Latest news with #Householder
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Attorneys for Householder, Borges ‘hopeful' following pardon for Cincinnati politician
Larry Householder, left, and Matt Borges, right. (Photos by WEWS/WCPO.) The attorneys for former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder and former Republican leader Matt Borges are feeling 'hopeful' after a Cincinnati politician convicted of bribery got a pardon from President Donald Trump. Once convicted of accepting $20,000 in bribes, former Cincinnati City Councilmember PG Sittenfeld's slate has been wiped clean. President Donald Trump pardoned the Democrat, who was sentenced to more than a year in prison in 2023. And with this pardon comes interest from other influential Ohio politicos. We asked Householder's attorney Scott Pullins if that gives him hope for Householder. 'Yeah, I can't comment, obviously, on what we're doing right now, what I'm working on, our legal team's working on,' Pullins replied. 'But it certainly gives us a lot of hope.' Thursday, Borges's appeals attorney, Dennis Belli, said in a phone interview that the Sittenfeld pardon also gives him hope. In March 2023, a jury found Householder and Borges guilty of felony racketeering in the largest public corruption and bribery scandal in state history. And earlier this month, a panel of federal court judges upheld the convictions of Householder and Borges. We asked Gov. Mike DeWine if he believes Householder and Borges should be pardoned. 'Look, I don't have any comment about the pardons,' he responded. 'These are decisions that are made by the president of the United States. I have authority in regard to state pardons, and I always will tell you about why I made a decision.' Pullins has been telling us for months now that the former speaker is seeking clemency, arguing the FBI was politically motivated in arresting the former speaker. 'They singled out Larry, him alone,' he said. 'No one else has been charged, no other politician — period.' Legal expert Steve Gooden, partner at Porter Wright Morris & Arthur, said this could be a sympathetic argument for a pardon. 'It obviously strikes very close to home for Donald Trump who has been the subject of these kinds of inquiries and cases in the past,' Gooden said. In an interview in February, Attorney General Dave Yost refuted this allegation. 'He was indicted by President Trump's United States Attorney, David DeVillers, who, I believe, is the same political party,' Yost said. 'I don't think that dog hunts.' And Yost said he was against Householder getting out. Householder is also facing Ohio charges. He has pleaded not guilty to 10 felony counts in Cuyahoga County. 'I oppose,' Yost said in February. Asked why, he said, 'Because I've seen the evidence and he committed multiple crimes. Even if his appeal is successful in the federal case, there is additional evidence of criminal acts that are included in the state's indictment.' If convicted on state charges and appeals fail, it would take an act of the governor to clear him of that. Previously, Pullins told us in an interview that the team is hoping to leverage Householder's close relationship with Trump to get him out. Asked about the appearance that Householder could be using his connections in order to get out of prison, Pullins responded, 'Well, yeah. He is. Hopefully, he has some friends left that can help.' After our exclusive, in-depth interview in 2023, we've kept in touch with the head juror, Jerrod Haines, who convicted Householder in federal court. He said that Householder was, once again, using power to get what he wanted. 'I definitely feel like he is using his connections to skip his sentence,' he said. 'I would feel that the justice system failed if he would be pardoned. I would feel that my time as a juror was wasted, even though I think it was a very valuable experience for me, my life was interrupted for seven weeks.' Haines told us in 2023 that he was left disillusioned with state government, hoping political leaders would finally learn not to undercut their citizens in exchange for power and money. Paula Christian from WCPO contributed to this story. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
FirstEnergy continues effort to raise prices as Ohio repeals scandal-ridden bill
Smart energy meter. (Stock photo via Getty Images) While energy prices are set to jump this summer, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signed a bill into law that could provide some relief — eliminating a subsidy from the scandal-ridden Ohio House Bill 6 that requires ratepayers to fund unprofitable coal plants. As this happens, utility companies are moving to increase consumers' bills. Back in 2019, Former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder took and funneled $61 million worth of bribes in exchange for legislation to give utility company FirstEnergy a $1 billion bailout, named H.B. 6, all at ratepayers' expense. In March 2023, a jury found that Householder and former GOP leader Matt Borges, beyond a reasonable doubt, participated in the racketeering scheme that left four men guilty and two dead. In late June that year, federal judge Timothy Black sentenced Householder to 20 years in prison. Borges got five years for his role in the scheme, but most importantly, he attempted to bribe Tyler Fehrman, an FBI whistleblower, with $15,000 to help kill a repeal effort he was working on. On video, Borges told Fehrman that if he told anyone about the bribe, he would 'blow up' his house. While