QUARTERLY UPDATE: SCPR "TOP 10" STARK CO POLITICAL SUBDIVISION ELECTED OFFICIALS - #5: SMUCKLER

ENCORE VIDEO

Bill Smuckler

on

Significance 

of

Bernabei Victory

Continuing today with the quarterly update of the SCPR's Top 10 List of Stark County's Political Subdivision Elected Officials with #5:  Canton Councilman-at-Large Bill Smuckler.

Consistently appearing on the list from update to update is Ward 8 councilman Edmond Mack.
  
In addition to Mack, Councilmen Richard Hart (a political independent) and Frank Morris, III have made appearances.

The SCPR sees Canton City Council as the top functioning major city—city council in all of Stark County with Massillon and Alliance close behind and North Canton City Council being in need of major repair in terms of its relationship with citizen activists should not be mentioned in the same breath along with Stark's other three large cities.

Because Canton stands out as the most accomplished of Stark's major councils in:

• responsiveness of members relating to petitioning citizens, and
• constructing
• programs,
• policies,
• practices, and
• projects 
• that promise a better tomorrow for Canton

yours truly has included two of its members on The Top 10 List from the initial list to this second quarterly update.

As the dean of Canton City Council, Bill Smuckler could easily have been an earlier selectee for a place on the list.

The Report picked up on Smuckler for inclusion on the current update because of the key role that he played in bringing new executive leadership to Canton in the election of former Canton law director, councilman and current Stark County commissioner Thomas Bernabei as Canton's new mayor.

While Canton is a strong council form of government, the face of the city is not 12 councilpersons and a council president.

Canton's identity is inextricably tied into the quality of executive leadership emanating from the 8th floor of Canton City Hall.

As the SCPR sees it, Canton has been in need of a change at the top almost from the beginning of William J. Healy, II's tenure as mayor which began on January 1, 2008.

Smuckler defeated Healy in the 2003 Democratic primary for mayor but lost narrowly (some 300 votes) to Republican Janet Creighton in the 2003 general election probably due to fellow Democrat Healy undermining Smuckler's bid in working under the radar for Creighton's election.

Healy, 

•  the political hypocrite he is, 
• as exemplified by his likely prevailing (in private political wheeling and dealing) upon the Stark County Democratic Party to challenge long time Democrat Bernabei's Stark Board of Elections of his certification of his candidacy as an "independent" candidate for mayor; 

has largely been a "smoke and mirrors" mayor of Canton.
The SCPR believes that Bill Smuckler understood that Canton would never solve its problems as long as the political sophisticate was mayor and therefore his being in the lead in promoting the Bernabei "independent" candidacy was in the judgement of yours truly a key factor in Bernabei being elected on November 3rd.

Healy was able to bamboozle most of Canton's/Stark County's elected and appointed Democratic leaders into the "support me because I am a Democrat" line.

But not true blue Democrat Bill Smuckler.

The Stark County Political Report believes that when all is said and done four years hence, those who supported Healy in the 2015 general election will realize that another four years of Healy as mayor would likely have been the death knell for the near term future of the city.

One of Smuckler's strong suits has always been his consistent and well thought out commitment to integrating Canton as the county seat into the fabric of all of Stark County Political Subdivision government and its inherent efficiency and responsiveness in providing base level services to day-in, day-out citizens.

Healy stopped a number of city/county/other-political-subdivision collaborations merely because Canton would not necessarily end up as "the top dog" in the envisioned partnership.

In his mind, The Report thinks Canton being "the top dog" was tantamount to Healy himself feeling he was in charge.

Smuckler as a government official has always demonstrated that he values efficiency and effectiveness over who is deemed to be in charge.

On election night in this encore SCPR video interview of Bill Smuckler, he articulates his belief that the election of Thomas M. Bernabei as mayor is the dawning of a new day of Canton joining with all Stark County Political Subdivision governments to make Stark County a county working first and foremost in service of its citizenry.



For his stepping forward as a unquestioned Democrat in support of the promise of Canton finally getting its act together, Councilman-at-Large Bill Smuckler is highly deserving of being #5 on the SCPR Top 10 List of Stark County Political Subdivision Elected Officials.

KIM PEREZ GEARING UP TO RUN FOR MAYOR OF CANTON?

 

 UPDATED AT 8:52 AM

Once upon a time Kim Perez was one of if not THE VERY BEST Democratic vote getters in Stark County.  He has been particularly effective in garnering city of Canton votes in his races for various offices over the years including his recent (2013) win as Canton treasurer.

His 2010 Stark County auditor race loss to Republican Alan Harold (under special circumstances, see explanation below) had to be devastating to him.

An astonishing thing about Perez is how many Stark County Republican politicos there are who cotton to him personality-wise.   The Report thinks that he successfully projects an "aw-shucks, who me?" persona that sucks even political sophisticates into believing that he is a politically uncalculating elected official who is more or less uninterested in hard-core Democratic politics.

In that regard he has an almost Gomer Pyle innocence quality to him.

But make no mistake about it, Perez is not a Gomer Pyle "Oh, Golly Gee" rube.

Perez, a cousin to Stark County Democratic chairman Randy Gonzalez, can and does work political sophistication one-step-up from his political peers.  Had he not got caught up in the web of Conley's Zeiglergate tag line because of his deep and lengthy political camaraderie with Zeigler, he would have beat back Alan Harold's challenge with ease.

He - the SCPR evaluates - buys into  Democratic Party political rhetoric and indeed becomes the Stark County spokesman for Democratic Party "talking points" from his "aw-shucks" demeanor at the "flip of a - political - switch."

His 2013 bounce-back might mean that he has pulled off a Bill Clintonesque (1992 presidential primary campaign) Comeback Kid caper and has earned the right to be viewed as Stark County's Comeback Kid.

And if the 2013 results are indicative of renewed political vigor and effectiveness, Mayor William J. Healy, II might be a Perez target in the Democratic primary for mayor that comes up in less than a year from the date of this blog.

Since being elected treasurer, it is the SCPR's take that Perez has ramped up his political activity (speaking out on policy issues [e.g. ending reduction in city income tax credit for Cantonians working out-of-town] and The Report believes the step up is indicative that Perez is not content being the head of Canton's smallest (in terms of number of employees) elected office.

