CLOUDY DAYS IN OFFING FOR CANTON CITY SCHOOLS' "BRIGHTER TOMORROW?"

UPDATE:  10:00 AM

At Wednesday's (January 14, 2015) Canton City Schools' Board of Education meeting, Superintendent Adrian Allison (superintendent for little over a year) (LINK to prior SCPR blog featuring Allison in video) unveiled a plan to merge Canton McKinley High School (adjacent to the Pro Football Hall of Fame) with Timken High School which is located in downtown Canton close to he intersection of Tuscarawas St W and McKinley Avenue.

The SCPR received a communication from Canton City Council Vice President Frank Morris, III which voices his individual concerns (i.e. not speaking for council as a whole) about the announced plan to merge which The Report publishes in this blog (see below) in its entirety (restructured for clarity sake).

The theme of the email as the SCPR interprets it is that the Canton City Schools and Superintendent Allison are "out-of-touch" with the greater Canton school community and therefore have created more "turmoil" for an already struggling city.

Although Morris disclaims speaking for council as a whole or other councilpersons, the SCPR does not totally buy that line.

Morris certainly has the strength of personality and character to be "a lone wolf, the SCPR thinks that he does express the sentiments of councilpersons other than himself.

It appears that Allison and the BOE have stumbled and bumbled their way into a  communication/relationship problem and consequently there may have to be a major rework of Phase III the CCS "Brighter Tomorrow" concept.  (LINK to Phase I, LINK to Phase II)

The Allison invitation:

The Morris email response:

Mr.  Allison

 I respectfully decline your offer to attend the meeting to discuss your Brighter Tomorrow Phase III plan. 

Canton City Schools called for a special meeting to unveil this plan before having conversations with community leaders. 

If our opinions or concerns were truly relevant to your plans you would have consulted us prior to scheduling the special meeting. 

I do not disagree with the concept that Canton may very well only need one high school however your disregard for the turmoil this will create in the community is unacceptable. 

Canton City School Board and yourself have laid out a plan for the future and neglected to include the residents, and taxpayers of the district.

I have believed for years that our school district has lost all concern for our neighborhoods in the city. 

Now the school district is going one step further by:

• stripping the identity from the elementary schools and junior high schools. 
• One mascot, same school colors, 
• the loss of neighborhood schools, 
• vacant schools, and 
• children being bused out of their neighborhoods 

are examples of a lack of concern for our neighborhoods and is proving to be detrimental to Canton.

The merge[r] of the high schools maybe the only alternative based on our population and limited resources. 

My issue with this is the lack of communication between the district and the community. 

This is going to be a heated debate between Timken supporters and McKinley supporters which is going to divide our city. 

You took it upon yourself to exclude many elected officials, community leaders and the general public in coming up with this plan. 

If you would have made an attempt to gain public support prior to unveiling this plan my attitude would be different. 

I am not speaking for my colleagues on Canton City Council on this issue as I am sure we will all view this differently. I am expressing my concerns as taxpayer, parent and ward councilm[a]n. 

You didn't ask for my input before you went public so don't ask for it now.

Respectfully,
Frank Morris
Ward 9 Councilmen

Morris (completing - this year - his second two year term) is:

• a Perry High School graduate
• a Democrat who represents Ward 9, and
• majority leader of council, and a member of the:
• Rules Committee (Chairman), 
• Parks & Recreation Committee
• Community & Economic Development Committee
• Public Property Capital Improvement Committee 
• Judiciary Committee

A most disturbing implication of Phase III of the CCS Brighter Tomorrow Phase III is that Canton's long term decline is projected to continue in terms of population base and a concomitant reduced student population thereby, for financial reasons, necessitating the shrinkage of the CCS school complex.

Phase III is, the SCPR thinks, a sort of a "in your face" (i.e. "Here is reality folks!") to Canton's political/government leadership and "a vote of no confidence" that they are going to be able to turn Canton around in the immediate near future.

This apparent reality is a tough "pill to swallow" in particular for members of Canton City Council in view of the struggle they are "up to the necks in" as they search for ways and means to stop the bleeding (e.g. $300,000 plus to the Canton Citywide Comprehensive Plan, $5 million to the Hall of Fame Village project, loan/TIF for the Onesto project, 12th Street corridor project, Mahoning Road corridor project et cetera) and ultimately restore Canton to a pathway of health and growth.

The SCPR thinks that Morris is correct in saying that Canton with the selling of Phase III of Brighter Tomorrow, there is going to be a new doses of turmoil in Canton political and government circles.

It does seem that the CCS BOE is on an island by itself and is not communicating with Canton's political leadership effectively.

Morris is right to make an issue of the failure of communication, coordination and inclusion.

The question is whether or not the superintendent and the BOE members have the skills to adjust and correct the glaring error they have stumbled and bumbled into.

HAS THE "O.K. CORRAL" RELOCATED TO CANTON CITY HALL?

As reported by the Stark County Political Report, Monday's Canton City Council meeting turned into - at the end, in the miscellaneous business section - one gigantic turmoil.

The cause?

Ward 2 councilman Thomas West!

