LUCAS COUNTY, Ohio — The Lucas County Commissioners released the findings of an investigation into the conduct of one of its board members Friday.
The Human Resources Director of the Board of Lucas County Commissioners received a complaint in March of “harassment and bullying that created a hostile work environment and of inappropriate, unprofessional behavior” by Commissioner Anita Lopez, the complainant’s supervisor, according to a summary of the investigative report released Friday.
There were concerns regarding potential violations of Ohio’s ethics laws regarding the conduct of elected officials. A third-party investigator was hired to report the findings and conclusions to the board’s outside general counsel.
The allegations focused on five incidents involving Lopez that occurred between March 6 and March 11 of this year, three of which were ruled to have violated the Lucas County Board of Commissioner's Harassment-free Work Environment Policy.
Statements from the unnamed complainant, the complainant’s father, Lopez and city of Toledo communications director Sarah Elms were included in the 20-page summary of the report.
The complainant was hired in January 2024 and served as the executive assistant to Lopez after Lopez spoke with his father to discuss the possibility. According to the report, the “complainant said the first couple of weeks of working for Commissioner Lopez were fine but by the time he reported his complaint, their relationship was ‘horrible.’”
The complainant said that Lopez “screamed at or talked over” him when attempting to clarify or explain something or defend himself, the report said. To his knowledge, no one else experienced similar conduct by Lopez and he did not see her act that way with others.
In one instance, Lopez said the complainant failed to confirm her attendance to a union event. Lopez “asked Complainant if he realized he ‘f---- up a $10,000 event for me?’ She said she couldn’t believe he assumed she could only make one event each night. She said she would cross the desert in Egypt to attend an event like that,” according to the report.
The complainant described an incident at a fundraiser at a restaurant, where he observed Lopez having a mixed drink. The complainant was told to get in Lopez’s car following the fundraiser to go to the casino with a donor, where she told him to “look out for any police, because, according, to Complainant, she said ‘I can’t get caught driving right now.’ Complaint said ‘I surmised she was over the legal limit,’” the report said. While Lopez “drove very fast at that time,” the complainant said he had no indication she was impaired.
At the casino, the complainant watched Lopez drink three glasses of wine and told the investigator that “upon getting in the car with her to drive her home, it started to get bad. She started rambling. She was definitely drunk, to my observation, knowing that she had at least four drinks and based on my observation of her slurred speech, choice of words, and more aggressive tone.”
Lopez frequently referred back to the union event and at one point asked how much the complainant’s family had donated. Lopez told the complainant that had she hired another donor’s son to do his job instead, the donor “would’ve donated $50,000” to her campaign, and made disparaging remarks about the complainant’s car and how it cost her donations because it was not a union- and American-made vehicle.
Upon being told of the complainant’s allegations regarding the drive from the casino to Lopez’s home, Lopez said “nothing is untrue,” according to the report. Lopez confirmed she had four drinks over the course of the evening, but said she was not impaired.
Lopez said she “was frustrated at missing the union meeting so she felt it was the least he could do to do events with her that night. Commissioner Lopez said she felt duped at that point that Complainant didn’t know anything – that he couldn’t even confirm a meeting. She said Complainant is so green that he is not even grass – he is a seed.””
The complainant’s father said he was concerned after getting a call from his son following the casino event.
In the third incident, on March 8, Lopez asked the complainant to get her on the schedule to speak at an International Women’s Day luncheon with less than an hour until it began. Lopez “screamed” twice at the complainant and demanded he get it done.
When complainant was unable to secure a spot for Lopez to speak during the program, Lopez yelled at him and told him he could not attend the event, for which he had a ticket. “Complainant felt it was punitive that he was no longer permitted to attend, because he was unable to get permission for Commissioner Lopez to speak at the event,” the report stated.
When Lopez asked him if any city council members would be in attendance, the complainant admitted he did not know all of the members of city council.
Instead, he was told to place campaign literature on all of the cars in the parking lot, which amounted to “well over 100 pieces” of Lopez’s campaign literature.