some of H.B. 6 was overturned already, ratepayers have been paying a subsidy that funds two Ohio Valley Electric Corporation coal plants — one in Southern Ohio and one in Indiana. The main beneficiaries for OVEC are American Electric Power Company (AEP), Duke Energy and AES Ohio. Still, FirstEnergy collects payment for it. But with the swipe of a pen — consumers will likely see their bills go down. DeWine signed a massive energy overhaul bill, H.B. 15, on Friday. It repeals the OVEC charges. A study commissioned by the Ohio Manufacturers' Association found that in 2024 alone, these subsidies cost ratepayers roughly $200 million. The company lost more than $100 million the same year, so consumers are paying for plants that aren't profitable. Consumers can expect to save between $1.30 and $1.50 per month, depending on their utility provider, according to the Energy News Network. The subsidies may not seem like a lot every month, but they add up when inflation is high and people struggle. 'It makes a difference, especially in today's day and age with a kind of shaky economy and folks trying to just make ends meet,' Fehrman said. While this will save citizens a bit of money, Householder attorney Scott Pullins argues that this will hurt the rural areas it serves. 'They are major high-paying jobs in the area, and the kind of area where there aren't very many high-paying jobs,' Pullins said about the plant jobs. 'They generate a whole boatload of taxes for schools in those areas. And if those plants get shut down, it's going to be devastating for those communities.' The Ohio plant employs many Ohioans, he added. But now, this may embolden utility companies to ask for more rate hikes, he said. This is already happening. 'Our electric grid needs to be modernized,' Pullins said. 'I'm assuming that those are where those costs are going. I think we do need a robust regulatory scheme to make sure these companies aren't wasting these funds.' FirstEnergy is now petitioning the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) to raise its prices — a $190 million increase in its charges. If approved, the Ohio Consumers' Counsel estimated that Cleveland Illuminating Company consumers will see a $13 price increase per month, Ohio Edison will have a $3 spike, and Toledo Edison at $1.50. On Monday, DeWine said he doesn't have an opinion on the price increases. 'As far as the raising of bills, ultimately, as you know, this is up to the PUCO,' he said. Fehrman said this shouldn't be allowed. 'There is this massive scandal where these companies tried to put a larger burden on the backs of every single Ohioan,' he said. 'And now, they're asking for more money in a time when folks are already struggling.' The bill will go into effect in 90 days. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Plan to expand recycling facility among applications to Bexley Council
A plan to increase recycling capacity by 70,000 tonnes is among applications submitted to Bexley Council. The proposal, by Mr L Bicaku, involves extending the facility at Century Wharf Industrial Estate, Crayford Creek Road, Crayford. It includes both upward and outward extensions to the existing building. According to the public notice, the aim is to improve efficiency and quality at the site, as well as enable the facility to process an additional 70,000 tonnes per year of mixed recyclables. The application, reference 25/00884/FULM, can be viewed on the council's planning portal. Public comments must be submitted by June 4. In a separate application, Mr R Manak has requested permission to alter the footprint and elevations of a previously approved development at Aysgarth, Cross Lane, Bexley. The site falls within the Parkhurst Conservation Area and the application is being made under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The original permission, reference 24/01696/FUL, was for the erection of two single-storey side extensions following the demolition of an existing garage and conservatory, and the incorporation of dormer windows to the northwest and southwest roof slopes. The current application, reference 25/00910/FUL, seeks to vary condition 2 (approved drawings) of the original permission. The full details of both applications can be viewed online at: Written responses for the Aysgarth application must be submitted by June 5 and addressed to Development Management, Civic Offices, 2 Watling Street, Bexleyheath, Kent, DA6 7AT. The council has advised that, under the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1995, any response will be made available for public inspection. It has also noted that, as the Aysgarth application relates to a domestic dwelling, if the application is refused and the applicant appeals under the Householder Appeal Service, only observations made on this application will be passed to the Planning Inspectorate. There will be no further opportunity to make representations at the appeal stage. Richard Turek, head of development management at Bexley Council, signed both public notices. The notices were published on May 14. Members of the public can view and comment on both applications via the council's planning portal. Further details on how to submit comments are available on the council's website. Want to find out all the latest planning applications, alcohol licensing applications and planned road closures near you? Then search the Public Notice Portal. The Public Notice Portal is owned and operated by the News Media Association, the voice of UK national, regional, and local newspapers in all their print and digital forms. NMA members include nearly 900 local and regional news titles which reach 40 million people across the length and breadth of the country each month. Many of these publications have served their communities for centuries and remain the most reliable source of verified news and information. Created by local news publishers and supported by the Google News Initiative, the portal carries statutory public notices published in local newspapers and is the fastest and most effective way of finding out what is happening in YOUR neighbourhood. Public Notice Portal Find, save and share Public Notices that affect you in your local area