Councilman Thomas West (D, Ward 2) renewed his effort to depose Frank Morris as council vice president and majority leader of the 11 member Democratic (of 12 total council members) caucus.

Notwithstanding that he got voted down 8 to 4, it appears that he is continuing what appears to the SCPR to be "provocateur-in-chief" in the sense of making one parliamentary move after another to keep council unsettled, to say the very least.

He seems to have Law Director Joseph Martuccio in a dither as he endeavors to play King Solomon (Martuccio is a thespian, you know) in rightly dividing the law on the question of whether or not the early January election of Frank Morris by a 6 to 5 vote (independent councilman Richard Hart abstaining) will withstand a legal challenge.

Legal challenge?

Yes, Martuccio fears that someone or some entity affected adversely by an ordinance with Morris as vice president of council might challenge on the basis of Morris not having been legally elected.

You do not have to be a biblical scholar to know that Solomon of about 1000 B.C. was going to cut a baby in half so that each contending mother could claim victory, but the "true" mother gave way to save the life of the child.  All of which was a smart thing for the "true" mother to have done as she ended up with the child as a consequence of the "wisdom of Solomon" in ferreting out the identity of the "true" mother.

But "Solomon" Martuccio should know better than play that card with the contending members of council because it is very obvious that nobody is going to give ground  - even if it means saving Canton City Council from itself.

Acting like a "wild 'West,' Councilman Thomas West is resembling a gunslinger of yore rather than a 2014 city councilman.

Canton City Hall these days appears to be a  preparation staging area for the gunfight at O.K. Corral in Tombstone, Arizona circa 1881 than an abode for Solomon about to dispense his wisdom.

On one side:

Side?

Yes.

The four (notice that West is the lead signature) fired off this letter yesterday:

Hmm?

And the other side?

The seven responded this way:

Note that Councilmen Griffin and Babcock didn't sign on with either group.

So what is this "special meeting" designed to achieve, when it occurs?

Well, Councilman West has worked hard to convey the impression he is doing God's work (the SCPR's attribution, not West's) in doing a "come, let us reason together" session.

But it is obvious that at least of his fellow councilmen are not buying his line.

One source tells The Report that West's ultimate game plan is is believed to be to force Councilwoman Chris Smith as a "compromise candidate."

And beyond this, the source says that West though he appears to be "the main man;" he is not, and is actually doing the bidding of  Mayor William J. Healy, II.

This take on the situation has Healy desperate to put Morris aside.

Already under Morris' leadership, council is going over Healy's budget proposal for 2014 with "a fine toothed comb" and thereby putting the mayor under scrutiny that he has never had to abide during his one and one half terms as Canton's chief executive.

Moreover, there is the committee assignment thing, which is the prerogative of the vice president/majority leader of council.

Already Morris has placed two allies in key committee posts.  West has been removed as chair of the Judiciary Committee in favor of Edmond Mack.

Mack is a proponent of charter government for Canton and had been frustrated by West in getting the legislation out of council so that council could vote on whether or not to submit the proposal to Cantonians for a vote.

Mayor Healy is thought to be an opponent of Canton going charter.

With Mack as Judiciary chair, the legislation will - at least - get to the reading/voting stage.  However, The Report is told that the pro-charter council members only have 7 of the necessary 8 votes to send the issue to ballot.

But that could change.  The Report believes that one of the remaining five members is persuadable.

But we shall see.

Another burr in the posterior of Mayor Healy has to be Greg Hawk's return (D, Ward 1) as Finance Committee chair.  Before the budget review process initiated by the Morris-led faction of council, Hawk was the only check on Healy's spin on this or that financial agenda item he has presented to council in the past.

And make no mistake about it, William J. Healy, II does hold political grudges.

The two have been bitter combatants over the six years of Healy's rule on the 8th floor.  The mayor is savvy enough to know that with Hawk being "in the majority" on key votes, he has leverage that has the potential to make Healy "cry Uncle" on finance issues that Hawk is intent upon.

As majority leader Chris Smith, Healy has to be thinking,  would likely restore West to chair of Judiciary and "anybody but Greg Hawk" as chair of Finance.

Of course, outside observers know it is likely that any such development would likely nudge council into out-and-out warfare.

Healy has clearly aligned himself with West and Smith and the SCPR believes that the West (and Smith) agenda being played out is in reality the William J. Healy, II agenda.

There is no doubt that West and Smith get something out of this fight if Chris Smith surfaces a majority leader.

The question for Canton's version of the gunfight at the O.K. Corral is who will be left standing when all the "political" bullets have been fired?

(VIDEO) HEALY IN WARD 9 WITH COUNCILMAN FRANK MORRIS, FRIENDS OR FOES?

VIDEO

MORRIS SPEAKS ABOUT

RESOLUTION BEFORE PASSAGE

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

THE VOTE

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

WEST SPEAKS ABOUT HIS

NEITHER "YES" OR "NO" VOTE

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

MORRIS RESPONDS TO WEST

They are both Democrats and they both serve in Canton city government.

But that is about all the commonality that Ward 9 councilman Frank Morris and Mayor William J. Healy, II have with one another when one gets beyond the superficialities (see photo above).

