Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
OF DEKALB COUNTY
GEORGIA
ANTHONY S. TRICOLI,
Plaintiff,
vs.
ROB WATTS; RON CARRUTH; JIM
RASMUS; MARK GERSPACHER;
SHELETHA CHAMPION; HENRY
HUCKABY; JOHN FUCHKO; STEVE
WRIGLEY; BEN TARBUTTON; THE BOARD
OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY
SYSTEM OF GEORGIA; SAM OLENS, THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF GEORGIA; and
ROBIN JENKINS
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
the GPC executive committee chaired by Tricoli that there was a $3.6
million fiscal year surplus and a normal budget cycle, and Carruth had
reported even rosier numbers in the past. Annual USG budget hearings
and the annual performance evaluations conducted by Rob Watts had
never mentioned any issue of deficit spending.
Upon hearing of the problem, Tricoli contacted the USG, informed
Chancellor Huckaby, and requested assistance from the USG budget and
compliance officers to determine the actual extent of the problem, as
Carruth gave uncertain and inconsistent responses. The next day the
USG announced that GPC was facing a $16 million budget deficit. A
Special Report later conducted by the USG, in the form of a self-audit,
found that Carruth had been spending GPC reserves without informing
Tricoli. The Special Report also confirmed that two sets of books had
been kept at GPC, one informing Tricoli of the rosy budget numbers and
another reporting deficit spending to the USG and state auditors over a
period of years. The Report also found that Carruth and other budget
officers had been emailing back and forth about a looming deficit crisis,
without informing Tricoli. It is undisputed that these emails go back to
at least as far as January 2012, well before Carruth reported a budget
surplus and normal budget process for the fiscal year to Tricoli in
5
March of 2012, only weeks before the announcement of the $16 million
deficit. USG officials said they had known of the deficit spending,
exhausting the reserves built up by Tricoli, for at least three years
though this was never mentioned in a USG budget hearing or
performance evaluation.
The same day the $16 million deficit was announced, and before
any investigation took place, Huckaby demanded Tricolis resignation. A
series of reports in the Atlanta media soon emerged--with USG officials,
including Huckaby and Tarbutton, as the named sources--in which
Tricoli was roundly blamed for the GPC deficit crisis. The Special Report
released in September of 2012 also laid the blame squarely on Tricolis
shoulders, despite the admissions that Carruth, Watts, and others either
actively misrepresented or withheld disclosure of the deficit spending
information from Tricoli.
When Tricoli refused to give in to Huckabys threats in April of
2012 to resign or be fired, Huckaby offered Tricoli a position in the USG
central office if he would resign quietly. After Tricoli, under duress of
continuing media attacks and threats from Huckaby, agreed to resign as
GPC president and accepted the USG position, Huckaby reneged on the
promised USG position. Instead, Huckaby and the USG purported to not
6
Georgia RICO Act provides injunctive relief. OCGA 16-14-3(6), 16-143(9)(A), 16-14-4 & 16-14-6(a).
The Attorney General has claimed sovereign immunity to Tricolis
breach of contract claims, asserting that Tricoli has no written contract
on which to suedespite the written, mutually-signed offer and
acceptance forms stating terms of employment, including application of
USG policy to presidential employment.
There is no merit to the Attorney Generals arguments that the
knowingly false reports on the Georgia Perimeter College (GPC) budget
in violation of OCGA 16-10-20 merely breached some private duty to
the Plaintiff, conferring tort immunity on the state government
defendants. Nor is there any legal basis for the Attorney Generals
argument that Tricoli was not entitled to rely on these reports on
matters under the jurisdiction of the State, or that the obligation fell on
Tricoli to perceive this duplicitous game and pierce the veil of the
knowingly false set of books in order to redirect his attention to the real
set of booksthe one withheld from him that had not been falsified.
OCGA 16-14-2 (legislative intent of Georgia RICO is to protect state
from harm and prevent subversion of its economy) & 16-10-20
11
though the Report admits that it cannot account for over $9 million in
GPC spending of state and federal funds during fiscal year 2012. That
Report is also truly special in that it holds Tricoli accountable for the
sudden $16 million budget deficitthat appeared in April 2012, a
month after the chief GPC budget officer, Defendant Ron Carruth,
reported a $3.6 million surplus and a normal budget process in March
of 2012, and after Defendants Rob Watts and Hank Huckaby both failed
to mention anything about deficit spending in USG budget hearings or
Tricolis annual performance evaluation required by USG Policies 2.3
and 2.4.2 prior to April each year. Plaintiffs Supp., Exh. 11. The budget
reporting discrepancies were not accidental or even attributable to
incompetence in light of the Special Reports admission that system
budget officials were frantically emailing each other back and forth
about the impending budgetary train wreck as early as January 2012,
while excluding Tricoli from these communications. Tricoli Aff., Exhs. 1
& 5. This use of the USG computer network to effect this fraudulent
scheme to deceive Tricoli on the actual state of the GPC budget is also a
Georgia RICO predicate act. OCGA 16-9-90 et seq., the Georgia
Computer Systems Protection Act (GCSPA), OCGA 16-14-
13
after the fact. See Defendants Response to Request No. 10. The USG
changed policies after the fact to place Tricoli in non-compliance for
purposes of the attempts to lay all blame on him in the Special Report.