San Francisco Chronicle
06-05-2025
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
Court upholds racketeering convictions of ex-Ohio House speaker and lobbyist in $60M bribery scheme
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — A federal appeals court upheld the racketeering convictions of former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder and an ex-lobbyist on Tuesday in a $60 million bribery scandal described as the largest corruption scheme in state history. The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Cincinnati represented a win for the Department of Justice, which had secured the convictions in March 2023 after a yearslong investigation. Householder, a Republican, was sentenced to 20 years in prison, and lobbyist and former Ohio Republican Party chair Matt Borges was sentenced to five years in prison. Acting U.S. Attorney Kelly A. Norris said the appeals panel's unanimous decision 'affirmed the strength of the government's evidence, the correctness of the jury instructions, and the fairness of the proceeding.' Householder was convicted of masterminding a $60 million bribery scheme funded by Akron-based FirstEnergy Corp. to elect allies, secure power, pass a $1 billion bailout of two of its affiliated nuclear plants and then defend the bill, known as House Bill 6, from a repeal effort. Prosecutors had described Borges' primary role in the scheme as working to thwart a ballot campaign aimed at repealing the tainted legislation. Specifically, he was accused of paying $15,000 to someone who was helping spearhead the effort in order to get inside information. The referendum ultimately failed to make the ballot. Scott Pullins, a long-time legal and personal adviser to Householder, called it a 'sad and disappointing day' for both men and their families and supporters, and 'even a sadder day for constitutional free speech and the rule of law.' He said in a Substack post that Householder "raised undisclosed, unlimited donations for a 501c4 organization that supported him and his political allies' — just as speakers before and after him have done. 'But the federal government singled only Mr. Householder out for prosecution.' Householder has a couple long shot legal options remaining: He could ask for a review by the full Sixth Circuit, or seek what's known as certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court, hoping for consideration by the nation's highest bench. Both types of requests are rarely granted. A message seeking comment was left for Householder's criminal defense attorney. Householder's appeal failed on all six claims he brought in hopes of a reprieve. He alleged erroneous jury instructions, insufficient and inadmissible evidence, violations of his right to counsel, judicial bias and that his sentence was unreasonable for the circumstances. The 65-year-old Householder argued that the government was wrong in describing what he had engaged in as a bribery scheme. Instead, he cast the money that flowed from FirstEnergy into a network of secret dark money accounts that he controlled as legal campaign contributions. Federal prosecutors charged that the money was given to Householder in exchange for the passage of House Bill 6, providing the necessary quid pro quo to make his conduct illegal. Householder had also faulted U.S. District Judge Timothy Black in his appeal, asserting that he failed to properly instruct the jury that an agreement is necessary to prove bribery and that Householder needed to have agreed he would take action 'on a specific and focused question or matter' at the time that agreement was struck. The judicial panel said all of his claims failed. Borges' appeal hinged on three technical points of law. All failed, as well, though he could also ask for review by the full appellate court or the U.S. Supreme Court. However, Circuit Judge Amul Thapar wrote in a concurring opinion that each of Borges' contentions 'raises tricky and unresolved issues in honest services fraud jurisprudence.' 'And here, Borges has a good argument his conduct fell within a murky middle: perhaps objectionable, but not clearly illegal,' he wrote. 'Until the Supreme Court revises its caselaw, however, we must follow its precedent.' Dennis Belli, Borges' attorney, noted a part of Thapar's concurrence that said "(t)he Tinkerbell strategy — clap if you believe he's guilty — doesn't cut it when we think about criminal convictions.' ''Tinkerbell strategy' aptly describes the prosecution's use of an alleged violation of a misdemeanor statute in the Ohio Elections Code to obtain a felony racketeering conviction of Borges in federal court,' Belli said, noting that his client denies that the statute even applies to his conduct. 'I will be studying the 64-page ruling closely and thoughtfully, and will advise my client regarding his options going forward.'