When the SCPR brought the matter up in a May 13th discussion with Democratic mayor William J. Healy, II, he said "he didn't know what Perez was up to" but he did indicate that he found it significant that Perez was addressing policy matters and not focusing on the treasurer's primary job of collecting the city's income tax.

Most of the focus by the SCPR has been on whether or not long term councilman (with a break for 2012 through 2013) Bill Smuckler will be running.  And he may be.  But if he does, The Report thinks he may well find Perez in the field of candidates.

Smuckler has told The Report that he is only interested in a head-to-head with Healy.  So if Perez does get in, if Smuckler does not change his mind on participating in a multi-candidate field, then Smuckler will be out.

A Perez/Healy match up would likely be a heated match up and would cut right through Canton City Council in terms of which councilpersons align with the candidates.

The Report believes that Democrat Kevin Fisher (Ward 5) and Jimmy Babcock (Democrat, at-large), both of who worked for him when he was county auditor, would support a Perez run for mayor.   Thomas West, Chris Smith and David Dougherty would likely line up with Healy.  And the rest would be prone to be neutral in terms of taking a public position.

As kind of a side note, isn't it interesting that Healy tried to make Perez's brother Rick Stark County Council on Governments (SCOG) Crime Lab director though unqualified under long established job description criteria (calling for a scientist to be in charge) which qualification Healy tried to get excised in a proposed rewrite of the job description.

Actually, the appointment was made but immediatley backed off upon when "the s_ _ t hit the fan with the likes of Healy arch-political-enemy (Healy fired in early 2009 as Canton's service director) and now Stark County commissioner Tom Bernabei who is a member of the SCOG executive committee.

Rick was a former top deputy with former Stark County sheriff Tim Swanson, who at one time designated as being Swanson's choice to succeed him until the political fallout from the Marlboro police chief Ron Devies case took hold in the Stark County policing community) .

The question is whether or not in making the attempt Healy was anticipating a possible challenge from Kim Perez and in appointing brother Rick as Crime Lab boss trying to make it difficult for Kim to take him on?

Perez started out as a Canton city councilman in 1988 (Ward 1).  Next he was in place as Canton's auditor (1994 through 2004).  And from there he defeated Republican insider and Alliance resident Brant Luther to become Stark County auditor in 2004.

Republican Janet Creighton had defeated Democrat Bill Smuckler in the 2003 Canton mayoralty race.

The Republicans appointed Luther to succeed Creighton as auditor.

The Republicans had held the auditor's office (and, at the time its many, many political patronage jobs) for years and years and years.  Creighton was auditor from 1991 through 2003.  Alliance Republican William Bowman. held the office from 1975 through 1991.  And the SCPR believes that Republican control of the office preceded Bowman.

So it was quite a big deal when Perez wrestled the office from the GOP's appointee Luther.

Just a note on Patricia Fallot (now Louisville's Republican mayor).

She is one of few Stark County politicians who has politically outmaneuvered Perez.  

But to be fair to Perez,  she used the Canton Repository's "let's give Perez special scrutiny" (as compared to, let's say, Janet Creighton) on whether or not he brings political cronies into office with him (i.e. when he defeated Luther), the SCPR thinks, as a skillful use of political leverage to retain her job has one of Auditor Perez's top employees, though a Republican.

Clearly, in the opinion of The Report,  she belonged in a category of originally gotten her job as an auditor employee primarily because of Republican political connections.

But then came 2009 and what local attorney and civic activist Craig T. Conley labeled as being Zeiglergate.

A very good resource for those readers who are not familiar with Zeiglergate, go to this LINK to get up to date on how it unfolded.  The linked article gives Perez and his political allies plenty of space to expound on their view that he was a victim of Zeiglergate as some believe Zeigler himself was.

An interesting point of the referenced link is Perez's historical vote getting power within Canton, to wit:

Traditionally, Canton has been Perez’s support base. During the 2006 election, Perez, a former city councilman and city auditor, swept Canton with huge margins. But this year [referencing Perez's losing 2010 election effort], Harold won 250 out of 364 precincts in Stark County, including 13 Canton precincts.

However, looking at the numbers in the treasurer's race, it is noteworthy that Perez was unable to garner 50% plus of the vote.

Healy did get a majority (53%) in 2011 in the general election when he defeated Republican A.R. "Chip" Conde as he did in the Democratic primary against Smuckler (55%).

To the SCPR, a successful Perez challenge to Healy would not do much for Cantonians.

The Report sees Perez being "six of one" and Healy as being "half-a-dozen of another" in terms of being consummate politicians and having among their allies highly politicized supporters.  The SCPR sees both as primarily politicians at heart in need of a taxpayer supported job.

Even so, should he run for mayor and should he win, he definitely will have validated that he has risen from the politically dead and deserving of being thought of as being Stark County's Comeback Kid!

(VIDEO) COUNCILMAN SMUCKLER HAS A DIFFERENT TAKE ON THE 12TH STREET CORRIDOR PROJECT OVERBID THAN MAYOR HEALY DOES. IS ANYBODY SURPRISED?

News broke at Monday's Canton City Council meeting that bids on the 12th Street Corridor Project (from Mercy Medical Center to the Mahoning Road Corridor Project) came in $4.5 million over estimates by the Canton Engineering Department.

One of the councilpersons who had a reaction was - who else:  Bill Smuckler, councilman-at-large who is upset that 12th Street's sorely needed repairs as a consequence of "the problem" will be delayed by about six (6) months.

Moreover, Smuckler's upset goes deeper than the delay.

He told the SCPR in a conversation last night that he thinks that the Healy administration knew that the project would be overbid so that the administration can include an "in the talking stages" City of Canton Bond Issue proposal of some $18 million (to be repaid over ten years or so) including money for repairing Canton's streets, including, of course, needed additional money for the 12th Street project.

Smuckler says that most of council object for the simple reason that the life of repaired roads is some 7 to 12 years (depending on traffic volume), and that spending bond money on street repairs is an imprudent thing to do.

There was no hint of any such plan by Major Healy in the following interview done by the SCPR yesterday afternoon.



However, in an off-camera discussion with the mayor immediately after taping the session, Mayor Healy did share with The Report his frustration with Councilman Smuckler.