Healy is a cosmopolitan, suave, politically sophisticated, debonaire, polished, highly educated (MBA from NYU School of Business) and calculating politician who lives out on 55th Street.

Morris is a "down-home," "speak from the heart," "rough and tumble," "in-your-face," union member guy who works with his hands to earn a living and lives in the heart of Canton.

On September 25th, Councilman Morris (one of a group [the dean?] of enterprising "young" councilmen the SCPR has dubbed as being "the four young turks") had Healy come to one his regularly scheduled "monthly" meetings within Ward 9 that Morris holds.

Back on May 21st; Healy, Morris and several Ward 9 residents got into fuss over the safety of Canton's neighborhoods and the failure of the administration to effectively provide for the safety of Cantonians.

Out out that exchange, Healy was invited to a future Ward 9 meeting.  The meeting materialized on September 25th.

The SCPR's introductory blog and accompanying video was published on September 30th.

As can be seen in the first video (more to come in future editions of the SCPR), Healy refers to a series of meetings he is holding with Morris among others on working out a plan to improve safety in Canton.

And Morris himself says that he feels they are productive meetings.

But the question becomes:  how productive?

While Morris and Healy seem to put a "politically correct Happy Face" on the ongoing discussion regarding Ward 9 and all of Canton safety issues (see the introductory Ward 9 video); The Report does not think the relationship is in reality all that cozy.

A glimpse into continuing dissatisfaction with improvement in Canton's safety profile surfaced at Monday night's council meeting in the form of an Morris initiated informal resolution (# 48), to wit:

 

The resolution passed on a voice vote but with Ward 2 councilman Thomas West not voting (see West video below).  West, Smith, Griffin, Dougherty, Cole and Babcock are usually reliable pro-Healy votes on council.  And West may be the "unofficial" spokesman for the mayor's position on any given legislation that comes before council.



The noteworthy thing about the resolution is that it was co-sponsored by seven councilpersons in addition to Morris.

• Jimmy Babcock (at-large),
• Mary Cirelli (at-large),
• Greg Hawk (Ward 1),
• Jim Griffin (Ward 3),
• Kevin Fisher (Ward 5),
• John Mariol (Ward 7),
• Edmond Mack (Ward 8), and, of course,
• Frank Morris (Ward 9)

Noteworthy?

Yes!

Mayor Healy seems unalterably opposed to the ordinance - witness The Repository's Matt Rink follow- up with Healy.

The gist of the Rink/Healy exchange is that the passage of the resolution on the votes of 11 of 12 councilpersons left him unmoved.

He says that his administration will not be adding a fire captain.

The political significance of the passed resolution (given the number of sponsors it had, and the nearly unanimous vote in its favor) is that Mayor Healy is fast losing his clout on council.

Even his friends (e.g. Babcock and Griffin [on the sponsorship thing;  Cole, Dougherty and Smith [on the vote] are leaving him.

Hmm?

Are they looking down the road and seeing that come January 1st that the political tide will have turned on the mayor insofar as the vote on key council votes are concerned?

The SCPR believes that come the organization meeting of the 2014/15 council, Mayor Healy may have to deal with Frank Morris more than he wants to.

Earlier this year (January 14, 2013) there was an incident in which Morris challenged the mayor on an issue.

The mayor's response?  

"This matter needed to be discussed on the eighth floor (where the mayor's suite of offices are located) before it is brought up on the floor of council." (paraphrase)

No surprise here to the SCPR.

Just one more manifestation of Healy's track record of trying to shut down that which he does not want to hear.

One would think he would be getting used to such.  More and more (with the election of "the four young turks), the mayor is being compelled to abide that which he does not wish to entertain.

Matters will only be worse for him with the new make up of council come January 1, 2014.

The Report hears persistent reports that there is very little likelihood that current council majority leader David Dougherty will be able to retain his post as leader and that Morris is a possible successor.

He will have to deal with longstanding nemesis Bill Smuckler's return.  And the Healy-obstinate Greg Hawk likely will be replacing Joe Cole as finance committee chair. And to cap things off, he likely will have to deal with being on the losing side of a 7 to 5 vote on issues which the "new" majority on council deem to be important enough for them to stand united against the mayor.

The overall significance of import of "the tide turning against Healy" is whether or not the changed picture of Canton City Council (all Democrats) vis-a-vis the mayor will ultimately prove to be the undoing of the political future of Healy.

As the SCPR has written numerous times, the mayor seems to wear teflon and to be a virtuoso magician-esque performer a la the famous Houdini in escaping from one scrape after another.

But out of the new mix of council, the SCPR believes, could come a rising political star that might prove to accomplish what nothing else could achieve in terms of the political demise of William J. Healy, II.

The 2014/2015 version of Canton City Council could prove to be the most political spellbinding happening that Canton has seen in "many of a moon," no?

(VIDEO) HEALY AT HIS FINEST IN WARD 9 NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THE "DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS" VOLUME 1

Make no mistake about it, the Stark County Political Report thinks that Stark County has not seen a more skilled political operator than Canton mayor William J. Healy, II "in many, many of a moon" if not ever.