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Court upholds racketeering convictions of ex-Ohio House speaker and lobbyist in $60M bribery scheme
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — A federal appeals court upheld the racketeering convictions of former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder and an ex-lobbyist on Tuesday in a $60 million bribery scheme that a prosecutor had described as likely the largest corruption scheme in state history. The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Cincinnati represented a win for the Department of Justice, which had secured the convictions in March 2023 after a yearslong investigation. Householder, a Republican, was sentenced to 20 years in prison, and lobbyist and former Ohio Republican Party chair Matt Borges was sentenced to five years in prison. Householder was convicted of masterminding a $60 million bribery scheme funded by Akron-based FirstEnergy Corp. to elect allies, secure power, pass a $1 billion bailout of two of its affiliated nuclear plants and then defend the bill, known as House Bill 6, from a repeal effort. Prosecutors had described Borges' primary role in the scheme as working to thwart a ballot campaign aimed at repealing the tainted legislation. Specifically, he was accused of paying $15,000 to someone who was helping spearhead the effort in order to get inside information. The referendum ultimately failed to make the ballot. Scott Pullins, a long-time legal and personal adviser to Householder, called it a 'sad and disappointing day' for both men and their families and supporters, and 'even a sadder day for constitutional free speech and the rule of law.' 'Mr. Householder, like former Ohio Speakers Cliff Rosenberger and Ryan Smith, and current Speaker Matt Huffman, raised undisclosed, unlimited donations for a 501c4 organization that supported him and his political allies,' he said in a Substack post. 'But the federal government singled only Mr. Householder out for prosecution.' Householder and Borges each have a couple long shot legal options remaining: They could ask for a review by the full Sixth Circuit, or seek what's known as certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court, hoping for consideration by the nation's highest bench. Both types of requests are rarely granted. Messages seeking comment were left for their criminal defense attorneys, as well as with a spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Cincinnati. Householder's appeal failed on all six claims he brought in hopes of a reprieve. He alleged erroneous jury instructions, insufficient and inadmissible evidence, violations of his right to counsel, judicial bias and that his sentence was unreasonable for the circumstances. The 65-year-old Householder argued that the government was wrong in describing what he had engaged in as a bribery scheme. Instead, he cast the money that flowed from FirstEnergy into a network of secret dark money accounts that he controlled as legal campaign contributions. Federal prosecutors charged that the money was given to Householder in exchange for the passage of House Bill 6, providing the necessary quid pro quo to make his conduct illegal. Householder had also faulted U.S. District Judge Timothy Black in his appeal, asserting that he failed to properly instruct the jury that an agreement is necessary to prove bribery and that Householder needed to have agreed he would take action 'on a specific and focused question or matter' at the time that agreement was struck. The judicial panel said all of his claims failed. Borges' appeal hinged on three technical points of law. All failed, as well. However, Circuit Judge Amul Thapar wrote in a concurring opinion that each of Borges' contentions 'raises tricky and unresolved issues in honest services fraud jurisprudence.' 'And here, Borges has a good argument his conduct fell within a murky middle: perhaps objectionable, but not clearly illegal,' he wrote. 'Until the Supreme Court revises its caselaw, however, we must follow its precedent.'