Healy projected to the SCPR that he thinks Smuckler is in "full political battle dress" (The Report's characterization, not Healy's) and that Smuckler's opposition to and/or criticism of various Healy administration proposals/projects are evidence of same.  Since taking office on January 1st, they include:

• the development of a long range plan for Canton at the cost of $350,000,
• the Bond proposal, 
• the Perez/Smuckler plan to end Canton's reduced income tax credit for Cantonians working outside of Canton, and
• the 12th Street Corridor project
• SCPR Note:  Councilman Smuckler gives the mayor high marks for having engineered the 90/10 split between federal/state-City of Canton funding of the project which will probably end up having so a $20 million or price tag to it.

And are borne of what Healy is convinced is Smuckler's plan to run for mayor in the 2015 Canton Democratic primary.

For a refresher, here are a couple of SCPR videos of Councilman Smuckler speaking of his opposition to the Healy administration to paying the $350,000 for the work up of a long term plan for Canton:





If Healy is correct and Smuckler (who neither confirms or denies that he will run for mayor) runs again, it will be the third time the two have run against each other.

In 2003 Smuckler bested Healy in the Democratic primary and went on to lose narrowly to Republican Janet Creighton (now a Stark County commissioner) in the 2003 general election.

In 2007 Healy defeated Smuckler and then went on to trump Creighton in November, 2007.

So it will be interesting to see whether or not Healy's certainty materializes.

Smuckler tells the SCPR that he has to walk a tightrope in his relationship with the mayor and that consequently he has found himself not speaking out when he felt he needed to because of his concern that he would be dismissed as a politically inspired crank.

He shared with The Report a conversation he had with Healy's safety director Andrea Perry yesterday about the same of the SCPR/Healy interview.

In the conversation Smuckler and Perry were exploring ideas how he could get on board with various Healy administration proposals.  He says he is willing to consider working to bridge over differences with the mayor but he wants to meet with Healy, Chief-of-Staff Fonda Williams and Perry in a neutral setting (i.e. not on the 8th floor of city hall nor in council chambers).

When Smuckler told The Report of his suspicion that the overbid scenario was one orchestrated at the mayor's direction for the ulterior motive of getting funds for the project from Bond money, The Report was skeptical.

Of course, SCPR readers have read blog, after blog, after blog of how utterly political The Report thinks William J. Healy, II is.

So why would The Report be skeptical on Smuckler's take on the deeper significance of the overbid?

A very good question, indeed!

Only time will tell as to an answer on Smuckler's suspicion.

We shall see in due course.

(VIDEO) SCPR RETURNS TO CANTON CITY COUNCIL/MAYOR OF CANTON

VIDEO

Healy & Bartos

Throw 

Canton"s Fixed Income Folks

"under the bus?"

As the regular readers of the Stark County Political Report know, The Report has been focused on a number of "hot" stories dominating the Stark County political landscape of late.

FIRST, FOR A LITTLE FUN

Consequently, the SCPR has not been devoting as much attention to Canton mayor William J. Healy, II as readers have grown accustomed to over the nearly six years (anniversary date:  March 12th) that Stark County's most complete and in depth source for coverage of Stark County politics and government has known since "the glory days of The Repository," which, of course, are long in the past.

The Report owes "getting back on track" with Healy et al to Canton City Council president Allen Schulman.

Last Monday evening, by implication - at least as inferred/interpreted by the SCPR - Schulman suggested that, perhaps, The Report was paying too much attention to the George T. Maier's sheriff-quest saga and needed to think of returning to other "bread and butter" topics, which from The Report's perspective "all things Healy" would be a prime example of.

Enough said Allen.

Drum roll, please!

Here is the SCPR returning to "All Things Considered 'err Healy."

One caveat though.

The SCPR is going to endeavor to resist the temptation to interview Healy.

Really?

Why's that?

As SCPR readers know, The Report does a pretty damn good job "smoking out" many of Stark County's political and governmental leaders on "topic of the day" issues, but Healy, the guy is just impossibly slippery.

Healy is right up there if not beyond William Jefferson Clinton.

Clinton?

Yes,

You know:  "that depends on what is, is?" guy.

As skilled as The Report is at interrogation techniques, a guy like Clinton cannot be corraled by the "big bucks" national media, let alone the "pipsqueak" Stark County Political Report.

Well, Healy is The Report's Clinton.

This guy rivals the 42nd president of these United States of American in spades.

The SCPR will know that this blog has reached its zenith when The Report does an interview with Healy that has even 10% non-spin it.

Now The Report says - very firmly - in bringing the childhood "greased pig contest" up in this blog (see below), that Mayor Healy IS NOT BEING COMPARED TO "a pig."

But even Healy must immodestly (of course, he is just being himself) admit that The Report nor any other media has captured him a "moment of weakness" (i.e. doing anything but "political spin").

Hence the refresher to SCPR readers on our childhood days and "the greased pig" contest:

Now that we have had little fun (thank you Mayor Healy for being humored by The Report's satire on your elusiveness),

LET US TURN TO SERIOUS MATTERS

First, congratulations to Mayor Healy upon being selected by the Ohio Municipal League to be its president for 2014.

NOW, FOR A LITTLE CRITICISM

God Bless Canton voters for returning Bill Smuckler to Canton City Council.

On Monday last he brought up a topic that should catch the attention of the many Cantonians who are on "fixed" income.

•  SCPR Note: (based on U.S. census reports)
• 12.8% of Canton's population is 65 and over
• presumably, most of whom are on fixed incomes
• of course, there are others who are other Cantonians under age 65 who are on "fixed" incomes
• 30.8% of Cantonians are below the federal poverty level,
• obviously, the 30.8% includes some of the 12.8% of 65 and over
• $30,000 is the median household income (2008-2012)

And, of course, one has to believe that even those Cantonians who are not on "fixed" incomes are going to be more than just a little outraged that the Healy administration proposes to raise the city's sewer rate for the fifth (5th) year in a row.

Healy projects himself as the champion of the downtroddened and oppressed (financially and socially) but, in the SCPR's view, one would have to be into buying swampland in Florida to think that Healy "really" cares for such folks.

Anyone who knows Hizzhonor certainly understands that the mayor in his heart of hearts only cares about one person and that is William J. Healy, II.

