UPDATE: 12:22 PM 08/04/2014
Aug 3 at 11:27 AM
Saw my name listed as indetermined....I am in Lawrence
Twp, and yep, I voted. I've missed before but it's been a while. I even hit the August/February issues. Have a good one. Loved that you
Mark H. Adams, MPH, RS
Director of Environmental Health and
Superintendent of Sanitation
Canton City Health Department
420 Market Avenue North
Canton, Ohio 44702
UPDATE: 2:45 PM
(FIRST TOWNSHIP RESULTS POSTED)
CONTINUALLY BEING UPDATED "LIST" OF STARK OFFICIALS
WHO VOTED/DID "NOT" VOTE
MAY 06, 2014
A reader of the SCPR tried to convince the writer of this blog to analyze and publish voting data for an election other than an off-year primary election.
Such a database, he said, would be more indicative of the voting patterns/habits of Stark Countians.
Well, the SCPR is more interested about who votes when there is nothing "glitzy" about the election. And certainly the May, 6 2014 primary election was a clear case of it taking "dedication to our 'democratic-republican' system of government and politics" to know who the "hard core" of supporters of our system really are.
The SCPR says that voting in an election like the May 6th primary is a true honoring of those founding fathers who put our system together and to those millions of Americans who have "given their final measure" to protect our way of collective life.
Accordingly, The Report continues this blog series on the pathetic participation of the voting hoi polloi of Stark County in the May 6, 2014 in what the SCPR says belongs in the Hall of Shame of the annals of Stark County voting history.
Some of the most ardent participants in our system of government are public officials.
As well, it should be.
For if those elected will not vote, then one would have to conclude that perhaps our system of government "is on the ropes" and someone will come along sooner of later to convince us that maintaining our freedoms is not all that important after all.
Especially so in this 21st century when security of the nation seems to be at the forefront of our concerns in the context of a world increasingly occupied by terrorists and the like, we Americans could be increasingly vulnerable to having fast-talking politicians sacrifice our vigilance.
The problem in Stark County on commitment to voting is with Stark's everydays; not with public officials.
In the SCPR's series on voting percentages across Stark County in the May 6, 2014 primary election, only 13.7% of Stark Countians voting with one precinct in Canton Councilwoman Chris Ward's Ward 4 voting at 2.03%.
Truly Stark County's voting numbers in May, 2014 is deserving of being tabbed as a "Hall of Shame" performance.
A preliminary examination (Alliance, Canton, Massillon and North Canton) of the Stark County public official voting on May 6th indicates that a supermajority of them voted.
However, indication is that there was a significant number who did not.
Canton, so far, in the SCPR analysis leads the way among Stark's political subdivision officialdom (elected and unelected) in "non-voting:"
However, Massillon and North Canton also sport some "notables" that Ohio secretary of state database information indicates did not vote in May, 2014.
Surprising in Massillon is a database indication that Safety Director Al Hennon did not vote in May's primary.
In North Canton, a couple of councilmen did not vote. Councilman at Large Mark Cerreta and "new" councilman Dominic Fonte.
One has to wonder whether or not Fonte's fellow councilpersons checked his "publicly available" voting in elections record to check his commitment to vote track record before selecting him last month to replace recently resigned Ward 4 councilman Jon Snyder.
Really, why not?
Did you notice that two of North Canton's councilpersons (Cerreta and Kiesling) before Fonte councilpersons failed to vote in the primary?
It appears that perhaps 100% of Alliance officialdom voted in the off-year primary election.
A couple of officials are not shown in Stark County voter registration records. It could be that they are non Stark Countians.
The Report thinks that if any group should have a 100% participation rate it should be those who are in taxpayer support positions of public trust.