WESTON—The Village of Weston’s Administrative Process committee met in a session that was part legal seminar, part infrastructure planning, and part debate on the fundamental philosophy of local government. Chairman Craig Warner, Mayor Rick Easterwood, and council members Jessica Susor and Erica Rupp tackled a heavy agenda dominated by a looming cybersecurity deadline and a complete restructuring of the village's approach to parks programming and management.


1. The Parks and Recreation Autonomy Crisis


The meeting’s most intense hour focused on the aftermath of the mass resignation of the Parks and Recreation (PnR) Board. The central conflict involves a 2023 document that purportedly gave the board "executive oversight" and the power to spend public funds without Council approval.


Project Transitions and Committee Oversight

Mayor Rick Easterwood opened the discussion with a critical update on the status of pending park improvements. Following the mass resignation, the Mayor clarified that several high-profile projects previously spearheaded by the board—including the installation of security cameras, new village signage, and the gazebo roofing project—will not be abandoned. Instead, these projects have been transitioned to the Economic Development and Public Affairs council committee for review.

While the projects themselves have moved to Economic Development, the Mayor noted that the specific document defining the board’s powers and duties is currently under the direct review of the Administrative Process committee. This separation ensures that physical park improvements continue while the village's legal framework is being rebuilt.


Legal vs. Practical Oversight

Mayor Easterwood expressed deep concern over the legality of the current governing arrangement, noting that the village lacks a formal ordinance or resolution adopting such autonomous powers for a board. "I’m having a hard time grasping the verbiage," Easterwood stated. "I don’t want nobody to feel that they’re doing things inadequately in a voluntary state... but this document has no merit because there’s no spending allowance."

The document in question attempted to give the PnR board authority over funds allocated during the yearly appropriations process. While the Parks department receives approximately $10,000 across a dozen line items, many of these—such as insurance premiums, port-a-potties, and electrical service—fall under the management of Village Personnel, not the PnR board. Additionally, park maintenance remains under the control of the Village Administrator.


The Liaison Paradox: A Breakdown in Checks and Balances

A notable irony surfaced during the debate regarding the board’s governing document. While the administration currently views the document as legally inadequate, it contained a mandatory internal check and balance: the requirement of a Council Member to serve as an active liaison on the board.

Despite this clear requirement for coordination and collaboration, the previous board successfully swayed the Mayor—and a reluctant Council—to allow them to operate without a liaison. This decision effectively removed the primary mechanism for real-time oversight and direct communication between the board and elected officials. The committee's current frustration with the "lack of merit" in the document highlights a circular problem: the board was allowed to check off its own critical safeguards, contributing to the very lack of coordination that eventually led to the breakdown of the relationship and the subsequent resignations.


Purchasing Protocols and Controversies

Missing from the conversation was the fact that the village has a purchase policy that covers all arms of the Village, including its boards, and they must follow strict protocols. While the Village has a process to "check out" a credit card, it is strictly limited to officials and "sworn-in" officers of the boards. For standard operations, most village purchases are relayed through the Fiscal Officer for purchase to ensure all acquisitions require a Purchase Order (PO) authorized by the Village Fiscal Officer. Because the Village of Weston is tax-exempt, purchases must be carefully coordinated to honor that status.

The confusion over these rules likely stems from recent controversies regarding how previous board members utilized their budget. Resident Samantha Wick addressed the committee, arguing that the scrutiny was less about the legality of the budget and more about poor judgment. She cited the purchase of a nearly $600 laptop and "DORA cups" for local drinking establishments as examples of questionable spending.

The cups were part of a coordinated effort with the Community Development and Public Affairs committee following the passage of the Downtown Outdoor Recreational Area (DORA) Ordinance. These initiatives were often paired with Farmers Market events coordinated with the Weston Business Association. While the association is a recurring meeting for local business owners, it is not a formal, legally established non-profit. Councilmember Susor echoed these concerns, stating she had been troubled by PnR’s financial decisions for some time.


