SHOCKING! MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN TAXPAYER MONEY DOLED OUT TO STARK STATE COLLEGE, KENT STATE - STARK TO GET "AWFUL-ON-STERIODS" GRADUATION RATE RESULTS

It was unsettling to read Bob Dyer's piece (Akron Beacon Journal, August 11, 2013, UA graduation rate is awful) for a variety of reasons.

Being a graduate of Akron University myself (1968 - undergraduate; 1973 - law school), reading his column was dismaying for the very fact of The University of Akron being my school.

Although working a full-time job, I graduated from the university within four years of starting.

Same for law school.

Worked a full-time job but graduated from the night program (which was programmed for all of us as being a four year course of study [three years day school]).

So it was more than a little bit disconcerting to read Dyer's referenced data which puts the percentage graduating from Akron at 14% within four years and 38% within six years.

This from a university board of trustees that seemingly does not hold its CEO (Proenza) accountable. For he recently announced his retirement and, according to press accounts, Akron U officials negotiated a ten year agreement with him that included:

• a salary increase to $500,000 annually (an 18% increase over his present salary), and additional perks of being granted:
• a post-retirement sabbatical (at the $500,000 per rate), 
• the right to participate in the executive level bonus pool over the next three years, and 
• the right to return to the university post-sabbatical to a full professorship and president emeritus at $325,000 annum to be boosted by:
• the creation of a "Trustees Chair in Higher Education and the Economy" with money raised from current among current university trustees and other friends of the university which is expected to add $50,000 per year over the life of his contract.

Moreover, it appears to the SCPR that it does not bother the trustees and Proenza that as a returning professor he will be making about 30% more than next highest paid faculty member.

Of course, this aspect of Proenza's contract raises the question of whether or it it will trigger labor unrest among the university's day-in, day-out full-time faculty.

In the SCPR's way of thinking, the retirement buyout of Proenza has shades of the CEO who has run a corporation into the ground but nonetheless gets paid handsomely to - over time - go away.  Except, in this case, Proenza is not going away.  He will be back.

Obviously, over his 15 year stint with the university, matters in terms of graduation rate have declined even though Ohio's taxpayers have put millions upon millions of dollars into the university's facilities (e.g. $61.5 for the Infocision Stadium complex), programs and operations.

A $61.5 million stadium outlay for a football team that has been 3 wins, 33 losses over the past three years and thereby is nowhere near making enough money to cover the total university athletic program costs as is the case with the likes of The Ohio State University.

A $61.5 million decision that Proenza had to be "up to his eyeballs in" undoubtedly at the expense of the primary mission of the university (academic excellence) and he gets a "golden parachute?"

In his piece, Dyer attributed the unacceptable graduation rate numbers (in his words) as follows:

Add all these numbers together and we are left to conclude that either:

A.) UA is not giving the students the support they need, or
B.) UA is admitting people who simply are not equipped to do the work.

The SCPR would add ", or C.) UA has had in Proenza an ineffective CEO."

The accurate answer to the question of the horrible numbers is likely a combination of all three.

Recently (May, 2012), Akron announced it was rejecting some student applications and referring them to community colleges such as Stark State College with a main campus in North Canton.

All foregoing prompted the SCPR to take a look at what is happening in terms of the graduation rate of Stark County's two public institutions of higher learning:  Stark State College and Kent State - Stark.

To borrow Dyer's term "awful" in his describing Akron U's rate of graduation, the numbers at Stark County's two public institutions of higher learning merit the descriptive expression "awful on steriods."

STARK STATE COLLEGE (SSC)

If you thought Akron's 14% was bad for getting a degree within four years, look at Stark State's: a whopping 7.3%.

And student-wise, it is about as big as the University of Akron.  Stark State officials claim a total enrollment (credit and non credit) of some 19,000 students.

With Stark State at 7.3% (2010 numbers), such a number makes a clear and convincing case public officials (both executive officials and overseeing directors and advisors) are throwing "good and 'hard earned'" taxpayer money after "totally unacceptable results"

Who in their right mind would put millions of dollars into facilities, programs and operations for a prime bench mark success (or, let's say failure) rate of 7.3%.

And Stark State's officials under the leadership of Para Jones (who only recently became president but has been a keep component of SCC administration going back a number of years [less an out-of-state stint for a couple of years right before assuming the presidency]) are not content with limiting the disservice to taxpayers to the institution's main campus.  SSC has expanded its operations to cover most of Stark County (and even into neighboring counties) and, of course, at the expense of millions of dollars in outlay of taxpayer funds in building/renting facilities and the staffing them.

KENT STATE - STARK (KSU - STARK)

While 6.8% graduating in four years may seem to be worse than Stark State College (SSC), it is not.  For to stay the course for four years is much more difficult that hanging in there for a mere two years as is the case with SSC to get a basic degree.

But the difference is not anything to brag about.

An interesting aspect of the Kent Stark - Stark operation is that it does have a list of prominent Stark Countians who apparently are not holding the feet of Dr. Walter F. Wagor (Dean of Academic Affairs/Chief Administrative Officer) and Dr. Ruth Capasso (Assistant Dean of Academic Affairs) to the fire in terms of accounting for the totally unacceptable graduation rate numbers.

