CLEVELAND, OH – Only in East Cleveland does a city government operate without a budget and officials who don’t know they’re creating a constitutional crisis by doing so.
It is 2:00 a.m. on Euclid Avenue. A police patrol car powered by fuel purchased with a “void” Voyager fuel contract and being driven by a police officer receiving wages that have not been appropriated by city council since January 1, 2026, pulls over a motorist. East Cleveland’s mayor, council and judge are operating without a 2026 appropriations ordinance.
Because the officer’s paycheck, the fuel in the public safety vehicle, and the energy source for the body camera are unappropriated, the stop and arrest are “void” pursuant to section 5705.41(B)(1)(a)(b) of the Ohio Revised Code (R.C.). The officer is essentially a private citizen in a uniform impersonating a law enforcement or peace officer.
“No subdivision or taxing unit shall: (A) Make any appropriation of money except as provided in Chapter 5705. of the Revised Code … (B)(1) Make any expenditure of money unless the fiscal officer of the subdivision or taxing authority has certified that all of the following apply:(a) The expenditure has been appropriated as provided in Chapter 5705. of the Revised Code; (b) The expenditure has been appropriated by the subdivision’s or taxing unit’s legislative authority …”
The instructions are mirrored in federal laws that are the basis of the “furloughs” that occur when Congress doesn’t approve the President’s budget. Specifically, 31 U.S. Code 1341 exists under the heading, “Limitations on expending and obligating amounts.” In Washington the law is known as the “AntiDeficiency Act.”
“(1)Except as specified in this subchapter or any other provision of law, an officer or employee of the United States Government or of the District of Columbia government may not — (A) make or authorize an expenditure or obligation exceeding an amount available in an appropriation or fund for the expenditure or obligation; (B) involve either government in a contract or obligation for the payment of money before an appropriation is made unless authorized by law …”
Pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1342, Congress prohibits federal workers from offering “voluntary” services during a furlough, which reinforces the “go home” instructions in the Office of Management and Budget’s Circular A-11.
Even locally, under ordinances enacted by the council and a charter enacted by East Cleveland voters, Section 67 of the Charter mirrors both federal and state laws.
“No contract, agreement or other obligation involving the expenditure of money shall be entered into, nor shall any ordinance, resolution or order for the expenditure of money be issued by the Council, or be authorized by any officer of the city, unless the Mayor and Director of Finance shall first certify in writing to the Council or to the proper officer, as the case may be, that the money required for such contract, agreement, obligation or expenditure is in the treasury, to the credit of the fund from which it is to be drawn, and not appropriated for any other purpose, which certificate shall be filed and immediately recorded. The sum so certified shall not thereafter be considered unappropriated until the city is discharged from the contract, agreement or obligation,”
By making an arrest in a municipal corporation with a shut down and unfunded government, the police officer is operating illegally under “color of law” while receiving misappropriated and unbudgeted public funds. The employee is committing fraud every time they place their hours worked in the ADP payroll accounting system. The incident report they wrote while the government was unfunded, that was used to file charges causing them to appear in court, is evidence of a crime. They can’t submit an overtime request for a position that isn’t budgeted.
Currently, East Cleveland police officers, prosecutors and the judge could face referrals for federal prosecution pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 242 (Deprivation of rights under color of law) and civil rights litigation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. So could every other department “enforcing laws” against citizens and businesses while employees have had no authority to discharge any official duties out of city hall since January 1st.
Pursuant to R.C. 5705.41, and East Cleveland Charter Section 65, no money can be drawn from the treasury to pay the officer’s salary or fuel for the vehicle’s he or she is driving to search for people to arrest unless it has been lawfully appropriated. It’s the same for every other employee, Morgan, Austin and the other four members of council. Elmore Hall should be careful as a corrections officer employee supervised by Cuyahoga County Sheriff Harold Pretel. He’s a gun carrying law enforcement officer. His receipt of misappropriated funds as wages places him in a completely different category of law violator.
