Over the past four months, OpenKennett reviewed and posted many documents, and submitted requests for many more. We were eager to see what else Blank/Rome discovered through the $127k+ of work billed through the end of February.
The answer… not too much. In effect, the report confirms the thoroughness of OpenKennett’s research, because almost every significant fact cited here had either already been revealed by OpenKennett (in some cases, months ago), or sought by OpenKennett through open records requests consistently denied by Kennett Township Manager Eden Ratliff. Indeed, about ¾’s of the 38 page report either reprinted or summarized other documents, or addressed questions which were largely irrelevant given the conditions under which the Ethics Commission had already indicated it would initiate an investigation.
The new information contained in the report did little to strengthen Ratliff’s defense. In fact, some of this new information raised still more questions which the report either conveniently side steps, or pointedly ignores, apparently to avoid casting Ratliff in a negative light. Consider these examples
The report reveals that two other people were interviewed for the position at Longwood Fire Company (LFC) now occupied by Ratliff’s wife Gabby (see p. 19), providing some assurance that the position was not created solely for her. The report fails to note, however, that the unusual decision to include certain desired qualifications would have clearly favored her application. While the report also notes that LFC had tried to fill this position for many years but kept cutting it from their budget (see p. 19), the report fails to make any mention whatsoever of LFC’s dire financial situation and its role in decisions to leave the position unfilled… a situation rectified by the windfalls engineered just two days prior to Gabby’s first day on the job, by her husband.
The report includes the official unredacted request for an advisory opinion submitted by Ratliff to the PA Ethics Commission, which Ratliff refused to release in response to our Right to Know request. The report relies heavily on this request to claim that Ratliff had no conflicts. But this release confirms that our reconstruction (posted on OpenKennett almost 2 months ago) and analysis was accurate: namely, that Ratliff carefully crafted his request to avoid raising questions about what may well be his most significant - and as yet unresolved - conflict of interest: his work for Kennett Township on Fire/EMS services. There is no record that Ratliff has recused himself from this work.
The report describes conversations Ratliff now claims he had during which he notified key persons that he was thinking of becoming a member of LFC (see p. 18), thus appearing to confirm that he was conscientious about potential conflicts. But this revelation is damning because Ratliff reports no such conversations related to the much more significant conflicts created once his wife applied for the position at LFC….oops!
These last two issues raise significant concerns about Ratliff’s transparency: how does Ratliff decide when and to whom to release important information? Consider #3: Ratliff’s undisclosed membership in LFC is revealed in an April 2021 meeting; shortly thereafter it becomes a campaign issue; it is echoed in allegations of a new conflict of interest in November, and; it resurfaces again in Doehring’s December ethics complaint. Ratliff could have dispelled these concerns one year ago, simply by disclosing the “conversations” reported in the review. But Ratliff apparently chooses to release information only when it suits him, and only to those who prove to rule in his favor. Ratliff has worked with township lawyers to identify and exploit every legal maneuver to delay or deny responding to every Right to Know request submitted for information regarding these issues, at a cost to taxpayers that we expect will exceed $20k.