If the SCPR has the numbers correct and if council goes along, "fixed" income and impoverished Cantonians in 2014 will be paying 41% (Smuckler says more like 45% when one figures in the "compounding" effect) more for sewer services  [accounting for the compounding factor]) than they did in 2008.   In 2008 Healy took over as mayor of Canton, his having been elected in November, 2007 over incumbent Republican mayor Janet Creighton (Creighton is now a Stark County commissioner)

Speaking of Creighton, in the video below, even six (6) years into his being mayor, Healy seemingly blames former mayors and Republicans Creighton and Richard Watkins (at the very minimum) for "not properly minding the store" on infrastructure finances thereby necessitating the Healy administration raising rates to Canton homeowners.

Such is yet another quintessential Healy attribute.

It is never William J. Healy, II and his administration's slipshod administration.  It is always somebody else who is to blame or some intervening circumstance that is at fault.

And get this!

BUT FOR one Bill Smuckler, the latest 3% increase would have happened:

Select one answer:  (mark an "x" in the appropriate box)

___     On a Vote by City Council Members

___     Without a Vote by City Council Members

You've got it!

Without a Vote by City Council Members.

And playing the role of Pontius Pilate-esque figure, Canton service director William Bartos (folks, he ain't no Warren Price, he, the SCPR thinks, is a personification of Healy abiding "yes" men/women only in his top administration) aided and abetted by Healy himself appear to the SCPR to try to slip the increase through by use of a legislative "sleight of hand" procedure (so, the SCPR thinks) called "read & file."

Let the SCPR say it one more time.

Thank God that Bill Smuckler is back on council!

He, at the very least, is going to make his fellow council members go on record with their "ayes/nays," if the increase is to occur.

To The Report, as can been seen in the SCPR video below, it took Bartos and Healy until the "miscellaneous business" section of the regular council meeting (most of the discussion in the video is in the preceding regular council "Committee of the Whole" meeting) to reveal that Councilman Smuckler was inadvertently "understating" the total amount of the increases over the past four years.

In the video, Bartos and Healy let Smuckler talk about 27% in increases (9% in each of the past three years) whereas "they had to know," even as Smuckler spoke, that the real numbers were 9.5% going back four years hence a total of 38% which is quite a bit more than 27%, no?

The foregoing is an example of why the SCPR is really tough on Mayor William J. Healy, II.

As indicated above, Healy is about as slippery and unaccountable as a public official gets.

This guy comes up for reelection next year and it does not appear, about one year out, that anybody is surfacing to challenge this guy.

The pity of Healy's chronic use of political grease, as far as the SCPR is concerned, is that it is all about how he appears and very little, if any, about how the citizens of Canton fare.

This time it is those Cantonians on fixed incomes and those who literally live "hand to mouth."

What block of the Canton citizenry will next be victimized by the Healy's "Same Old Song" and dance?

Song and dance?

Indeed!

And year after year with this mayor it is the:  "Same old song."

Are Cantonians ever going to get it?

Here is the video of Councilman Bill Smuckler "smoking out" Bartos and Healy on the "slide it through" sewer rate increase maneuver.  Of course, laying the increase as being "the work of council."

(VIDEOS) THE AFTERMATH OF MAIER V. DARROW: CAN THE WOUNDS BE HEALED WITHIN STARK DEMOCRATIC PARTY?

VIDEOS

STARK CO. PROSECUTOR JOHN FERRERO

ON

MAIER SELECTION

AS

DEMS SHERIFF APPOINTEE

=====================================

CANTON COUNCILMAN ELECT  BILL SMUCKLER

ON

MAIER SELECTION

AS

DEMS SHERIFF APPOINTEE

=====================================

GONZALEZ/STARK DEMS LEGAL COUNSEL

WARREN PRICE

ON

MAIER SELECTION

AS

DEMS SHERIFF APPOINTEE

ON

POSSIBLE HIRE BY MAIER

======================================

ATTORNEY STEVEN REISCH

ON

MAIER SELECTION

AS

DEMS SHERIFF APPOINTEE

After George T. Maier defeated Lou Darrow in the contest between the two of the them (Democrat Douglas Smith and Republican Larry Dordea were non-factors) by a vote of 101 to 65 (contrasted to the February 5, 2013 vote of Maier 92  - Darrow 84 - Dordea 1), one has to wonder what residual damage has been done to the Stark County Democratic Party in terms of retaining the sheriff's office come November, 2014.

One unknown factor is the prospect that interim sheriff (at least until Maier is sworn in again) Tim Swanson will be filing a "new" quo warranto in the coming days.

The last information that the SCPR has is that Swanson plans to file a new action given that his counsel Greg Beck is reportedly advising that he feels that the Ohio Supreme Court will bounce Maier from office once again.

The SCPR thinks that the Randy Gonzalez led Stark County "establishment" Democrats could have made a huge political mistake in excluding Swanson's (and Darrow's) legal counsel (Greg Beck) from presenting to the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee a contrary point of view on whether or not George T. Maier is qualified to be Stark County sheriff.  A perspective different than that of the Stark Dems' legal counsel; namely, Allen Schulman, Warren Price, Steve Okey and Michael Thompson.

But perhaps Swanson/Beck will be going forward no matter how badly they may feel that they were treated at Wednesday night's meeting at Holy Trinity Orthodox Church to select a successor to Sheriff-elect Mike McDonald.

McDonald could not take office as scheduled on January 7, 2013 due to an illness that proved to be terminal (February 22nd).

"Full-speed-ahead" appears to have been the conclusion of Gonzalez and his second-in-command Johnnie A. Maier, Jr., a former Stark County Democratic Party chairman (2003 - 2009). He is also the brother of George T. Maier.

For it seems to the SCPR that there was no evidence of reconciliation or easing of tension between the Maier supporters and the Darrow supporters at the conclusion of the Holy Trinity assembly.

Moreover, The Report thinks that unhappiness and divisions linger within the Stark Dems organization that runs deeper than the Maier/Swanson/Darrow conflict.

If the Stark County GOP can glom onto and exploit these divisions, then it might be that the Maier/Swanson/Darrow spat will provide an opportunity for the Republicans to win the sheriff's office in November.

However, there are a little over ten months for the Democrats to find a way to heal some of the wounds that have been opened in the McDonald succession fight.

One would think there is very little chance of that happening if there is another period of sitting and waiting to see whether or not the Ohio Supreme Court is going to oust George T. Maier once again.

Beyond the Democrats and their infighting is the answer to the question of how the general public is taking all this in.

While George Maier gets high marks for his "on-the-job" performance from most if not all Stark County law enforcement familiar with his modus operandi, will the political infighting - if it continues -  give the Republicans the edge they need to sneak their candidate (likely to be Larry Dordea, former Alliance chief of police and now serving in the same capacity in Hartville) through the backdoor and into office in next fall's general election?

The SCPR's take on the political demographics of Stark County is that, if properly structured and run, a quality Democratic candidate should win in countywide races.

However, 2014 could turn out to be problematical for Democrats because of the statewide governor's race involving Republican John Kasich (running as an incumbent) and Democratic challenger Ed Fitzgerald.

The Fitzgerald campaign is currently bogged down because of tax arrears problems of his first chosen lieutenant governor running mate who, as a consequence of the press attention given to the tax issue, has decided to leave the ticket.

Troubles at that level of Ohio politics could make it very difficult for any countywide office-seeking Democrat (let alone one plagued with internal county party bickering) to win even if it is a "leans Democratic" county which the SCPR believes Stark is.

So the SCPR has started examining how the Maier/Swanson/Darrow fight might impact either Maier's or Darrow's chance to win next November.

It should be comforting to Maier (the candidate the SCPR thinks has the most concerns), if he ends up as the Dems' nominee, that it appears to the SCPR that he is not likely to lose support from among the 65 or so precinct committee persons who voted against his second appointment as sheriff on Wednesday night.

But if he gets bounced again by the Ohio Supreme Court, that could change.  If a new quo warranto is filed and the high court takes another nine months before making a determination and that decision is to oust Maier again, it is hard to see how he overcomes that with voters across the county.

To be viable next November, he will have to win the Democratic primary in May (and the SCPR sees no problem with that given Darrow's lack of political skills) and trust that there is no Supreme Court ouster between May and November.

Of course, it was Gonzalez' and Johnnie A. Maier, Jr's call, but I think that the rude treatment that Swanson/Darrow and their attorney got Wednesday night at the hand of the the Stark County Dems leadership just might come back and bite George T. Maier in the "political rump" come November, 2014.

If a second Maier ouster occurs, not only will the dissident Stark Democrats surface once again, but the Republicans will be looking at ways to capitalize.

So The Report thinks that the establishment leadership should have been more conciliatory on Wednesday to Darrow's supporters and, even now, should be rushing to conciliate with Swanson before he goes off on another quo warranto mission.

But what does the SCPR know about politics anyway?

After Wednesday's vote, the SCPR talked with four of the participants; one a non-voting participant in order to begin collecting a sense of feelings are running.

JOHN FERRERO

This former Stark County Democratic Party chairman (1996 - 2003) and sitting Stark County prosecutor says that he thinks that the imbroglio over Maier's statutory disqualification has hurt the party.  However, while not naming Maier, he said he would be supporting the Democratic candidate next November.



WILLIAM SMUCKLER

A well known city of Canton politician who knows Canton politics "like one knows the back of his hand" could be a huge help to whomever becomes the Dems' candidate for sheriff.

He has served many years in Canton City Council, has run for mayor and for Stark County commissioner.



WARREN PRICE

A member of the Gonzalez/Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee legal team, Price says that he thought that Wednesday's meeting went reasonably well.

The SCPR sees Price as a mediating person who should be utilized by party leaders to smooth out the currently ruffled political feathers.

Another issue that The Report brought up with Price was the document that came into the SCPR's hands from the sheriff's office showing that he was dickering with Maier during his first stint in sheriff for possible employment in the sheriff's administration either as a direct employee or a contract employee.



STEVEN REISCH

An attorney for 15 years and currently with the Stark County Public Defender's office, Reisch's was dismayed at the way Wednesday's meeting went.  However, the SCPR did not get the impression that Reisch was about to bolt the party come next November.

It was interesting to see how critical Reisch was of Gonzalez/Stark Dems' legal counsel Steve Okey.

Could Reisch's critical evaluation of Okey signal that the man best suited to smooth things over within the party might be Warren Price?

GOV'T BY CITY COUNCIL IN CANTON AND MASSILLON?

As unrealistic as it seems to the SCPR that such is a viable option for governance, it appears that the city councils of both Massillon and Canton are asserting themselves more and more in ways that indicate a contest with the respective executive branches of government is underway to determine which branch has the major say in the way in which the city is governed.

MASSILLON

At the Monday night council work session "all Hell broke loose" in a battle between Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry and several council members over council's effort to reform the structure of the city's parks and recreation board.

Charges and counter charges on truth telling with respect to the tenure of former parks and recreation directors were the order of the night at Monday's session.

It appears that this fight is being won by council and that the end of the Councilman Larry Slagle-led Parks and Recreation Committee deliberation; it will be council (through the Parks and Recreation Board) that prevails on that particular issue.

And, of course, those who have been following developments in Tigerland government circles, know that the council/city executive fights have not been limited to the parks and recreation matter.

There have been the fights between council and the mayor over taxes and the cutting of expenses.

Beyond the issues in and of themselves, it is painfully clear that most of Massillon council does not trust the mayor.

The mistrust and differences on the issues and the role of council in decision making for the city will spill over into the upcoming council ward elections

The "unstated" stakes in the councilmantic races include whether or not the Johnnie A. Maier, Jr. led political faction can elect anyone to office and, if he is reelected, whether or not Ward 6 councilman Ed Lewis, IV uses his reelection as a springboard to run against Catazaro-Perry in 2015.

Maier et al are contesting Republican Nancy Halter in Ward 2 and Lewis in Ward 6.

As far as the SCPR is concerned, the Maiers are also vying with Republican Jim Triner in Ward 4.

It appears that stand-in (for Quinessa Hampton - who quit the race because of compatibility issues with her military service) Shaddrick Stinson is trying to distance himself from the Maier faction, but the SCPR is not buying and I believe that, if elected, Stinson would by and large stand with Maier executive government proxy Catazaro-Perry on the important issues (to the administration) that come before council.

The SCPR has learned that the Stinson folks have been making overtures to powerful Ward 4 political factors in an endeavor to retain this seat for the Democrats in one of Massillon's most heavily Democratic wards.

The Report is told by one long time Massillon Democrat that a Republican probably hasn't represented the Ward 4 since the 1950s.

If Quinessa's husband (running as a non-partisan) can be a factor (siphoning off Democratic votes) and if other Ward 4 Democrats can be neutralized, then Triner is in a good position to take Ward 4 for the Republicans.

The Catazaro-Perry administration main hope in staving off the challenge as to who will dominate Massillon city government rests in the Maier faction's ability to elect council members politically aligned with the administration.

So all eyes in November's election should be on Wards 2, 4 and 6.

CANTON

While the SCPR does not see councilmantic challenge of the Healy administration to be as pronounced as in Massillon, there is no question that expected results of Canton's November election will alter the relationship between the mayor and council as a whole.

On key issues, the SCPR sees the more or less "let's challenge Healy forces on council" will be bolstered by the election of Democrat Roland K. Burns, III at large and the return of former councilman and Democrat Bill Smuckler.

While Mayor Healy does rid himself of the troublesome Mary Cirelli (who stepped down from council to run for city treasurer in a losing effort), the reintroduction of Smuckler spells big trouble for the mayor.

Smuckler has a different vision for the city than Healy.

And he has been frustrated in his attempt to become the city's chief executive (losing to Republican Janet Creighton in 2003) and to Healy (in the Democratic primary) in 2011.

So The Report expects him to lead a "let's challenge Healy" majority (re:  key issues) on council.

Smuckler does not trust Healy but, nonetheless, being the practical politician he is and understanding that council in a structural sense is not suited to actually run city government, he will use his power as the de facto if not de jure leader of council to compel Healy to implement policies and practices that are his/council's idea and not Healy's.

The "let's challenge Healy" group should have a 7 to 5 majority post November 5, 2013.

SUMMARY

The SCPR does not see how a city council can effectively govern any city.

Council simply does not have the structure to do so.

The best that can be hoped for is for any council that wants its point of view, its preferred operating model to rule is to convince the executive authority (i.e. the mayor) to become its alter ego.

MASSILLON

There is no hope that such can happen in Massillon even if the Republicans maintain their majority.

Many believe that Kathy Catazaro-Perry is not "the real mayor" of the city.  Rather, they believe, the city is run by Johnnie A. Maier, Jr. who thinks he can run the city like he runs his clerk of courts operation.

Maier, in effect, is the elected executive officer of Massillon's clerk of courts office and his word within the department in the "word of god."

However, that mode of operating "will not play in Peoria" in relation to city council.

But Maier will never ever become a "come and let us reason together" guy.

It is indelible that Maier is an "old school" power broker politician who leaves no prisoners.

So - going forward - a strong and able council with a mind of its own, especially if it continues to be controlled by the Republicans, is likely to be in one battle after another on one issue or another with the Catazaro-Perry/Maier administration.

At one time it looked liked council and Catazaro-Perry were coming together on the parks and recreation issue.

But that The Report now believes was merely a "feint" and beneath it all was a determination by the administration to come out of that fight on top and not having compromised with council one iota.

So the SCPR thinks Massillonians will be caught up in a continuing administration/council battle as who is to prevail in having its way in the running of Massillon city government.

CANTON

The return of Bill Smuckler to Canton City Council is likely to be - in an ironical sense - the salvation of the William J. Healy, II administration.

Make no mistake about it.

Smuckler and his "let's challenge Healy" majority will make their mark, and Healy, (the quintessential "let me live another day" politician) will find a way to allow "the will of council" to affect the priorities of Canton government so long as Healy gets some headline making credit for whatever the manifestation of "the will of council" turns out to be.

Smuckler is quite adept at accommodating egos and therefore the SCPR sees Canton's turning for the better with Smuckler's de facto city of Canton leadership from "his perch on city council."

(VIDEOS) UNIONS/DIVERSITY CONCERNS AND OTHER TURF INTERESTS DOOM CANTON'S CHARTER GOV'T FLIRTATION?

In order for Canton Ward 8 Councilman Edmond Mack to get the issue of Canton's going to a charter form of government before city voters, it is going to take a dramatic turnaround on the thinking on the part of most Canton City Council members.

A vote on the legislation, which Judiciary Committee chairman Tom West has said he will sign off on (on the condition of Monday night's town hall meeting having been held) in order to get the Canton Law Department to work drafting the legislation, will likely take place between January 6 and March 6, 2014 in order for the question (if council approves the legislation) to make the filing deadline for it to be on the May, 2014 primary election ballot.

By the SCPR's nose count of councilpersons, it appears that Mack has an uphill fight to get council to approve presenting the matter to voters.

Co-sponsor Mary Cirelli will not be around to be one of his "yes" votes inasmuch as she - having opted not to run for re-election to council - will not be around.

Additionally, Cirelli announced Monday that she will not be a candidate for the charter commission should city council place the question on the ballot.

Come January, he will acquire a superb ally to aid him in the cause.  Longtime charter advocate and former councilman Bill Smuckler will be returning to Canton council.

On Monday council minority members West (D - Ward 2) and Chris Smith (D - Ward 4) said flat out that they will not be voting for the legislation.

The SCPR is disappointed in West in that he argues for citizens and fellow council members to be educated on city issues (e.g. Redflex traffic cameras) before forming a position while seemingly, in The Report's estimate, having made up his mind on the charter issue.

In an interview with him Monday night post-meeting, West appears to be open to the possibility of changing his mind.

However, The Report thinks that his seeming hedging on having made up his mind is more a case of wanting to give the impression of openness rather than being genuinely open to changing his mind.

After all, it is a tad hypocritical to decry others for not being informed and then close one's own mind to perhaps mind-changing information - is it not?

Another SCPR criticism of West has to do with what yours truly thinks is unfounded focus on the diversity issue.

Canton now has two African-American council persons out of total of thirteen total councilpersons when one includes the council president.

Okay.

A little math lesson is in order:  2/13 = 15%.

Hmm?

Canton has a 24% black population.

So why is he and why is Chris Smith (D - 4) zealously protecting the status quo?

Are they willing to settle for a mere 15% of black leadership roles in Canton government in the face of African-American composing 24% of Canton's population?

It is hard to see how African-American representation in any proposal that a charter commission might come up with would be less than 15 per cent.

The potential is there for African-American politicians to achieve citywide and countywide offices.

Kelley Zachary ran a very respectable race for Stark County treasurer and Canton treasurer.  West himself ran well against Kirk Schuring a number of years ago for the state Senate in a district that covered about 90% of Stark County.

There is a case to made that BUT FOR Mary Cirelli being a candidate for Canton treasurer that Zachary would have defeated Kim Perez.

But for African-Americans to improve their numbers one would think that a Canton/Stark County African-American needs to step up to the plate having designed a workable plan for electing blacks citywide, even countywide.

Of course, it is not enough to come up with a plan. Someone will have to actually "roll up the sleeves" and do the hard work of selling the plan to the electorate.

Who better than Councilman West?

Being the social worker, politician, businessman and educated man he is, West should have inner characteristics, qualities and resources to get creative and be a pro-active Stark County minority leader that gets results.

To boot, he has been a councilman ten years.  Hardly a novice, no?  But in all fairness one has to ask what does he have to show for it?

While yours truly personally likes Tom West, it seems that he needs to be challenged "to be all that he can be" in terms of making his mark in Canton and Stark County as a leader among leaders.

That is not what The Report is seeing in Tom West of 2013.

West is no different than another other Stark County-based elected official who is not measuring up.

The Report typically prods those Stark County political subdivision "a day late and dollar short" leaders holding public office who are not delivering a quality of leadership that Stark County cities, villages, townships and boards of education so sorely need.

Stark County does have a model of county level of leadership being ratcheted up to a higher level with the election of Tom Bernabei and Janet Creighton in 2010.

Before Bernabei and Creighton, SCPR readers will recall what a mess Stark County government was in.

It is encouraging to see that Canton in Edmond Mack as a person who is willing to take on a "the odds are against me" issue and seek to turn the negative thinking around. Folks, this is leadership.

Not to pit them against one another, but yours truly thinks Councilman Edmond Mack (only now finishing up his first two year term) demonstrates far more in the kind of leadership that the SCPR is looking for than West does.

There is no doubt about it.  Mack seemingly faces insuperable obstacles of bringing charter government to Canton.  But do not tell him that.  He embraces the challenge of adjusting and accommodating to various perspectives in quest of reaching his ultimate goal.

The Report presents via video the entire formal presentation of both from Monday's town hall meeting on the charter government issue.

Edmond Mack.



Thomas West.



The Achilles Heel of Mack's presentation was his failure to tie in creating a charter government to specific benefits to be derived by everyday citizens.

West was far too much into "the fear factor" and resting on the security of the maintaining the "status quo" in appealing to the base instincts of people.

Lastly, yours truly has a special word for Stark County organized labor as personified by Stark County trades union president David Kirven.

Kirven did what he is paid to do which is look out for the interests of unions.

But for elected public officials to factor special interests into their decisions as to what structure of government is best for the public is not a responsible basis for decision making.

While The Report personally favors Project Labor Agreements (PLAs), prevailing wage laws and protecting public workers' pensions, it doesn't follow that maintaining a statutory form of government has anything whatsoever to do with those matters.

To sum it all up, it appears to the SCPR that the private, political and special organization interests of a number of Canton city councilpersons (i.e. turf interests) are playing into the decision on whether or not Cantonians will have the democratic right to determine their own structure of government.

The overall interests of the citizens of Canton appear to be taking a back seat.

The obvious decline of Canton that is underway should be an wake up call to the city's councilpersons.

As one citizen said on Monday night on recounting the dramatic loss of population since 1950, "don't you think we might be doing something wrong" in terms of how we do government in Canton.

And it is noteworthy that Cantonians took a look at fashioning charter government in 1962.  Unfortunately, the 1961/62 set of commissioners came up with an ill-founded plan of electing all of of the commission member at-large.  In doing so, they took away the ability of Cantonians living in clustered neighborhoods (e.g. Vassar Park) to hold individual councilpersons accountable.

Cantonians reacted the way they should have at the ballot box in voting 78% against that proposal.

The beauty of the chartering process is that the voters can always say "no," if out-of-touch charter commissioners loose their heads.

But does anyone think that a new commission would repeat the mistakes of the 60s era group?

Canton council needs to approve letting a new group of 15 give formulating a charter a new try.

Having at the ready flexible tools (whether or not they are ever used) to do a more efficient and effective job for the taxpaying public equips government to more responsive to public demands to fix things gone wrong.

The Report understood Ward 5 councilman Kevin Fisher on Monday night of having talked about getting the Ohio General Assembly to change the formula for the election of charter members to reflect the demographics of a city.

Fisher's idea is a good one that the Canton's representative to the Ohio House (Stephen Slesnick - D/Canton) and Stark County's representative to the Ohio Senate (Scott Oelslager - R/Plain Township) should pick up on.

For Canton, such a change could mean electing a 13 member charter commission:  Nine (one each) from the existing wards plus four at-large members.

But there is no chance that any change in state legislation will be forthcoming over the next six months.

Nevertheless Canton desperately needs a fresh start with as much flex as Ohio law allows for charter cities to structure themselves for the maximum benefit of the citizenry.

Seventy-three percent (73%) of Ohio's cities are charter cities.

If statutory status meets the optimal need of cities, why have 3/4ths of Ohio municipalities opted for the charter form?

As long as Canton is represented by the self-centereds who pretty much flesh out a "public be damned" underlying attitude in pursuit of their perceived special interests, the city will continue its downward spiral.

More and more Cantonians should be asking themselves this.

Is a Detroit scenario really all the far away from Canton's doorstep?

WHO DOES COUNCILMAN-AT-LARGE JOE COLE THINK HE IS KIDDING?

Yours truly gets one hoot after another in following the political career escapades of Canton Councilman Joe Cole.

Now a lame duck councilman, having lost to Frank Morris, III (a fellow Democrat) in Ward 9 this past November, Cole - once a very promising councilman - in his work as councilman seems to the SCPR to have totally lost it.

