Download a PDF copy of the complaints at the link below.
RestrainingOrder-Trebel-Motion-for-TRO.pdf
https://etnatimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Trebel-Complaint-2.pdf
New Lawsuit against Etna Township and Mark Evans Personally – Stop Evans PAC
Our township has another significant liability, courtesy of Trustee Evans. It’s time to defund Evans (vote him out). The failing, combative, and verbose Mr. Evans, in his hate for anything that did not originate with him, has perhaps gone a bit too far.
It is unclear how long voters will tolerate a toxic bully who is unable to connect with people and work effectively. But this lawsuit is different than the others Mark has fomented. In this case, Mark is sued both as trustee and personally. He may have to provide for his own defense, as the Township will certainly move to protect itself. When we say Mark costs us over $100,000 a year (way more if you consider the cost of replacing the eight employees he has bullied out of the township), plus doughnuts, a few stop signs, and, of course, the constant verbal waterboarding and gaslighting of anyone who will not bow to his self-imagined greatness. As Etna Royalty (in his estimation), he will expect the township to protect him. Will that be harder, as he has documented on tape (February 6, 2023), and throughout the year, can he be both a resident and a trustee, or a trustee and a resident, minute to minute? Just like in the case where he cost the township $27,069 with his testimony, he documents his own demise.
Perhaps Mark has come up with a way to use some of Gary’s Park Money. It’s too early to say. However, it has the potential to drive Evans’ waste and loss costs to record levels (even for Mark). When it’s only the Township’s money, Mark has no concerns. EtnaToday will update once Mark answers the complaint. Last night at the meeting, he was both trustee and resident. Oddly, today he is assuming both roles again, in one lawsuit. With his removal by voters pending, it will be interesting to see what happens when Evans loses his seat. Perhaps this lawsuit can be his final legacy to Etna Township. Hopefully, the voters will expel him, and then we can read about it in the paper as things settle down in Etna in 2026.
Staff Etna today
Below is Adobe’s summary:
The lawsuit involves a legal complaint filed by Trebel LLC against Etna Township and Trustee Mark Evans, alleging defamation and the misappropriation of trade secrets related to energy consulting services. Lawsuit copies provided by https://StopEvans.com/newlawsuit for PDF copies from the Licking County courthouse. The first document is the complaint, the second is an injunction and restraining order.
Trebel, LLC’s Role and Allegations
Trebel, LLC claims to be the exclusive energy consultant for Etna Township, alleging defamation and interference by township officials.
- Trebel has been the exclusive energy consultant for Etna Township since 2014.
- The company manages governmental aggregation programs for electricity and natural gas at no cost to the township.
- Allegations include defamation, interference with business relationships, and misappropriation of trade secrets by Defendants Evans and the township.
- Trebel seeks injunctive and monetary relief due to ongoing harm to its reputation and business.
Jurisdiction and Venue
The court has jurisdiction over the case based on Ohio law, with venue established in Licking County.
- Jurisdiction is established under R.C. 2305.01, et seq.
- Venue is appropriate as the claims arose in Licking County, where the township operates and where Evans resides.
Parties Involved in the Case
The case involves Trebel, Etna Township, and Trustee Mark Evans, each with specific roles and responsibilities.
- Trebel is a limited liability company based in Columbus, Ohio, certified to provide energy services.
- Etna Township is a governmental entity responsible for local governance in Licking County.
- Mark Evans is a trustee of Etna Township, involved in the alleged misconduct against Trebel.
Nature of Governmental Aggregation
Governmental aggregation enables local governments to negotiate more favorable energy rates for their residents by consolidating their energy loads.
- It is authorized under R.C. 4928.20 for electric aggregation and R.C. 4929.26 for natural gas aggregation.
- The purpose is to secure favorable rates for residents who do not choose alternative suppliers.
Confidentiality and Proprietary Agreements
Trebel and Etna Township entered into agreements that include confidentiality and exclusivity provisions.
- The 2014 Energy Consulting and Management Agreement (EMA) established Trebel as the exclusive energy consultant.
- Confidentiality provisions prohibit the disclosure of proprietary information without consent.
Defendants’ Alleged Misconduct
Defendant Evans is accused of disclosing confidential information and making defamatory statements about Trebel.
- Evans allegedly shared confidential drafts of agreements with Trebel’s competitors.
- He made false statements regarding Trebel’s fees and the effectiveness of the Aggregation Programs.
- Evans’s actions are claimed to be outside the scope of his official duties and motivated by personal animus.
Impact of Allegations on Trebel
Trebel asserts that the actions of the Defendants have caused significant harm to its business and reputation.
- The company claims ongoing irreparable harm due to the Defendants’ actions.
- Trebel has documented savings of approximately $4 million for residents through its Aggregation Programs.
Attempts to Resolve Issues
Trebel has made efforts to cooperate with the township and fulfill its contractual obligations despite ongoing disputes.
- Trebel has provided access to records and requested meetings to discuss program renewals.
- The township has not followed through on requests to inspect documents related to the Aggregation Programs. [This is Evans’ game; he files a records request only to have something to complain about. He claims people won’t meet with him, but he does not keep appointments or refuse any reasonable solutions; he is really only interested in something to use as a cudgel against his perceived political enemies. In court 2024-CV-00385 he had to admit to sabotaging the township with excessive public records requests. Of course, he was under oath.]
Recent Developments and Statements
Recent public meetings have seen continued disparagement of Trebel by Evans, which has impacted the company’s standing.
- Evans has made statements claiming Trebel has not complied with records requests, which were contradicted by other trustees.
- The township has moved to approve new supply agreements without Trebel’s involvement, violating the existing EMA.
Defendants’ False Statements and Actions
Defendants made numerous false statements regarding Trebel and its aggregation programs, leading to reputational and financial harm.
- Defendants claimed Trebel was “not a good partner” and made disparaging remarks about Mr. Taylor.
- Defendant Evans misled residents about the aggregation’s electricity supply contract, stating it was cheaper elsewhere, despite knowing residents were ineligible for the County aggregation program.
- False claims were made about Trebel’s responsibility for notifying residents about contract terminations.
- Defendants published outdated and misleading information about supplier rates on various platforms, including the Township’s website and social media.
Legal Claims Against Defendants
Trebel filed multiple legal claims against the Defendants for defamation, misappropriation of trade secrets, tortious interference, and deceptive trade practices.
- Count I: Defamation claims for knowingly publishing false information about Trebel, resulting in economic losses and reputational damage.
- Count II: Misappropriation of trade secrets due to unauthorized disclosure of confidential information, harming Trebel’s competitive advantage.
- Count III: Tortious interference with business relationships, leading to lost contracts and revenue.
- Count IV: Deceptive trade practices under Ohio law, causing confusion and unfair competition against Trebel.
Damages and Relief Sought by Trebel
Trebel seeks compensatory and punitive damages, along with injunctive relief to prevent further harm.
- Trebel demands compensatory damages for losses due to Defendants’ actions, including lost revenue and contracts.
- Punitive damages are sought due to the malicious nature of Defendants’ conduct.
- Trebel requests injunctive relief to stop the publication of false statements and the misappropriation of trade secrets.
- The complaint includes a demand for attorney’s fees and costs associated with the legal proceedings.