Defendants also altered USG policy after the fact to camouflage its own
violation of policies in place at the time of Tricolis illegal ouster. Thus
stands the corruption-ridden milieu in which Tricoli was ousted, and
the grounds on which he seeks immediate re-instatement.
16
17
18
19
2009, 2010, and 2011. Response to Request No. 20. Likewise, the USGs
Office of Internal Audit and Compliance (OIAC) had access to the same
information. Response to Request 19.
No USG Defendant ever shared such a concern about deficit
spending with Tricoli during those yearsat the same time it is
undisputed that he was being given knowingly false reports on these
matters. Responses to Plaintiffs Open Records requests--that so far
have not been forthcoming from the USG--will demonstrate no mention
of any budget shortfall in USG Budget Hearings and annual performance
evaluations by Watts and Huckabyat the same time that GPC budget
officials were, as Defendants admit, relaying knowingly false
information to Tricoli. The USGs OIAC, despite claiming to have had
access to this information since 2009, was also never heard from on this
issue until April of 2012. Response to Request 19.
All knowingly false statements in the Responses, intending to
misrepresent or deceive and contradicted by Defendants own public
records and public statements on matters under state jurisdiction, are
themselves violations of OCGA 16-10-20.
20
for interlocutory injunctive relief to restore the status quo and prevent
further harm. Bishop v. Patton, 288 Ga. 600, 706 S.E.2d 634, 638 (Ga.,
2011). Such interlocutory relief may be awarded in the discretion of the
court upon consideration of the following factors: likelihood of success
on the merits, the balancing of the equities between the parties,
avoidance of irreparable harm, and promotion of the public interest. Id.
at 638-39.
Likelihood of success on the merits
Admissions that Defendants, while sending dire emails about a
budget disaster starting in January, were reporting to Tricoli that all was
well with the GOC budget, establish prima facie violations of OCGA 1610-20. Defendants are setopped from defending these admissions of
criminal conduct in a civil suit. OCGA 16-14-6(e).
Defendant Huckaby forestalled the performance evaluation
required by USG policy 2.3 to let the scenario play out.
Tricoli has presented evidence of a written contract incorporating
USG policies. It is undisputed that this contract was breached and these
USG policies were first violated by Defendants, then changed after the
fact by the USG to cover their tracks.
23
25
pet consulting contract that the plan to eliminate Tricoli lept into full
swing.
Plaintiff intends to prove at trial that elimination of such pet
projects and pork barrel spending were the principal motivation for
Tricolis ouster, and he has requested appointment of special attorney
general to investigate for that purpose. Over $9 million of the alleged
budget overspending remains unaccounted forin short, there is no
indication Defendants stewardship has served the public interest. In
fact, 300 positions were lost and GPC suffered a 7000 drop in
enrollment due to the contrived budget crisisvirtually erasing
Tricolis accomplishments.
The purpose of the Georgia RICO statute is to prevent just such
harm to the state, its institutions, and its economy. OCGA 16-14-2.
Defendants, on the other hand, did not hesitate to harm the school
through their manipulative actions. They showed no compunction about
violating the Criminal Code of Georgia. That is the very reason for the
RICO statute, to prevent governmental entities from being co-opted by a
pattern of criminal activity. OCGA 16-14-2, 16-14-3(6) & 16-14-4.
The Attorney General and the USG need not wring their hands
and wonder what are we going to do if we cant falsify state college
29
budge reports and relay more false reports to the AJC in order to oust a
president who cut a phantom consulting contract out of the budget.
Contrary to what Sam Olens says, the sky wont fall if state employees
cannot commit criminal acts with sovereign impunity. The USG will just
have to be staffed with people focused on creating the best educational
system in the countrythe one that students and taxpayers deserve.
The USG and AG are fighting it hard, but what is so wrong with that? All
they will have to do is stop committing RICO predicate acts and focus on
education.
30
31
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Undersigned counsel hereby certifies that all Defendants in this action have
been served this Motion for Interlocutory Injunction via US mail, this 19th
day of November, 2014, as follows:
Samuel S. Olens
Dennis R. Dunn
Kathleen M. Pacious
Annette M. Cowart
Loretta L. Pinkston
Christopher A. McGraw
C. McLaurin Sitton
Office of the Attorney General
40 Capitol Square, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30334-1300
32