There are laws found in R.C. 5705.41 through R.C. 5705.47 that quite literally instructed Morgan and the court to shut down. Without a council-approved appropriations ordinance (budget), the finance director can’t certify the availability of funds budgeted per line item to spend in 2026. Morgan’s finance director, Lynn Ann Gries, is personally responsible to East Cleveland taxpayers for every penny that’s been spent since January 1, 2026.
“Any officer, employee, or other person who issues any order contrary to section 5705.41 of the Revised Code, or who expends or authorizes the expenditure of any public funds, or who authorizes or executes any contract contrary to sections 5705.01 to 5705.47 of the Revised Code, unless payments thereon are subsequently ordered as provided in section 5705.41 of the Revised Code, or expends or authorizes the expenditure of any public funds on any such void contract, obligation, or order, unless subsequently approved as provided in that section … shall be liable to the political subdivision for the full amount paid from the funds of the subdivision on any such order, contract, or obligation.”
Just like the United States government shut down last year and President Donald J. Trump sent federal workers home, East Cleveland’s workers were supposed to be sent home by Morgan until the council presided over by Ward 2 councilman Timothy Austin received and approved a 2026 appropriations ordinance generated from the mayor’s office. The November 15th annual deadline for a mayor’s estimate was missed in 2025 after Valencia Meeks’ employment was terminated on October 10, 2025, for increasing her finance director’s salary from $85,000 to $110,000. The only three other employees in East Cleveland’s finance department are clerks.
An incomplete departmental draft of the mayor’s estimate was left in the mayor’s office for Morgan at the end of the conference table near the door with a sticky note explaining it on December 31, 2025. It was there with the user login and password information for the city’s bank accounts former Mayor Lateek R. Shabazz and his executive assistant, Dawn Jones, left for Morgan. I know because I prepared and left the login and password data with other “sticky noted” transitional documents for Morgan to read.
When asked during her call to me on February 12, 2026, why she didn’t give the 2026 draft of the mayor’s estimate to her finance director to complete, Morgan admitted she didn’t know it was left on her desk. Two other documents left for Morgan were the employment termination letters of Todd Carroscia and Salondra Wallace. Carroscia’s termination letter and the evidence attached to it were 120 pages. Morgan didn’t read the Carroscia termination and evidence, either, because she thinks 120 pages of evidence shows the civil service law violator was improperly terminated for FMLA fraud. Back to the police officer.
Because the officer’s paycheck, the fuel in the cruiser, and the energy source for the body camera are unappropriated, the stop and arrest are “void” pursuant to R.C. 5705.45. The officer is essentially a private citizen in a uniform impersonating a law enforcement or peace officer.
By making this arrest, the officer is operating illegally under “color of law” while receiving misappropriated and unbudgeted public funds. The law enforcement employee is committing fraud every time they place their hours worked in the ADP payroll accounting system. This exposes the officer, prosecutors and the court to federal prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 242 (Deprivation of rights under color of law) and civil rights litigation under 42 U.S.C. 1983. It’s also a Brady violation that requires the prosecutor to disclose the city’s shutdown status to every criminal defendant since January 1, 2026.
In Ohio the law doesn’t care if Morgan thinks she’s doing the right thing by paying employees to discharge official acts in violation of R.C. 5705.41 through 5705.47. The Ohio Supreme Court held in State v. Krutz that each act in theft in office offenses is counted separately in a collective of unlawful acts.
Since January 1, 2026, Morgan and her finance director, Gries have unlawfully moved millions of dollars in wages, benefits, services and contracts in numerous individual acts. All contracts enacted without a 2026 appropriations are void, as they were never appropriated.
By the time an auditor finishes counting, they won’t just be facing a “2026 budget shortfall.” If the law is equally applied, they’ll be facing a mountain of individual felony counts applied to each action and obstruction of the enforcement of law, each one enough to strip them of their right to hold office forever.