The ORC Debate: What is at Play?

The session shifted into a debate over which section of the Ohio Revised Code (ORC) should govern Weston's parks. Resident Sarah Easterwood argued that the only proper way to operate Parks and Recreation in Weston was through Section 755.06, which establishes a "Board of Park Commissioners." However, she further argued that even if such a board is established, the code says nothing about spending money on events. Easterwood maintained that it is illegal for the Village to fund community events like the Halloween Parade or tree lightings, suggesting instead that private village organizations should take over all community programming.

Jeremy Schroeder countered this stance, noting that while the ORC does provide for Section 755.06, it is often a heavy-handed and complex way to handle a smaller parks system, particularly when no levy money is involved. Schroeder clarified that Weston operates its Parks and PnR program under its General Fund, mostly funded by Income Tax and a distribution of County Property Taxes. He also clarified that, contrary to some assumptions that the previous parks document had no oversight, it had indeed been reviewed by legal counsel and approved by a unanimous 6/6 Council vote in 2023 when the board was re-established. While Easterwood argued that current practices are illegal, Chairman Craig Warner noted that the town has successfully hosted these events for over a decade without legal challenge.

Ultimately, while tensions remained high among some participants, Jessica Susor recommended rescinding the governing document entirely to perform a total rewrite. Though Craig Warner initially urged Council to retain the document and simply look for new members to appoint, he eventually relented to Susor's proposal. Susor motioned to rescind the document until further review can be done on the underlying legal pieces, and the motion passed.


2. Cybersecurity: The July 1st "Crunch Time"


The village is facing a strict state mandate to adopt a comprehensive cybersecurity policy by July 1, 2026. Legal Counsel Paul Skaff reported that the village must begin three formal readings of an ordinance by early May to avoid an emergency vote.

The committee reviewed several options:

  • A "bare bones" draft authored by Skaff.
  • A model policy from the Ohio Municipal League.
  • A professional policy service through Lake Erie West, estimated to cost between $600 and $1,000.

Jessica Susor noted that while the state requirements are a "minimum," the village needs a policy that protects its data without creating an undue administrative burden. The committee moved to have Fiscal Officer Stephanie Monts prepare a draft for the first reading at the next Council meeting.


3. Funding the "Big Plan" for Stormwater


Infrastructure remains a top priority, with a focus on persistent flooding on Washington Street. The committee revisited a "Big Plan" involving GIS mapping of the village's drainage system to prioritize repairs.

The proposed financial strategy involves a stormwater surcharge administered through the Northwest Water and Sewer District (NWWSD). Mayor Easterwood highlighted a model used by the City of Perrysburg, which utilizes a flat fee for residential units and a square-footage-based fee for commercial properties.

"The $30,000 was based off of taps," Easterwood explained, referring to previous revenue estimates. The committee discussed the challenge of billing "one-tap" properties like trailer courts or apartments fairly. If implemented, these funds would allow the village to tackle one major drainage project per year, moving away from reactive "band-aid" fixes.


Meeting Highlights and Minor Business


  • New Leadership: The committee introduced Annette Davis as the new Village Clerk. She will begin attending Monday Council meetings immediately.
  • Grant Writer Search: The village has received eight applications for the freelance grant writer position. One was noted as being "completely AI written." The committee will rank the top three candidates for interviews.
  • Safety Corridor (ODOT Grant): A proposal for a sidewalk from Broadway to Dollar General is moving forward. The village’s match for engineering is approximately $3,000, payable in phases.
  • Tree Commission Voting: The committee is seeking the original ordinance to clarify if the council representative on the Tree Commission has a vote or serves strictly as a liaison.
  • Snow Removal Fees: A brief discussion was held regarding the fee structure for village-performed snow removal on private sidewalks; no action was taken.
  • Brush Cleanup: The village administrator will pick up storm-related brush, but residents are reminded of the 14-day limit for intentional trimmings placed at the curb.