Hmm?

Stark County commissioner Richard Regula among them.

Interesting, no?

Canton mayor William J. Healy, II among them.

Interesting, no?

Well known Stark County educator Jacqueline DeGarmo (former superintendent of Plain Local School District) among them.

Interesting, no?

Stark County Educational Partnership president Adrienne O'Neill among them.

Interesting, no?

The SCPR thinks that Stark County, Ohio and federal taxpayers are getting shafted (in terms of achieved graduation rates) by Stark's public institutions of higher learning.

And all this ineffectiveness vis-a-vis the taxpayer is going on right under the nose of Stark County's legislative delegation to the Ohio General Assembly.

Nary a word about this flagrant inefficiency on the part of Messers Oelslager, Schuring Slesnick and Ms. Hagan.  It is not as if this phenomenon has sprung up over night.  For them to have not seen it is to say that they are not seeing something "hidden in plain sight."

Hagan, in particular, via press releases, tries to make out that she is the maven of fiscal integrity.

From a SCPR blog of November 30, 2011:

She would be far more impressive locally if she were to read the riot act to Stark State and Kent State Stark officials for their poor performance in parlaying tax dollars into acceptable graduation rate results.

She is very bullish for vocational education (Stark State's specialty), if Ohio is to invest in higher education at all. Moreover, she can be read by her public statements as being for no education at all beyond high school for many Ohioans.  She is fond of saying that "college is not for everyone."

Isn't that scary in 21st century America?

In an ironical sense, it could be taken that the graduation rate numbers cited in this blog support her - in general - anti-public-supported-higher-education-stance.

But the base question remains.  Why are we taxpayers paying so much to local institutions of higher learning and getting so little in return with no or little accountability on the part the well paid public officials who run them?

Maybe the Ohio General Assembly, at the agitation of Hagan, should be getting some answers and if no convincing answers are forthcoming, perhaps some heads should roll (figuratively speaking, of course), no?

Does she and her fellows have the stomach for holding the likes of Para Jones, Walter Wagor and Ruth Capasso accountable for the deplorable graduation rate numbers that Stark State and Kent State - Stark are producing?

The SCPR's forecast?  Absolutely not!

That's what makes her feints at accountability for the use of taxpayer dollars appear to be just that:  rhetoric, rhetoric and more rhetoric.

In this discussion, the SCPR has not touched on the all-too-frequent need for remediation of students entering college across Ohio at student and taxpayer expense. Such is required because a significant number of graduating college bound high school seniors have not acquired basic academic skills during their K-12 days.

But The Report saves this topic for consideration in a future blog.

It is now time for big time public pressure to brought to bear on the Proenzas, Joneses, Wagors and Compassos of of academia to develop a plan for putting public money to much more productive and efficient use than 14%, 7.3% and 6.8% bespeak.

They are all amply compensated.  True enough, some (i.e. Proenza) much better than the rest.

The SCPR totally subscribes to Dyer's parting shot in his column, to wit:

Area taxpayers should be demanding to know why a university that has been constructing things faster than a post-World War II Levittown is foundering in one of the most important categories in higher education. 

ARE NEWSPAPER ENDORSEMENTS INSULTING TO VOTERS?

There was a day and an age when newspaper endorsements were worth their weight in gold.

But no more!

Times have changed and newspaper endorsements in addition to being no longer not worth their weight in gold but carry the added baggage of actually generating a contrarian reaction.  A voter is more and more likely to say:  "If The Repository endorsed candidate x, then I am voting for the opposing candidate because The Rep is so incredible to me that if they are for candidate x, then something has to be wrong with that candidate."

So how is it that newspaper endorsements are not the rave they once were?

The Report believes that the erosion set in when voters began realizing that neither political party had answers for the many problems vexing communities, and that increasingly they were more alike than different in the solutions (as unreliable as they were anyway) they offered.

So what does this have to do with newspapers?

Most newspapers gained a reputation of being the handmaiden (editorially speaking) of either the Republican or Democratic parties.  Locally, The Repository has been known as Republican in orientation, whereas the Akron Beacon Journal is Democratic in leaning.

As the electorate has loss confidence in America's two political parties; they have also lost confidence in those allied with them.  In this sense, both The Rep and the ABJ have been victims - in terms of editorial credibility - of their own biases.

It also used to be that voters would take the final list of a newspaper's endorsements with them to the polls and dutifully vote every one of the candidates/issues as recommended by the newspaper editorial staff.

Somewhere along the way, voters became more and more aware that newspaper gurus were no better informed than they were and, moreover, it was embarrassing to have to admit in a candid conversation with friends and neighbors that they followed voting marching orders from the editorial staffs at The Rep and the ABJ.

It is okay to cite a well-reasoned newspaper endorsement in a given race as a reason for voting for candidate x, but to take the list "lock, stock and barrel" is another matter.  Obviously, newspaper editors implicitly suggest to voters that taking their list of endorsements into the voting booth is a wise thing to do.

However, voters through experience know better.