Lopez was informed of the allegations and “generally agreed” with the description of events, adding that she was “very frustrated” by the complainant’s lack of knowledge regarding city council members.
“She again concluded he is clueless and thought ‘I can’t handle this.’ Lopez said that his having her miss the union meeting a few days earlier was still on her mind and she was frustrated,” according to the report.
The fourth incident in the report, which happened March 11, involved the complainant attending an agenda meeting for the commissioners. The complainant took note of everything on the agenda but did not meet with County Administrator Jessica Ford or Deputy County Administrator Matthew Heyrman, whom Lopez had instructed him to meet with, as he felt he had gotten all of the information Lopez needed, relaying the information to Lopez including details about a community funding link that would remain open through the end of the year.
The complainant received a call from Lopez regarding the link, which she said had closed. Elms called Lopez, who merged the complainant in on the call. “Commissioner Lopez was very angry,” according to the complainant.
“Eventually Ms. Elms said that she cannot let the Complainant take the blame for this; that at the meeting, which she also attended, it was said that the link was open through the end of the year, although that was not accurate,” the report said. Lopez’s tone was described as “very aggressive.”
“After the call, Complainant felt that he had been harassed, based on the way Commissioner Lopez spoke and what she said. He believed the way she handled the situation was inappropriate and her expectations were out of line,” the report said. “Commissioner Lopez expected Complainant to have all the answers even when he received inaccurate information.”
When asked about the call, “Commissioner Lopez agreed generally with Complainant’s version of the phone call which Sarah Elms participated in, and again agreed she asked him questions about what Complainant told Commissioner Lopez about the link closing, tried to get him to admit that he gave her inaccurate information, and he didn’t meet with individuals as she directed him to do, and didn’t tell those individuals that Commissioner Lopez ‘didn’t want any last-minute shit.’ Commissioner Lopez said she was furious on that call. She just learned that funding was closed when she had just been told it was open through the end of the year.”
Elms was asked about the situation and said she was surprised when the complainant was on the call, as she thought it was between only her and Lopez. She described Lopez as “shouting” at the complainant and cutting him off when he attempted to speak. Lopez texted Elms after the call, apologizing twice for being frustrated.
“Ms. Elms said that Commissioner Lopez had been so aggressive on the call that Ms. Elms called Jessica Ford that evening to tell her about it. Ms. Elms said that she would never talk to anyone like that, especially her assistant. Ms. Elms described it as berating. Ms. Elms wanted to give Ms. Ford a heads up in case this happens again.”
The fifth incident, on March 11, involved an issue with scheduling where the complainant admitted he did not realize two meetings overlapped. He was called at 11 p.m. by Lopez and asked if he confirmed every single meeting for the following day.
When he said he had not confirmed the one he admitted he did not see until Lopez brought it up, “Commissioner Lopez then asked Complainant if he had a disability. Complainant said no and said that he was sorry he didn’t see the meeting.”
“She asked more than once if Complainant had a disability. Commissioner Lopez then asked if Complainant is addicted to drugs. Complainant believes Commissioner Lopez was ‘drunk.’ Complainant doesn’t think Commissioner Lopez believes he had a disability; it was just an insult. Had she just asked once, it might have been out of true concern,” the report states.
Lopez hung up on the complainant around 11:28 p.m.
Lopez’s statement regarding the phone call agreed that she was frustrated with the complainant and she “doesn’t deny she asked if he had a disability and in fact believes she asked if he needed a reasonable accommodation to do his job. Commissioner Lopez said that she meant it – she was not trying to joke or be insulting – she genuinely thought there must be something wrong if this person can’t figure out after being told so many times that he has to do such basic things in connection with his job.”
According to the report, Lopez said “I asked if he needed a reasonable accommodation because something’s just not clicking. I meant that genuinely. I’m dealing with an adult who can’t do these things. I just reamed your ass last week (for the Women’s event) and you just did it again.”
Lopez texted the complainant’s father after the phone call. At 11:49 p.m., she told the complainant’s father she was under “enormous stress” and “cracked today kindly.” The complainant’s father replied “Anita, this feels wrong” and attempted to call her. It went to voice mail.