Gries is formerly Lynn Ann Ries. She married Donald Gries and joined his father Robert Gries’ family. Robert Gries was one of the Cleveland Browns investors. Her husband’s great-grandfather built May Co. The New York Times published her marriage to Donald Gries on August 5, 1990.
Lynn Ann Gries’ background is in investing and Initial Public Offerings. She’s worked in investment banking for McDonald Investments, Morgan Stanley and JumpStart, LLC before starting her own business, Gries Consulting. She has no prior background in municipal finance as evidenced by her trip to Mexico this week instead of staying at city hall to complete the 2026 budget.
The bottom line is it’s assumed Gries has money, so the risk to her personal wealth becomes greater for following the orders of a mayor who’s the city’s chief law enforcement officer and doesn’t know the laws of the public office she won an 84 percent vote to discharge. R.C. 5705.45 gives individual members of council, taxpayers, residents and property owners in the city more than one law to cause their removal from office, duties to pay and criminal prosecutions.
Since East Cleveland is a direct entitlement city for the purpose of receiving U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds that Congress requires to be lawfully appropriated, locally, residents have Trump’s U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio to submit complaints against the sanctuary city. Where federal investigators or HUD’s Inspector General may first look is to 18 U.S.C. 666 under the “Theft or Bribery Concerning Programs Receiving Federal Funds” statute.
This is the most dangerous statute for the Morgan administration. It is often called the “Federal Program Fraud” statute. It prohibits the “intentional misapplication” of property or funds valued at $5,000 or more from any local government that receives more than $10,000 in federal assistance in a year. Just as State v. Krutz makes every unappropriated dollar a state felony, Section 666 makes it a federal felony to misapply funds under the control of the city. Up to 10 years in federal prison per count.
The Uniform Grants Guidance (Financial Management) found at 2.2 C.F.R. 200.302 is the federal regulatory “bible” for all grant recipients. Federal law requires that a city’s financial management system provide for the “comparison of expenditures with budget amounts for each federal award.” If there is no 2026 appropriation (budget), Gries cannot legally “expend and account for the Federal award in accordance with State laws” as required by 200.302(a).
Because she is violating R.C. 5705.41, Gries is simultaneously in default of the city’s grant management agreement with all federal agencies. This allows the federal government to suspend or terminate all federal funding to the city and demand immediate repayment (clawback) of all funds spent during the lapse.
There’s also 3. 31 U.S.C. 3729, The False Claims Act (FCA). If the city submits a request for “reimbursement” or a “drawdown” of federal funds while certifying that they are in compliance with all laws — when they are actually in a state of unappropriated “shutdown”— they are submitting a false claim. If they spend federal money and fail to return it now that the “void” nature of the expenditure is exposed, they may be liable for “knowingly and improperly avoiding an obligation to pay or transmit money to the Government.” Treble damages (3 times the amount spent) plus massive civil penalties.
The U.S. Attorney is only one place where a complaint can be filed against Morgan and Gries for their now documented acts of dereliction, theft, fraud, obstruction, misfeasance, malfeasance and nonfeasance in office. R.C. 733.72 is but one Ohio law in a resident’s toolbox to draw attention to the failure of elected and appointed officials to obey laws.
The heading for R.C. 733.72 is “Charges against municipal officers filed with the probate court-proceedings.” Any elector of East Cleveland, meaning any registered voter, along with four other electors can submit the information in this news story to the probate court, along with all of council’s agendas and meeting minutes for 2026, that Clerk of Council Stacy Clark Warren has a duty to prepare and maintain, as background information for a complaint.
