Former London Mayor Randall Weddle files appeal to have impeachment vote reversed
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Randall Weddle filed an appeal to reverse his impeachment by the city council.
- The council removed Weddle after confirming misconduct in three of 11 charges.
- The appeal cites Open Meetings Act violations and seeks an expedited court review.
Former London Mayor Randall Weddle has filed an appeal seeking to reverse the London City Council’s impeachment vote against him.
The council filed 11 charges of misconduct or willful neglect against the former mayor, including misusing city police department funds for a personal protection detail, leaving vacant an ethics commission seat and illegally signing a $5 million mortgage on behalf of the city without council approval.
After a recent nine-hour meeting, the council unanimously agreed that three of Weddle’s 11 charges warranted removal from office.
Weddle was not been convicted of any criminal activity.
Conrad Cessna, an attorney representing the council, did not immediately respond to a request for comment, and has yet to comment on the council’s impeachment vote.
The council appointed Tracie Handley, a London resident and retired trial science consultant, as acting mayor. She was sworn-in shortly after the hearing.
After the hearing, Weddle vowed to appeal the vote.
“Today, I appealed the City Council’s unlawful attempt to remove of me from office,” Weddle said in a statement Thursday. “I look forward to this going before an impartial judge, who will examine the evidence and facts without prejudice or personal bias.”
Weddle’s attorney, Carmine Iaccarino, described the London City Council’s decision to remove Weddle from office as “an unprecedented and unlawful power grab” in the appeal. Iaccarino added the council conspired for months to remove Weddle from office and conducted a sham hearing to achieve its goal.
In a separate court filing, Iaccarino said the council’s reasoning for the impeachment vote were, “petty politics, personal vendettas, and policy disputes.”
“The council ignored statutory limits, twisted state law, and manufactured charges that—at worst—reflect ordinary policy disagreements,” Iaccarino wrote in the appeal. “The council’s unlawful vote must be set aside.”
Iaccarino also asked for a temporary injunction on the council’s vote and an expedited briefing and hearing date at the earliest possible opportunity. A special judge has also been requested for the proceedings, as the regular judge from the 27th Circuit is disqualified to preside over the case, according to court documents.
“This matter is now in the hands of the courts, where the council should have turned to address their disagreements instead of seeking to remove me in a highly political process,” Weddle said in his statement.
The appeal also claimed the council violated Kentucky’s Open Meetings Act by having the impeachment hearing in the Laurel County Judicial Center. Iaccarino wrote that the council purposely chose the judicial center knowing it had a smaller capacity than the amount of citizens interested in the hearing.
Several of Weddle’s supporters attended the hearing, so many so that an overflow location had to be arranged at the Laurel County Courthouse two blocks away, where residents watched the hearing online. Iaccarino added the use of an overflow location also violates the Open Meetings Act.
“Even if an “overflow” location were acceptable under the Open Meetings Act (it is not), those locations were plagued with technical difficulties throughout the day,” Iaccarino said in the appeal. “The video and audio feed lagged and were repeatedly interrupted, and the public repeatedly complained during the hearing.”
Weddle thanked his supporters in his statement.
“I want to sincerely thank all the individuals who have poured out their support to me and my family during this time, as well as everyone who attended the hearing and stayed for all those long hours,” Weddle said. “Your support means more than I can put into words.”