After the March 11 call, the complainant said he planned on resigning and did not want to go to pursue a complaint with human resources because he was “scared Commissioner Lopez would do something to come back on Complainant or hurt him.”
The complainant said his parents told him HR could put him into another position with Lucas County, but he “didn’t feel comfortable working at the county because Commissioner Lopez said how much power she has over all county departments.”
He contacted the HR department to request an urgent meeting and told his co-workers he would not be able to do more work to prepare Lopez’s folder for the commissioners’ meeting. The complainant was placed on paid administrative leave.
The complainant had no previous experience in politics. Lopez said she assumed the complainant’s event-planning background would mean he could at least plan events and follow through on related matters. “Commissioner Lopez noted that Complainant never demonstrated animosity or frustration – she said Complainant’s father was more upset than Complainant.”
Lopez described her intensity in communicating as being a “bad habit” from her “legal background” where she “cross examines employees like a hostile witness” when she knows they are not telling the truth or will not admit something.
“When asked if she thought she could change something like that, she said ‘when adults lie to me, I treat them like a hostile witness. I can’t contribute to putting ineffective, not passionate governmental officials in office who just drain our budget,’” the report said.
The complainant also said that he was never asked to contribute to Lopez’s campaign, and “Complainant said that Commissioner Lopez ‘frequently told me that I need to take my personal days to help her with her campaign at the early vote center and if I didn’t have enough days, I’d need to take unpaid time from work. She didn’t say that she would pay for that time,’” the report said.
He said there may have been times that he was paid for his executive assistant job while working on Lopez’s campaign, but he did not provide examples.
“Lopez told Complainant not to use county phones for the campaign and not to use his work laptop,” according to the report.
Lopez said the complainant wanted to learn the campaign aspect of her position and would ask if she needed anything related to the campaign. Lopez said that on multiple occasions, she told the complainant he could not do campaign work on county time.
“Commissioner Lopez said she never directed him to work on her campaign,” the report said. “She also said there was never any quid pro quo in Complainant’s hiring, with his father or anyone else.”
The investigator found that Lopez’s conduct violated the board’s Harassment-free Work Environment Policy, in particular regarding “Personal Harassment” and “Bullying,” according to the report, in connection with the drive home from the casino, the calls regarding the community funding link, and the March 11 nighttime call.
It was determined that “Commissioner Lopez’s behavior, as described by Complainant and as was largely unrefuted by Commissioner Lopez, fulfills all of the elements of the policy definition.”
Those incidents also constituted bullying, according to the report.
The investigation found that Lopez was not in violation of Ohio law on campaign and public ethics, and noted that the complainant said he was explicitly told by Lopez to not work on her campaign while being paid by the county or in a county building.
As Lopez is an elected official rather than a board employee, the potential responsive actions are different than those that would otherwise be available.
The report found that Lopez’s conduct did not merit serious legal violations warranting removal from office nor did it reach the level of criminal conduct.
The complainant has been on paid administrative leave since March 12, according to Lucas County Commissioner Pete Gerken.
Lopez is required to undergo training in appropriate workplace behavior, according to a record of corrective action, which reads, in full:
“An investigation into a complaint the Board of Lucas County Commissioners Human Resources Department received concluded that Commissioner Anita Lopez violated the Board’s Harassment-free Work Environment Policy and also engaged in inappropriate, unprofessional behavior.
“Accordingly, Commissioner Lopez is required to undergo training in appropriate workplace behavior. As an elected official, Commissioner Lopez cannot be ordered to participate in this training.
“Commissioner Lopez nonetheless agreed to do so.”
Lopez issued a statement following the release of the report, saying:
"I strongly believe in transparency and I've always pushed for that within government, even when it applies to myself. I conducted myself in a way that was not the best of me and I plan to work on my communication skills under stressful situations, especially during campaigns. I'm grateful the investigation is over with, and no violations of the law were found to have occurred. I was very honest and cooperative during the investigation. I believe in order to represent the public you have to be candid about the good and bad about yourself."
The full report is available below and at this link:
MORE LOCAL HEADLINES FROM WTOL 11: