News
Nelsonville is in another legal battle with a former City Council member
By: David Forster
Posted on:
ATHENS, Ohio (WOUB) — This time, it’s the city of Nelsonville suing Greg Smith.
The city alleges Smith is violating the terms of an agreement he signed to settle several lawsuits he brought against the city.
Under that agreement, the city paid Smith and his attorney a combined $137,500.
In return, Smith agreed to a number of conditions. One was that he would “not seek any further compensation or benefits of any kind or nature” from the city. This includes “wages, benefits, back pay, front pay, damages (whether compensatory, punitive or otherwise), legal fees, expenses and court costs, in connection with any matter.”
That agreement was signed on Dec. 8, 2023, a month after Smith was re-elected to the City Council. The city had already spent more than a year trying to remove Smith from his council seat.
The city tried multiple times, and each time Smith responded with a lawsuit. It was those lawsuits Smith agreed to drop under the settlement agreement.
The city also tried and failed to keep Smith from running again for a council seat in the November 2023 election, arguing as it had before that he was ineligible because he did not spend enough time living in Nelsonville to be considered a continuous resident. Smith denied this.
After the election, Smith continued to sit on the council in December 2023 and into February 2024 before stepping down as he had agreed to do under the settlement.
This seemed to be the end of it until a month ago when Smith sent an email to Taylor Sappington, the city’s auditor:
“While doing my taxes I discovered that I was not paid for the time I was council president from December 2023 thru February 2024. Please do a correction.” This would amount to a few hundred dollars.
The next day, April 10, Jonathan Robe, the city’s attorney, sent an email to Smith’s attorney, Dan Klos.
Robe said Smith was not entitled to any pay because after he was re-elected to the council he never completed and returned the required payroll forms.
“Thus, Mr. Smith has waived any claim to any Council pay for that period,” Robe wrote. “… Accordingly, the City will not comply with Mr. Smith’s frivolous and baseless demand. To do so would be unlawful.”
A few more emails were exchanged between Smith and city officials. Smith claimed he had returned the payroll documents. Sappington claimed he didn’t.
Devon Tolliver, the city’s police chief and acting city manager, sent Smith an email on April 16 warning him to “withdraw your frivolous and baseless demand” by April 17 or risk being sued.
In its lawsuit, the city alleges it “has been left with no other choice than to seek judicial relief for the fraud Mr. Smith has perpetrated—and continues to perpetuate—against Nelsonville.”
The lawsuit alleges Smith never had any intention of complying with the terms of the settlement agreement, citing Smith’s email seeking payment for the few weeks he served on the council following his re-election.
The city says it understood this to be “a demand for back pay,” which is barred under the agreement.
The lawsuit notes Smith was told in the email from Tolliver: “You agreed this payment should not be made to you.” And Smith replied: “I really don’t think I have ever made a representation or statement to that effect.”
“Mr. Smith’s feigned ignorance of the very Settlement Agreement by which he was able to obtain more than $137,000.00 to himself or for his benefit strains credulity and further demonstrates his fraudulent intent to never comply with his contractual obligations,” the lawsuit alleges.
Smith told WOUB the settlement agreement was never referenced in any of the correspondence he had with Nelsonville officials over the pay dispute.
“If that was their legal position, why didn’t they just explain that in the email instead of filing a lawsuit?” he asked.
Smith also takes issue with the characterization of his request as a demand for back pay.
“There were no demands,” he said. “There was questions about why it would be illegal for them to pay me.”
In an April 16 email to Tolliver, Smith wrote: “If you, the Auditor, or any other official wants to make an assertion of law to suggest a pay correction is illegal, then I request again you provide me with that law so I can evaluate it.”
He made a similar request in a letter to the Nelsonville City Council: “I am still waiting to hear what exact law, regulation or other legal authority would make my pay illegal or improper. I do not think there is anything frivolous and baseless in asking for that explanation.”
Smith argues the pay he is seeking doesn’t count as back pay under the terms of the settlement agreement. The agreement would only cover back pay in the period before it was signed in early December 2023, he said.
His request is for pay earned after that, Smith said. “That’s not back pay,” he said.
Robe, the city’s attorney, told WOUB the language of the settlement agreement is broad and references not only back pay but front pay and includes the weeks for which Smith is seeking compensation.
Robe also said the settlement agreement was referenced in correspondence before the lawsuit was filed. In his letter to Smith’s attorney explaining why Smith is not entitled to any pay, Robe mentions “private law.” In the context of this pay dispute, Robe said, this could only be understood as a reference to the agreement.
The city is seeking more than $25,000 in damages from Smith and an order from the judge that Smith is not entitled to any back pay and that he is obligated to follow the terms of the settlement agreement.