“When a complaint under oath is filed with the probate judge of the county in which a municipal corporation or the larger part thereof is situated, by any elector of the municipal corporation, signed and approved by four other electors thereof, the judge shall forthwith issue a citation to any person charged in the complaint for his appearance before the judge within ten days from the filing thereof, and shall also furnish the accused and the village solicitor or city director of law with a copy thereof. The complaint shall charge any of the following: (A) That a member of the legislative authority of the municipal corporation has received, directly or indirectly, compensation for his services as a member thereof, as a committeeman, or otherwise, contrary to law; (B) That a member of the legislative authority or an officer of the municipal corporation is or has been interested, directly or indirectly, in the profits of a contract, job, work, or service, or is or has been acting as a commissioner, architect, superintendent, or engineer in work undertaken or prosecuted by the municipal corporation, contrary to law; (C) That a member of the legislative authority or an officer of the municipal corporation has been guilty of misfeasance or malfeasance in office. Before acting upon such complaint, the judge shall require the party complaining to furnish sufficient security for costs.”
There’s a special law written for fiscal officers like Gries who any independent thinking member of council has a right to file. It’s found in R.C. 733.78 and captioned, “Violations by fiscal officers.”
“(A) As used in this section, “fiscal officer” means a village fiscal officer, a village clerk-treasurer, a village clerk, a city auditor, a city treasurer or, in the case of a municipal corporation having a charter that designates an officer who, by virtue of the charter, has duties and functions similar to those of the city or village officers referred to in this section, the officer so designated by the charter. (B)(1) If a fiscal officer purposely, knowingly, or recklessly fails to perform a fiscal duty expressly imposed by law with respect to the fiscal duties of the office of fiscal officer or purposely, knowingly, or recklessly commits any act expressly prohibited by law with respect to the fiscal duties of the office of fiscal officer, a member of the legislative authority of the municipal corporation may submit a sworn affidavit alleging the violation, together with evidence supporting the allegations, to the auditor of state. The sworn affidavit and evidence shall be submitted in the format prescribed by rule of the auditor of state under section 117.45 of the Revised Code. A person who makes a false statement in a sworn affidavit, for purposes of this section, is guilty of falsification under section 2921.13 of the Revised Code. (2) The auditor of state shall review the sworn affidavit and the evidence. Within thirty calendar days after receiving the sworn affidavit and evidence, unless, for good cause, additional time is required, the auditor of state shall determine whether clear and convincing evidence supports the allegations. If the auditor of state finds that no allegation is supported by clear and convincing evidence, the auditor of state shall submit those findings in writing to the fiscal officer and the person who initiated the sworn affidavit. If the auditor of state finds by clear and convincing evidence that an allegation is supported by the evidence, the auditor of state shall submit those findings in writing to the attorney general, the fiscal officer, and the person who initiated the sworn affidavit. The findings shall include a copy of the sworn affidavit and the evidence submitted under division (B)(1) of this section. (3)(a) The attorney general shall review the auditor of state’s findings and the sworn affidavit and evidence. Within ten business days after receiving them, unless, for good cause, additional time is required, the attorney general shall determine whether clear and convincing evidence supports the allegations. If the attorney general finds that no allegation is supported by clear and convincing evidence, the attorney general, by certified mail, shall notify the auditor of state, the fiscal officer, and the person who initiated the sworn affidavit that no complaint for the removal of the fiscal officer from public office will be filed. (b) If the attorney general finds by clear and convincing evidence that an allegation is supported by the evidence, the attorney general, by certified mail, shall notify the auditor of state, the fiscal officer, and the person who initiated the sworn affidavit of that fact, and shall commence an action for the removal of the fiscal officer from public office under division (C) of this section.”
While there are other civil remedies such as mandamus actions, and demands for law directors to apply the “specific performance” of avoided public duties pursuant to R.C. 733.57, they rely on law directors and prosecutors appointed by the mayor to act. It is why some residents may choose R.C. 2935.09 and R.C. 2935.10.
Pursuant to R.C. 2935.09(D), “A private citizen having knowledge of the facts who seeks to cause an arrest or prosecution under this section may file an affidavit charging the offense committed with a reviewing official for the purpose of review to determine if a complaint should be filed by the prosecuting attorney or attorney charged by law with the prosecution of offenses in the court or before the magistrate. A private citizen may file an affidavit charging the offense committed with the clerk of a court of record before or after the normal business hours of the reviewing officials if the clerk’s office is open at those times. A clerk who receives an affidavit before or after the normal business hours of the reviewing officials shall forward it to a reviewing official when the reviewing official’s normal business hours resume.”
What follows a complaint generated from a person’s affidavit are the instructions found in R.C. 2935.10(A). “Upon the filing of an affidavit or complaint as provided by section 2935.09 of the Revised Code, if it charges the commission of a felony, such judge, clerk, or magistrate, unless the judge, clerk, or magistrate has reason to believe that it was not filed in good faith, or the claim is not meritorious, shall forthwith issue a warrant for the arrest of the person charged in the affidavit, and directed to a peace officer; otherwise the judge, clerk, or magistrate shall forthwith refer the matter to the prosecuting attorney or other attorney charged by law with prosecution for investigation prior to the issuance of warrant.”
Attorney George Shoup III was appointed to the newly created public office of a $400 an hour “receiver” pursuant to a new statute written into R.C. Chapter 118 in Title 1 for state governments instead of Title 7 for municipal corporations. R.C. 118.29 governs the duties of receivers appointed to oversee the finances of a municipal corporation whose leaders have been as incompetent as convicted ex-Mayor Brandon King and now Morgan.
Shoup’s $400-an-hour receiver duties pursuant to R.C. 118.29 include preparing and implementing a financial plan based on a council-approved appropriations that is structured to eliminate the city’s growing deficit, made worse daily by nearly 60 days of illegal spending. He also has other broad authority pursuant to R.C. 118.29(C)(3) to, “Ensure the municipal corporation, county, or township in fiscal emergency complies with any other relevant aspects of this chapter …”
Shoup isn’t just watching a fiscal crisis. He is a $400 an hour receiver appointed by the Court of Claims watching a crime scene in slow motion.
As I write, East Cleveland is approaching its second month of operating while the government is lawfully shutdown. Gries has no idea she’s deep in the felony category of signing her name to checks and transferring federal, state and local public funds without a budget.
The Morgan administration is so “Third World backwards” her directors of finance, Gries, and community development, Kamla Lewis, want offices next to the mayor instead of with their employees. Gries occupies the office that has traditionally been occupied by the mayor’s secretary. One of the GAAP practices of a municipal fiscal officer is to “observe” the procedural conduct of the employees they’ve assigned to discharge statutory duties to confirm there are “internal controls” on how public monies are handled. Her upstairs location is just plain backwards and exists as another example of how little she knows about government finance.
In Ohio, a city does not have an inherent right to spend money. That right must be granted — annually, by ordinance, through the legislative authority. When that grant expires, the spending power expires with it. It’s no different that a person operating a vehicle without a driver’s license, or a peace officer who did not take the 24 hours of mandated state training and report it to the Ohio Peace Officer’s Training Academy before December 31st.
Back to the police officer and the arrested citizen. If the judge allows the proceeding to continue while being paid with unappropriated funds, they are “assenting” to a theft of public services. The arrestee’s lawyer now has grounds for a suppression motion, arguing that the entire judicial process is a nullity because the officers of the court have no lawful authority to receive a paycheck or occupy the bench.
There’s nothing in Morgan’s director of finance appointee’s resume that puts her over the finance department of a municipal corporation as fiscally troubled as the City of East Cleveland. It’s the same for Shoup.
Gries cannot certify what does not exist. There is no appropriation. Therefore, there can be no certificate. Therefore, every contract signed since January 1 — for police body cameras, for fuel, for utilities, for payroll — is statutorily void.
Since January 1, 2026, no one has the legal authority to be paid. All contracts are void. All invoices are worthless. The law places the burden on every person interacting with unbudgeted East Cleveland officials to have known better.
