UPDATED: 11:50 AM
If you are Massillon policeman Michael P. Maier and - if - one day down the road you want to be
So far in legal proceedings, Massillon is batting .000 (0 for 3) in what appears to The Stark County Political Report as part of Catazaro-Perry's all consuming passion to make the grandson of a former (deceased in 2006) highly regarded/respected Massillon policeman; namely, Johnnie A. Maier, Sr. a future head of the MPD.
The appeal of the Massillon Civil Service decision holding that the law of Ohio allowed Mayor Catazaro-Perry to appoint Micheal P. Maier (son of Stark County sheriff George T. Maier) to a vacancy recreated on the retirement of Sgt J.J. DiLoreto had to be painful for Massillon FOP Henderson Lodge president Tim Anderson and the Local 105 leadership inasmuch as Michael's grandfather is listed on Lodge stationery as being president "emeritus" (a honorary status)
- SCPR Note: See LINK and note that on the linked FOP webpage that Anderson is listed as the Massillon representative to the Lodge 105).
- SCPR Note: Yours truly is told that there are reports that Michael Maier took a recent "promotion to lieutenant" MCSC exam but did not fare particularly well.
- If the speculation is correct, then the prospects for Maier to one day be Massillon police chief are dimmed considerably more than finding himself once again in patrolman status as a potential consequence of the Rogers and Anderson case outcomes.
And here is Judge Hartnett's summary of relevant facts which, she says, were not in dispute.
Here is the refined issue, Judge Hartnett's ruling and the SCPR's read of the significance of the ruling.
And here is her reason for reversing the MCSC Anderson decison:
Looking at the matter through the eyes of the mayor, one would likely see her batting record as, in baseball parlance, 2 for 5 (.400, very good for baseball). For the Massillon Civil Service Commission (which is controlled, more or less, by the mayor by whom she appoints to the commission) has ruled in favor of Michael or his interest twice.
- SCPR Note: Chairman Marcus Simpson is said by The Report's source to have voted to grant the appeal of the FOP.
- The Report is told that Simpson's term is to expire soon and it would be truly amazing were Catazaro-Perry to reappoint him given his dissent on the Anderson matter.
Especially in light of this letter from Law Director Perry Stergios:
It is hard to see how Massillonians going forward - if Chapanar and Campbell remain in place - can have confidence that "the rule of law" will be respected by the Commission.
It is interesting to note that Massillon Law Director Perry Stergios was not representing the city in the Anderson case.
Which, of course, means that Massillon spent taxpayer dollars on private counsel.
Massillon is in State of Ohio designated fiscal emergency on the petition of Mayor Catazaro-Perry.
But such does not seem to bother her in the least in pushing through on behalf of Michael Maier either directly or in his interest.
The promotion instead going to Michael Maier.
As it turns out on the decision of Stark County Court of Common Pleas Judge John Haas, confirmed by the Fifth District Court of Appeals that MCSC illegally (by the union/city contract terms and the law of Ohio) appointed Maier.
The SCPR doubts that the Catazaro-Perry administration will voluntarily implement the clear implication of Judge Hartnett's ruling.
That is to say, the second Michael Maier appointment was never as a matter of law effective and that he remains a patrolman in the Massillon Police Department.
Counsel for the union (Craig T. Conley) anticipates that Mayor Catazaro-Perry will seek to maintain Maier as a MPD sergeant and therefore in planning further legal action to implement the consequences of the Hartnett decision.
The mayor is on record as saying that her dealings and determinations with respect to the Michael Maier situation has nothing to do with the fact that his father Sheriff George T. Maier was her first safety/service director.
It is noteworthy that in the Rogers MCSC decision appeal (the appeal to the Commission itself) George was present.
Moreover, in Lodge #105's appeal before the commission on its promoting Michael on the basis of using "the List" two years rather than the legal one year period, it is noteworthy that Michael was present with his attorney Steven Okey.
Catazaro-Perry's statement, the SCPR thinks, belongs in the category of: "It may be true, but who is going to believe it!"