For those readers who missed it, here is a LINK to the SCPR blog which details the hoodwinking Mary Cirelli gave him back in February at the filing deadline for the May 7th primary election.

The Cirelli move caused him to end up running against the Ward 9 incumbent Morris.

Why?

Likely because Cole, believed he would have to run against Bill Smuckler, Cirelli and Jimmy Babcock and (in the light of is previous "weak" election showings [see number below]) be the "odd-man-out" [so to speak]) in the 2013 council-at-large Democratic Primary.

As it turned out, Mary Cirelli made her own bad decision in opting to run for Canton treasurer. Astonishing nearly all of us who think we know something about Canton politics, Mary ran third of three candidates for the Canton city treasurer post.

So in the end, the "cloak and dagger-esque" scene at the Stark County Board of Elections between Cole and Cirelli was politically fatal to both of them.

Before the Board of Elections fiasco, Joe - in the opinion of the SCPR - made a big mistake in throwing in with Mayor William J. Healy, II.

But he probably was feeling politically vulnerable and thought that closely associating with the mayor might help him.

When he first ran in 2009, he barely bested Babcock in a field of 10 Democrats vying for the three council-at-large seats in the Democratic Primary.

Then in the November election he was way, way behind Smuckler and Cirelli.

And in subsequent elections, he has always been third in the race for one of the three Canton council-at-large posts up for election.

Cole was likely (well before the filings, when he was in the throes of picking his political allies) figuring that Bill Smuckler who lost to Healy in the Democratic mayoralty primary in 2011 and to Republican Richard Regula in November, 2012 for county commissioner would be itching to get back onto Canton council.

He knew that Healy was the political adversary of both Cirelli and Smuckler and what better ally than the mayor, no?

And, apparently, the mayor likely brought him the support of Stark County's trade unions and the man the SCPR believes is the Trades' most active political type; namely, Dave Kirven of Local 94 of the Plumbers and Pipefitters.

The SCPR has received a number of opinions from various Stark Democrats that Kirven is in cahoots with the mayor to take over the Stark County Democratic Party.

Local political observers can't quite figure out the Kirven/Cole relationship inasmuch as Cole is the superintendent of a charter school which, of course, do not generally hire unionized teachers.

The Report thinks that it is Healy who is the nexus between the Trades/Kirven and Cole.

The SCPR has reported the huge amount of money (probably to be shown to have been in excess of $10,000 in  post-primary campaign finance reports) [LINK]) that Kirven apparently was instrumental in getting the Trades to put into Cole's campaign against Morris (himself a member of an Akron-based glaziers' union).

So the moral of the political story for Cole is that the mayor was of no help in his race against Morris and that the large union war chest was of no help.

But how can anybody help a candidate who - during the campaign:

• dissed a key segment of Ward 9 voters (LINK - i.e. Vassar Park residents [Group 175] who are pushing Canton government to increase the Canton police force to 175 strong)
• in an open council meeting, singled out Frank Morris as being deplorable in voting no on funding the Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce at $175,000 city taxpayer dollars.  (Morris wanted to the money to go towards hiring more police).
• decided - during the campaign - he was against Canton having "council-at-large positions altogether beginning with the 2015/2016 term if approved by Canton's voters.

To the SCPR, the Cole Ward 9 campaign was "one big laugh" and all that union money from the hard working members' membership dues was not going to help a "comedy of errors" campaign.

Rather than admit the obvious that his anti-council-at-large-seats stance was born of having been hoodwinked by Cirelli, he persisted to bringing the matter to a vote this past Monday.

He only got two votes, other than his own:  Edmond Mack, Ward 8 and David Dougherty, Ward 6.

The Report sees the initial "during the campaign" proposal by Cole as being a political gambit (much after the model of that Mayor Healy presents in his "everything is political" way of thinking) that was laughably silly if he thought it was going to benefit him in terms of getting newspaper ink during his race against Morris.

While his reasoning may have some validity, to wit:

“This is territorial in a sense [...] These are individuals worried about their political futures and I understand that. That’s not a criticism. They are worried about what would be the landscape if you had individuals who would normally be at-large, who now don’t have those seats, they’re going to becoming into ward (races).”  (Source:  City Council keeps at-large seats, Rink, The Repository, May 20, 2013).

Of course, the best evidence of his point is himself.

When Mary Cirelli bamboozled him into thinking that she was going to run for council-at-large, what did Joe Cole do?

You've got it.  He took on the incumbent councilman in the ward he lives in:  Ward 9.

When his personal political survival was at stake, Cole showed how utterly political he is.  That his opponent was a fellow Democrat and an incumbent didn't faze him one bit.

What he did not talk about in his justification(s) for eliminating the council-at-large seats is that there is a better justification for keeping the at-large positions and redrawing the wards (to make them larger) so that there are fewer of them and thereby achieve a "cost to taxpayer" savings.

But who really believes that saving money was his "real" motivation?

More likely is:  "If I can't be councilman-at-large, then let's eliminate it for everybody."  In other words, as vain as it seems, "sour grapes - pure and simple!"

A the SCPR sees it, having three council-at-large positions is in moderation of the "territorial" feature and not territorial in the sense that Cole defined it (political self-interest, which he so amply demonstrated in Ward 9).

In The Report's definition of territorial, having three council-at-large slots on council should provide a more city-wide (i.e. global) input into what happens in city government and thereby lessens the competition among the Wards for city taxpayer money to be spent for parochial interest as opposed to matters which will benefit the entire city.

For instance, the three at-large councilpersons (Babcock, Cirelli and Cole) were naturals to take up the cause of Group 175 because presumably a greater police presence benefits the entire city.

But, as we know, only Cirelli supported Group 175.

The SCPR does not think Babcock and Cole function in a de facto sense as city-wide representatives.  Both have wedded themselves to Mayor Healy and his specific political agenda.

And in doing so, they are more narrowly focused than a number of the ward councilpersons.

The bottom line though is that the Cole proposal to eliminate the council-at-large positions were never about what is best for the structure of Canton government.

To repeat, the SCPR believes that Cole's proposal was a political gambit borne of the frustration of having been outwitted by Mary Cirelli and therefore, in the end, was nothing more than "a case of sour grapes!"