However, substantively, I think he presents a much different story.  And it is a story that is not good for Canton nor for Stark County.  After all, Canton is the county seat and the largest city in Stark.

And the difference between the two (i.e. his political skill versus the subtance of governance) could not have been more clearly contrasted than his one-on-one with residents with Councilman Frank Morris' constituents in a two hour meeting held at the north branch of the Stark County District Library on September 25th.

I was present at the meeting with what some readers like to call the "SCPR trusty videocam" recording nearly every word that the mayor exchanged with Ward 9 residents present.

The impetus for the meeting was a facebook exchange between the mayor and the residents on Councilman Morris' page on May 21, 2013.

An outgrowth of the back and forth was last Wednesday's meeting.

I think that the September 25th meeting presents Healy in terms of his quintessential self.

"One smooth (political) operator!"

However, unfortunately for him was that political reality and accountability was also in place in the form of Ward 9 residents well prepared to deal with his:

• self-serving blandishments, 
• his excuse making and 
• his failure to be a good listener.

But just don't take the SCPR's word for it, just watch/listen to the mayor in SCPR videos over the next several weeks that I will presenting so at the end of the series Cantonians who want a more detailed look at Healy have had it:  "in his own words."  Nealy two hours worth.

For starters, Councilman Morris pretty much let the mayor have free reign.

Only here and there did Morris chime in.

It was gratifying to me (only kidding, of course) when the ontset of his remarks Mayor Healy acknowledged that the SCPR is the pre-eminent authority "on everything Canton and Stark County" from a political insider standpoint.

But the shot on me does indicate a glimmer into how Healy smarts from any critique of him as mayor and his conduct of the administration of the city of Canton.

Over his years of being mayor he has been in verbal fisticuffs with the likes of council president Allen Schulman, fomer service director and chief of staff Tom Bernabei, Councilman Morris, former Councilman Bill Smuckler, Ward 9 resident Bruce Nordman, former safety chief Tom Nesbitt and former service, safety, annexation director and chief of staff Warren Price, to name - not all his antagonists, but to present the foregoing sampling as clear evidence of his being a "conflict-ladened" and embattled mayor.

In this "Volume 1 blog," Healy starts off with his excuse making.

He does start off on a positive and strong note by bringing up his "four pillars of governance" that has been a mark of his administration for a number of years now if not back to the very beginning, to wit:

However, it is not long until he brings out his crutch of "blaming others."

He says "make no mistake about it, Canton has been going backwards for decades now" (04:11 mark of the video) in the face of his administration having been in place for 5-1/2 years.

At least the ragging on prior administrations now extends beyond his immediate predecessor and Republican Janet Creighton.  Such used to be his focus.  Apparently, he has realized that to lay everything at her feet just "was not playing in Peoria."

Neither do I think extending the playing field plays.

Right, wrong or indifferent, what is past is past and all Cantonians and Stark Countians care about is what results is his administration is producing today and tomorrow that makes the city and county a desirable place to live in.


Were he to abandon his excuse making mode and truly and fully embrace a "we are up to the challenge" and "we are producing results," then he might actually be convincing.

But his words "road bumps along the way" language seems to me to be a reverison to the safe harber of "I have an excuse for not achieving more."  For example, he cites the county financial problems and the curtailing of available county jail bed spaces from a maximum of 501 beds to 200 as being a reason why Canton's crime level has not been on a steady trek downwards.

I do not accept that nor do I believe most Cantonians.

Then there is his "rules and regulations" which limit what the administration can and cannot do.

Excuse making again, pure simple.

"I don't want to sound like we're trying to hide things from the public (video:  06.42)."

Hmm?

Who would ever accuse the Healy administration of that?

What a laugh.

William J. Healy, II has a replendent track record of wanting councilpersons to come to the eighth floor to discuss their concerns and not to bring them out during council meeting "to the embarrassment of" the administration.

But his actual track record on the "details" of his governance style, do not keep him from repeating the nonsense "I don't want to sound like we're trying to hide things from the public."

One has to wonder how Councilman Morris restrained himself from interjecting at this point.

A resident did (09:57 of the video).

Katherine Brunoni-Angelo of Harrisburg Road, NE asks:  "Why is this being address just now?"

Answer:   (to paraphrase) "You are ignornant of all the many things we have been doing during the 5-1/2 years of my administration."

Only one problem for the mayor.  Ms. Brunoni-Angelo is not buying that as an answer.  She and Ward 9 residents live in Ward 9 and they know that whatever the Healy administration has been doing in not working.

So at the end of the first video, we have a mayor who makes one generalized assertion after another, but when he is forced into the details the residents of finding that though he is "one smooth operator" on the glittering generalities level but when one gets to the details it is indeed a clear case of:  "the devil being in the details" of insufferable neighborhood life in the city of Canton.

Volume 1 video of Healy on location in Ward 9.

(VIDEOS) COUNCILMAN-AT-LARGE JOE COLE IS LOSING IT IN BID TO BECOME WARD 9 COUNCILMAN??