For instance, how many Stark Countians voted for deposed Stark County Treasurer Gary D. Zeigler because of The Repository endorsement?  Think that doesn't leave a foul taste in the mouth of those who followed that Repository recommendation?

Another Repository example:  Janet Weir Creighton when she ran the first time for mayor of Canton.  David Kaminski, the then executive editor of The Rep, announced after The Rep endorsed her, that he planned to write ad nauseam  trumpeting the endorsement.

Of course, this was the same guy who wrote metaphorically that The Rep was a 800-pound gorilla that buy ink by the barrel.

So the opinion was not "merely" an opinion (i.e. the Creighton endorsement).  It became something The Rep was intent upon jamming down the readership's throats.

And, of course, The Rep is Stark County's only countywide newspaper, and as a monopoly, one has to be bombarded with the arrogance expressed by Kaminski, if one is to read a newspaper that deals with the whole of Stark County.


There is very compelling evidence that newspaper endorsements are not all that persuasive these days.  Many endorsed candidate lose.  It is likely that more win than lose, but the operative factor is that newspapers are biased toward incumbents and the winning has more to do with incumbency than with the endorsement.

As endorsements go, the SCPR believes that the ABJ endorsements are more credible than those of The Repository.

Why so?

Because The Report's take on The Rep's endorsements is that they are more "from the gut" than the ABJ's, and the ABJ not only endorses in a more thoughtful way, but also points out qualities about the non-endorsed candidate that provides more material for the voter to make his/her own choice.

"His/her own choice?"

Yes, "his/her own choice," that should be the way one votes.  Voters should gather information about the candidates from many sources and should get to know candidates on a one-to-one basis in local races which is a doable exercise.

WHBC's Ron Ponder - "Points to Ponder" - and yours truly had a discussion this past Monday on the need for voters to become better informed.  We agreed that "to help Stark County voters become better informed" is our primary mission for being.

Unfortunately, both of our area's major newspapers serve as gatekeepers, and censor what gets out to the general public about public officials and candidates. 

Why would they do this?

It is hard to say.  Serving their biases?  Not wanting to undermine public confidence in officialdom?  Undoubtedly, there are a number of rationales for the filtering. 

It is said that "information is power," and, indeed, it is.

For our democracy to have credibility, decisions have to be made by individual voters making considered judgments.  Merely being conduits for the likes of newspaper editorial boards is to avoid personal responsibility which is the cornerstone of our democratic way of life.

Voters should look at newspaper endorsements as one bit of information of equal weight with many other bits of information and opinions they gather in determining which way to vote.

Taken in this context newspaper endorsements are okay.

But to the extent that voters are encouraged to use them as a forfeiture of their individual choice in the exercise of the franchise, they are at best insulting to voters and, at worse, do a great deal of harm.

TWO COMMISSIONER SEATS ARE UP FOR VOTER SELECTION THIS YEAR: ARE THERE ANY AMONG THE FIELD OF FIVE WHO CAN MATCH THE VISION OF RALPH REGULA AND FRED KRUM?

The Akron Beacon Journal recently published a story:   Big federal check lands at Akron-Canton Airport (Bill Lilley, March 15, 2010).

The key to the story was Lilley's focus on the vision demonstrated by longtime 16th district congressman Ralph Regula and longtime Akron-Canton Airport director Fred Krum over the years in bringing Akron-Canton along as a huge economic asset to Stark County, Summit County and, indeed, to all of northeast Ohio.

Krum passed away a little over a year ago and Regula retired from Congress in 2008.

With these two visionary giants gone from the Stark County scene, the question becomes who will pick up with their drive, dedication and determination as qualities which fueled their vision and made Akron-Canton Airport an engine and hub for future Stark economic development?

Said another way, who among Akron-Canton's public and private leadership circles will step forward to fill the void left with the absence of Regula and Krum.

The primary focus of the Stark County Political Report is, of course, the public sector and Stark's political and government leaders.

2010 brings the election cycle to the fore and presents an occasion for Stark Countians to focus on the two commissioner slots that are up for selection this November.

Here are the candidates:

The SCPR has been thoroughly unimpressed with the folks who have staffed the commissioners slots going back to the mid-1970s when yours truly first moved to Stark County.

Had Stark County had a Fred Krum or Ralph Regula in a commissioner seat over those years, Stark County would not be facing the gigantic financial crisis that is presently under way.

But who can point to one single commissioner during those 35 years that in any way, shape or form approximates Krum and Regula?

There are none!

And Stark County is now paying the price!!!

The question presented for 2010 voters is this: whether or not any of the five listed above as running for Stark County commissioner have characteristics and qualities that could, 35 years from now, have Stark Countians looking back in adulation at the sterling work done in a visionary fashion to bring Stark to the fore in economic productiveness and thereby make Stark a prime Ohio location to work and live in

These are critical times for Stark's future.

Right now, Stark is not, except for a few bright spots like the Akron-Canton Airport complex and Stark State College's high tech development footprint, headed in the right the direction.

Voters need to probe the commissioner candidates and find out which of the five provide the best visionary promise - in the Krum/Regula mode - for Stark's future.