Growing rift develops between Washington Co. commissioners, Chamber of Commerce
Sherman wants more transparency on economic development plans
Mike Jones/Observer-Reporter
The Washington County commissioners are asking their solicitor to provide a legal opinion on whether the county’s Chamber of Commerce and associated Tourism Promotion Agency are subject to the state’s open records laws, illustrating a growing rift about how the organizations are spending tax dollars.
While the chamber and tourism are not public agencies and therefore do not fall directly under the Right To Know Law, their acceptance of county and state tax money can be reviewed with the caveat that any open records request must be made through Washington County.
But county Commission Chairman Nick Sherman said the real issue is the lack of information he claims the chamber is providing to them about what economic development is being performed in exchange for the 10-year, $1.6 million contract the commissioners approved in September 2023.
“We’re paying them a lot of money and we’ve never had a single meeting with them on economic development, who they’re meeting with and what they’re doing. Absolutely nothing,” Sherman said. “They are paid to do economic development, and right now I don’t think we’re getting our money’s worth.”
Sherman voted against that 10-year contract with the chamber, but was outranked by former commission chairwoman Diana Irey Vaughan and current Commissioner Larry Maggi, who approved it. But Sherman, Maggi and Commissioner Electra Janis voted unanimously during Thursday morning’s meeting to ask their solicitor Gary Sweat to draft a legal memo if the chamber and tourism are subject to open records requests, which appears to merely be an opening volley over transparency with how the county’s money is being used.
After the meeting, Sherman noted that the provisions of the contract require chamber President Jeff Kotula, who also oversees the tourism agency, to chair the county’s Local Share Account review committee and serve on the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission board. Kotula stepped down as LSA chair in January after heading that committee since its inception 17 years ago, and he is not a current member on the SPC board, raising questions about whether terms of the agreement are being fulfilled.
“On the record, I’m saying I believe he breached the contract,” Sherman said. “I didn’t vote for it, and I don’t take any pride in saying ‘I told you so’ on this.”
Kotula denied there are any issues with transparency or communication with the county, noting that members of the chamber and tourism boards met with the three commissioners last week to address any concerns.
“As all three commissioners serve on the chamber’s governance board, we wanted to clarify our responsibilities under our economic development contract, and most importantly, answer their organizational and financial questions directly, openly and factually,” Kotula said in a written statement Thursday. “We reviewed how through working together and sharing costs among organizations we are able to keep our costs low, gain better results and avoid the duplicate efforts the county and chamber saw when they both had separate and uncoordinated programs 26 years ago.”
He said the chamber and tourism are not subject to the Right To Know Law because they are “private nonprofit corporate entities,” but noted there are public filings through the IRS and state that can be reviewed by the commissioners. While the 10-year contract that increased the payments to the chamber was approved less than two years ago, Kotula said the public-private partnership with his organization dates back to 1999.
“At the end of the meeting, the commissioners presented no additional questions and all appeared satisfied with our discussion,” Kotula said. “Since the meeting last week, we have not received any further communications or questions from them. We ended the meeting with the intention to chart a path forward for our 26-year-old public/private partnership by a renewed commitment to communication and collaboration between the county and our organizations.”
But Sherman wants more information, such as what economic development the chamber has performed and what the tourism agency is doing with its funds derived from the hotel tax in the county. He said he has asked for audits of the agency or specific financial figures, but has been rebuffed.
“This is not a private business,” Sherman said. “These are tax dollars being collected, and I feel like it’s irresponsible for them not to respond to how every penny of this money is being spent.”
Despite the strong words and apparent growing rift, Kotula said he was confident that the two sides could work together in the future.
“The chamber and tourism value our partnership with the commissioners and look forward to working with them for the benefit of the citizens and businesses we jointly serve,” Kotula said.