VIDEOS

  President Schulman Frames the Debate

Cole Slams Morris; Morris Responds

The Entire Debate

(Including Chamber of Commerce Input)

In what seemingly had nothing to do with 9th Ward politics, Councilman-at-Large Joe Cole lashed out at his May 7th primary opponent Frank Morris last night as being "deplorable" on Morris' "no" vote on spending $175,000 in city of Canton general fund dollars on what amounts to be a government subsidy of free enterprise; namely, the Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce.

The ordinance:

18.   AMEND APPROP O#209/2012; AUTHORIZE MAYOR &/OR SERV DIR TO ENTER INTO GRANT AGMT W/CCIC IN AMT NOT TO EXCEED $175,000.00 FOR PURPOSE OF FUNDING CANTON REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ACTIVITIES; EMERGENCY

Actually, as the SCPR sees it council president Allen Schulman had it right in saying that those who voted "no" were not against economic development and those voting "yes" were not against increasing the numbers of Canton safety forces.



However, the political stakes are such these days that such is exactly how Cole and Morris were trying to paint each other in last night's regular weekly meeting of Canton City Council.

With Morris, it is not so clear that he was going after Cole.  But the SCPR believes that he was. 



With Cole, in referring to "him" as being the object of his (Cole's) scorn, it was rather obvious that the "him" was Councilman Morris.

It further appears to yours truly that Cole realizes that it will take a political miracle for him to defeat fellow Democrat Morris in the May 7th Democratic Primary election.

Though he is a resident of the 9th Ward, it seems as if the Morris political forces have been able to paint Cole as a carpetbagger of sorts (i.e. someone coming into an area from the outside) who really does not belong in Ward 9 politics and certainly not one to represent the ward in city council.

Cole has fed into the perception in posting signs in the ward suggesting that he is the incumbent councilman.

If one thinks about it, in being a councilman-at-large, Cole does have some basis on which to claim a connection to Ward 9 (other than living there) because in being a councilman-at-large he does represent the entire city.

All of which makes it totally confusing as to why Cole would want to eliminate the three council-at-large seats.

There can be little doubt as to Cole's motivation for pushing the "eliminate council-at-large" legislation.

Back at the filing deadline for council positions, Cole got hoodwinked by fellow council-at-large Mary Cirelli into giving up his council-at-large position (i.e. she finessed Cole into believing that she was running for reelection and therefore he would be the odd man out in the face of Cirelli, Babcock [an incumbent councilman-at-large], and former Councilman Bill Smuckler competition) in a political cloak and dagger-esque drama at the Stark County Board of Elections.

If you haven't read the SCPR blog on this political vignette, you must do so.  It is the "political hoot of the year" if not of all time in the annals of Stark County politics (LINK).

Cole's plainly lashing out at Morris last night bespeaks an indication that Cole knows that he is not likely to prevail in the 9th and he is lobbing "hail Mary" after "hail Mary" in desperation to find something that sticks to Morris in order to pull out a stunning, "at the last second" come from behind victory.

The election is two weeks away.

And the stakes are not simply personal in the sense of who is going to remain on council:  Cole or Morris.

It could be that who wins in the 9th will determine where the balance of political power will lie in the new council which takes office in January, 2014.

By the SCPR's calculation, a Morris victory would likely mean, that on legislation that is the key to Mayor Healy realizing his agenda ambitions, a potential 7 to 5 vote against the mayor.

So Healy is solidly in Cole's corner.

But as The Report sees it, having the mayor in one's corner could be more of a liability in the 9th rather than a help.

The mayor is currently in a tussle with some Ward 9 residents (who have named themselves Group 175) over the overall manpower strength of the Canton Police Department.

They are intent on raising the force strength to 175 and the mayor determinedly resisting saying that the city does not have the $1.4 million or so to finance 25 additional officers.

So to have Healy as an ally appears to the SCPR not to be helping Cole in the slightest and in fact likely hurts him and therefore one can understand why the councilman-at-large is hurling "hail Mary."

And, of course, Cole has his own baggage on the police issue.

He (as chairman of council's finance committee) along with Ward 3 Councilman Jim Griffin (unopposed in the May 7th primary) deep-sixth legislation proposed by Councilpersons Cirelli, Fisher, Hawk, Mack, Mariol and Morris recently to increase the starting pay of Canton cadet police officers so as to stay competitive with surrounding communities in attracting new hires.

Cirelli, last night, was heard referring to the Cole/Griffin act as being two thwarting the will of six (six being exactly one-half of the voting members of council).

All this trashing about by Councilman Cole appears to the SCPR to be an example of one who is the midst of political death throes.

So, so sad for someone who at one time was thought to be an up and coming star on Canton City Council, no?

Here is a video of the entire debate over the $175,000 Canton Council contribution to the Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce.

NOW THIS IS REAL SMART POLITICS, CANDIDATE COLE (9TH WARD) GETS IN TIFF WITH VASSAR PARK RESIDENT?

UPDATE:  11:10 AM


In the original blog today, Councilman Cole challenges Vassar Park resident Bruce Brewer:  I would ask you to contact other councilmembers as to why they have voted against legislation that would have brought over a million dollars in police funding?

What?

Really?

The SCPR asked four of Canton's council members:  What is Cole talking about?

Responses from them:
--------------------------------------------------------
From Councilman John Mariol, (Ward 7)

I believe he is referring to traffic cameras. 

From Councilman Kevin Fisher (Ward 5)

Redflex...he is stuck on repeat the mayor mode with the the Redflex is about cops & safety song and dance... I would think a better question is, is he claiming that the mayor intends to enter into an illegal negotiation by negotiating with CPPA for cadet pay, as cadets are not CPPA members?

From Councilman Edmond Mack (Ward 8)

Not sure.  Maybe red light cameras? ...

From Councilman Frank Morris (Ward 9)


LOL sure I do, he's referring to us voting no on the [R]edflex deal. Mr. Cole was one of the council members who felt that these cameras would have made the city over a million dollars.  ... .
-----------------------------------------------------------

Mariol, Fisher, Mack, Morris along with Cirelli (Democrat - at large), Hawk (Democrat - Ward 1) and Griffin (Democrat - Ward 3) voted "no" in a 7 to 5 no vote on Redflex on September 17, 2012.

ORIGINAL BLOG

 SUBTOPIC

Chronic Crime in Canton

Is Not Just a Canton Problem and

a Ward 9 Problem.

It is a Problem for Any Stark Countian

Who has Reason to Go To Canton!

If one wants to be the councilman to represent Canton's Ward 9, then one wouldn't think it is wise to get into a tiff with a Ward 9 resident, no?

Especially if that resident is Bruce Brewer who just happens to be president of the Vassar Park Neighborhood Association.

Apparently, Brewer is ticked off big time with Councilman Joe Cole (a Democrat - currently councilman-at-large) who got hoodwinked by Canton city treasurer candidate Mary Cirelli (a Democrat) into running for Ward 9 councilman (against incumbent Democrat Frank Morris) because he thought Cirelli was running for reelection as a councilman at large and therefore he could not win one of the three seats open on November's ballot (the other two being Democrats Bill Smuckler and Jimmy Babcock).

Ticked off about what?

Cole's having, as finance committee chairman, pulled January legislation to increase the starting salary Canton policemen (now at $26,000 versus Akron's which ranges from $42,000 to $49,000).

In a series of back and forth emails shared by Brewer with the SCPR it is clear that Brewer and presumably his Vassar Park friends are miffed at what Cole did and are not buying his explanation.

Sitting Ward 9 councilman Frank Morris has to loving every minute of Cole trying to do political damage control over Canton's policing policy which Cole had a direct hand in.

For anyone who has been at a Canton City Council meeting of late has to know that dealing with the crime problem is far and away the number one issue in the Hall of Fame city these days.

Here is the back and forth (reconstructed by The Report for readability) between Brewer and Cole.

-------------------------------------------------------

BREWER

Mr. Cole.

I will now redirect my previous question to you, as I was unaware of how your actions to stop the legislation from coming to a vote by removing it from the agenda.

But in my opinion this was worse than a no vote, I now understand that the starting salary was for a cadet was at one time $32,000 but was reduced to $26,000 so the mayor could hire more officers for Canton.

Where are all the Officers?

Crime is running rampant in the city and yet we sit [idly] by and do nothing.
           
I did not take the time to see what section of our fair city that you live in and I hope it's safe for you. - But ours is not!

So maybe you will be able to respond to the question now that we have our facts are correct.

COLE

From: joseph.cole@cantonohio.gov
    
Subject: Re: police protection

To: "Brewer Bruce" ... .

Date: Tuesday, April 2, 2013, 8:48 AM

Mr. Brewer,
        
Just received your emails, was having some email tech. difficulties. Would love to sit down with you or talk over the phone to discuss the matter.
        
Thanks,
        
Joe

BREWER

Joe       

I think just explaining in an e- mail would do the trick, because I have a pretty good idea why a person pulls a item from an agenda mostly so it can't be voted on by all parties concerned.

But WHY??   no ones voice can be heard. I work with My Neighborhood Association [as] President and no one has ever asked me to pull any voting materials from a agenda. nor would I.

COLE

From: joseph.cole@cantonohio.gov

Subject: Re: police protection

To: "Brewer Bruce" ... .

Date: Wednesday, April 3, 2013, 11:31 AM

Mr. Brewer
     
Very well.  But it seems like you already have made upyour mind.  However, the explanation is as follows:
     
The Mayor killed that bill, because regardless of the outcome he was going to veto it. The Police Union and the Mayor had already agreed to discuss this issue when the wage negotiations reopened.
     
I would ask you to contact other [councilmembers] as to why they have voted against legislation that would have brought over a million dollars in police funding?
     
I don't make promises I cannot keep and I don't make promises for endorsements. Sorry.
     
Also, for future reference, I live in Ward 9, 1402 27th St. NE 44714.  I am also [a]ffected by the crime rates.

I have a daughter that is a year and a half old and I am very concerned for her safety along with that of every other resident as well.
     
Good Day,
     
Joe

BREWER

From: Brewer Bruce ...

Subject: Re: police protection

To: joseph.cole@cantonohio.gov

Date: Wednesday, April 3, 2013, 1:54 PM

Joe

Well then the Mayor should have been able just to veto it. [A]nd then you and I would NOT be having this conversation now would we?

Another Question, [I] received your flier today and it [lets] one think you have been a ward councilman all along, or am [I] just reading it wrong[?]

-----------------------------------------------------

Vassar Park residents are taking the lead in forcing Canton's Mayor Healy administration to beef up the capability of Canton policing.

The participating residents who have dubbed themselves "Group 175" (which is their goal for CPD strength [up from the present 150) have published a report showing that for the four day period of March 29th (2013) through this past Monday (April 1st, but these numbers are not April Fools numbers) there have been 39 very serious crimes committed in Canton with ONLY four arrests.

Group 175 is also handing out to every Cantonian they come in contact with the following chart showing that when Canton (in 2007) was at 175 police officers, there were nearly 1,000 more arrests than there are at the present 144 officers (soon-to-be 150).

 

Indications are that Group 175 will only get the Canton PD to 175 officers is if THEY COME UP WITH THE $ to finance the increase.

So city officials have been saying publicly and privately.

But increasing the numbers of policemen is not the only quest of Group 175 and a group of councilmen, including Cole's opponent Frank Morris.

They see police officers being paid a competitive salary to nearby analogous (in terms of working high crime districts) cities like Akron ($42,000 to $49,000) as being key to obtaining and retaining the very best in police professionalism.

Accordingly, the Vassar Park folks have joined Councilpersons Cirelli, Fisher, Hawk, Mack, Mariol and Morris in pushing for a pay increase for police cadets (who are not union members until they get certified which is usually a year of so after being hired) and, as a follow on, when they become certified officers.

For Councilman Cole to have deep sixed the proposed legislation (or blaming his withdrawing the legislation from the agenda back in January on his political ally, the mayor) is not helping his effort to unseat Morris.

The fact of the matter is likely that if Cole had any chance to unseat Morris, his January act and his trying to justify it to Brewer "is not going to play in Peoria err Vassar Park and, indeed, the entire 9th Ward.

So on top of his planting of campaign signs suggesting (in the opinion of some Cantonians) to the unawares that he is the sitting 9th Ward councilman rather than the actual councilman who is Frank Morris, you now have the above-described email exchange (re:  getting cadet police salaries to a competitive level) with Brewer in which he:

1. seemingly blames Mayor Healy, and
2. suggests that the money is not available from city finances (reference:  "I don't make promises I cannot keep and I don't make promises for endorsements. Sorry.")

Lest the readers of the SCPR think the matter of adequate and effective policing is just a matter for 9th Ward members or residents of Canton at large, think again.

Canton is the county seat of Stark County.

Many of us who living in Stark County's outlying villages, cities, unincorporated areas (townships) have reason to go to Canton for various and sundry reasons:

• some of us to work (as in "being gainfully employed"),
• some of us for government service matters/issues/meetings,
• some of us for shopping,
• some of us for entertainment (e.g. the Canton Charge, Arts In Stark, high school sporting events, the Canton Art Museum, et cetera),
• some of us to visit places like the McKinley Museum, the Professional Football Hall of Fame, the National First Ladies Libriary and other touristy attractions which also draw Stark Countians, or
• some of us simply go to Canton to visit our relatives and friends who live there

In many ways Canton getting a grip on its rampant crime problem is a Stark County issue.

Accordingly, 9th Ward contest between Cole and Morris has ramifications far greater than just affecting only the nine wards of the city.

All Stark Countians have a stake in the outcome of this race and in a sense the participating Vassar Park residents (Group 175) are speaking for all of us who travel to Canton and whose very personal safety may be at stake.

Moreover, this blog has not up to this point addressed the likely reality that all the Canton officialdom (i.e. the Healy administration and Healy's councilmantic friends: Babcock, Dougherty, Griffin, Smith and West) hoopla about economic development is pretty much a non-starter unless and until the administration and council solve Canton's crime problem.

Right now, who in their right mind, would move to the apartments being developed at the old Hercules Engine Plant with the aid of $3 million (as a loan) in Canton taxpayer money?

Rather than making excuses, Councilman Cole (for 3-1/2 years now) needs to be offering solutions.

Morris is acting with independent minded cohorts on council to come up with solutions.

(VIDEOS: MORRIS, REAM, HEALY & SCHULMAN) IS CANTON GOVERNMENT'S BUREAUCRACY JEOPARDIZING EXISTING AND NEW JOBS? UNION METAL COMPLAINS ABOUT TREATMENT AT HAND OF CANTON BUILDING DEPARTMENT

It was an interesting evening at Canton City Council's regular meeting last night.

It was a night that Canton was both bragging about its job production and apparently should hold its head in shame in terms of how it recently treated one of its longest standing job producing companies.  And, to boot, a manufacturing company.  A vanishing breed across America, no?

Immediately prior to the meeting, the SCPR had upwards of a 30 minute conversation with Mayor William J. Healy, II.

Conversation?  About what?

A number of items, but a main one was Hizzhonor ticking off success after success in Canton slowly but surely building up the city job base.

The crown jewel of Healy's chortling, of course. is the city having attracted VXI and some 1,000 jobs to downtown about year ago or so.  He says that the number will increase to 1,500 or so soon.

But he seemed equally well taken with a number of firms settling in the city bring clusters of a couple dozen jobs or so some of which are engineering related and high paying.

He stands by his proclamation of last year's State of the City address in which he billed Canton of the future as being "The Utica Capital."

Healy, of course, as readers of the SCPR well know has a MBA from the New York University Stern School of Business.  And one of the benefits to Cantonians of his educational achievements is his market prowess.  Hence, "The Utica Capital" as a marketing tool to attract new jobs to Canton.

And, Healy says, his plan is working.  "The oil and gas industry loves Canton," he says.  Moreover, notwithstanding that there has been a lot of controversy at the hand of area environmentalists at council meetings of at any thing that smacks of being pro-fracking of Stark County/Canton based Utica/Marcellus shale encased oil and gas deposits, the mayor is confident that his public relations effort has convinced the industry that Canton is indeed oil and gas friendly.

However, he is quick to add that he and council will be quick to protect the environment.

Obviously, Healy and The Report believes Canton City Council view as their job number one as being to attract new jobs to Canton and, of course, to maintain existing jobs.

So it was a surprise to the SCPR when a ruckus of sorts developed at the end of last night's meeting with a concern/question expressed by Ward 9 Councilman Frank Morris about Canton's treatment of long time Canton corporate citizen Union Metal (located in Canton since 1906).

Morris related to council and the administration a troubling visit he had with Union Metal officials last Thursday.

Here is a must see video of the exchange between Morris, Safety Director Ream, Mayor Healy and Council President Alan Schulman.



First, he recited the importance of Union Metal (America's second largest manufacturer of light poles) to Canton in detailing the number of jobs that the company brings to the city, to wit:

• 375 good paying union jobs,
• created 50 jobs in 2011, and
• with plans to expand

Second, he described a recent project whereby Union Metal endeavored to improve the lighting of a back lot of the company's manufacturing facilities along Harrisburg Avenue.

In the course of his presentation, Morris complained that:

• Canton's building department made Union Metal jump through hoops on the project,
• all Union Metal wants is to be respected as much as the Timken Company is with Canton city officials,

The ninth ward councilman implied that the Union Metal folks were "bitter" at how they had been treated by Canton building department officials and he wanted to know whether or not Healy administration officials had contacted Union Metal officialdom to soothe ruffled feathers.

Safety Director Ream to the lead in responding to Morris who replied that:

• Union Metal is being treated no different than Timken,
• it would be up to council to change the city ordinance that caused the problem on the project,
• the building department is going to initiate contact, but that the administration had not and had no plans to be in touch,

Morris' response:

• Union Metal was recently bought out by a Texas company recently and he would not want to see Canton lose jobs over ruffled feelings, and,
• the Healy administration should send Ream or the mayor himself down to Union Metal to patch up the city's relationship with the company

Mayor Healy gets in on the conversation, he says:

• that he will, as requested by Morris, make contact with the top folks at Union Metal and seek to mollify them,
• but seemingly does not accept that the problem was caused by an insensitive building department bureaucracy rather by the existence of council imposed standards to ensure "the safety and quality of the work and local labor."
• it is likely a case that Union Metal wants to bring it own contractor in and not hire a local contractor as required by the relevant Canton city ordinance,

 Morris' response:

• Healy has it wrong on his supposition that Union Metal was trying to avoid a local contractor inasmuch as the company has an ongoing relationship with a Canton-based electrical contractor,

At this point, Council President Alan Schulman jumps into the conversation, to wit:

• "it does not make any sense to annoy a major employer in [the Canton] community," and 
• that someone in the building department should have notified the Healy administration prior to the company having related its irritation at how it was being treated Canton bureaucracy when Councilman Morris appeared at company facilities last Thursday,

Of camera, Councilman Morris told the SCPR that the contractor issue was not the only annoyance experienced by Union Metal personnel that there was a string of three or so "re-do this, re-do that, and so forth" items that preceded the "hire a local contractor" issue.

In short, Morris agreed with yours truly's characterizing of the testy relationship as being "a pissing contest."

So the SCPR's take is that to be consistent with the administration's zealous pursuit of jobs, Mayor Healy should have been on the telephone with Union Metal officials as soon as they are answering the phones today setting up a meeting wherein the administration must satisfy them that:

• the company is appreciated as much as The Timken Company,
• the administration wants to hear about any difficulties experienced with the city's bureaucracy, and
• will act to correct communication problems.

One of the common complaints that Democrats get is that they are too hep on regulation overall and that their romancing of regulation of business in particular leads to job loss in America.

And interestingly enough, Ream and Healy in the Union Metal flap seem to side with the Republicans.

Both appear to offer as a possible remedy to the problem:  "Council can undo the regulation in question."

Hmm?

Indeed!

It was an interesting evening at Canton City Council's regular meeting last night.