(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.

WHAT WAS UP AT JASMINE'S ASIAN BISTRO (02/11/2013) WITH BUTTERWORTH, COLE & HEALY?

Whether there is anything political to it or not, when a former councilman (Butterworth) sits down with the mayor of Canton (Healy) and a current city councilman (Cole), people are going to speculate that some sort of deal is being cut.

Former councilman Mark Butterworth (a Republican - Ward 8), has filed petitions to run against the man (Democrat Edmond Mack) who defeated him in his bid for reelection on November 8, 2011.

So, of course, the sit down which occurred at Jasmine's Asian Bistro located on 30th Street is going to create a political buzz.

Especially when:

• Butterworth is taking on one of four troublesome councilpersons (Fisher [5th], Mariol [7th], Mack [8th] and Morris [9th] to Mayor Healy and his chief ally on council (Cole), and
• Cole himself is taking on a second of the four troublesomes (Mack).

The SCPR did contact Mark Butterworth to get his side of the story.

He tells The Report that "No," Joe Cole and Mayor Healy did not hand him a manila envelope containing his marching orders for his November, 2013 campaign to reclaim the 8th Ward seat.

So whom contacted whom to set up the meeting?

Butterworth's answer was forthcoming about two or three minutes after the question was posed after some dithering by Butterworth on whether or not he could recall who made the initial contact.

Butterworth says that he had heard that Cole was experiencing personal difficulties that Butterworth himself had gone through and that he had contacted Cole (about February 8th) to see whether or not he could be of some guidance on the matter.

Hmm?

As readers of the SCPR know, yours truly is a devotee to political competition as the cure to a lot of bad politics and bad governance.

When Butterworth was elected in 2009 as the lone Republican on council, The Report was pleased and expectant that - though just one person - he would put together a sort of "loyal opposition" plank to Healy administration/Democratic council member proposals.

However, in The Report's judgment, Butterworth was not up to the task.

Oh, he did have convictions about this issue or that issue.  But he seemed to lack the courage of the convictions.

One of his big issues was getting a measure through council for Cantonians to decide whether or not the city should become a charter city.  However, Councilman West (chairman of the Judiciary Committee) proved too much of a hurdle for the-then eighth ward councilman.

Other matters came along during his term that the SCPR had gathered were important to Butterworth, but seemingly time and time again, one by one they faded into being political mist.

On the other hand, his successor Edmond Mack picked up with an agenda and has been able to forge a political alliance of sorts with Councilmen Fisher (Ward 5), Mariol (Ward 7) and Morris (Ward 9).

What the SCPR has been impressed with is the coming together of these four in a collective effort to put their heads together to help solve Canton's neighborhood problems.  Problems fueled by Canton's burgeoning and chronic crime malady, notwithstanding Mayor Healy's "zero-tolerance-to-crime" first term political campaign promise which The Report and many others think has been a huge failure.

The Report has dubbed the four as being the "four young turks." 

The four have been a real thorn in the side of the Healy administration and a couple of Healy's most loyal council members (West and Smith) who have openly attacked (The Report's take) the four during a council session on the four having held a consolidated ward meeting with their constituents.

Being the pure driven politician he is, one might well think Healy would be behind a Mark Butterworth (though a Republican) running against Mack and his loyalist Cole running against Morris.

Butterworth flat-out denies that such is the case with him.

He owns up to not handling his interaction with the overwhelmingly Democratic council/Democratic mayor in his 2010-11 stint on council well.

Because both Mack and Mariol were part of the collection of Canton politicians present at Jasmine's on February 11th, the SCPR believes that Butterworth's denial of deal making with Healy/Cole is credible.

It would be rather ridiculous to be plotting political strategy as your opponent sat nearby, no?

At the very least, though, it was politically unwise for him to be seen in public with Cole and Healy.

It was totally predictable that the Jasmine's meet up would set off speculation that Healy was behind Butterworth's filing.

Healy has a history of doing things such as this - witness his involvement in trying to get Councilman Hawk defeated in Ward One (denied by Healy) and his attempt to become a power player in the make-up of the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee in the last election cycle for committeepersons.

The SCPR believes he aspires to be Stark County's Democratic Party's kingmaker.

Back to Butterworth and his trying to reclaim the Ward 8 seat.

In so many words, Butterworth told the SCPR that if elected he will be a councilman who scrutinizes everything brought forward in council deliberations and proposals, either by the mayor or the Democratic supermajority.

And, he added, it would not be outside the realm of possibility, that if elected he would seek to join in with Fisher, Mariol and Morris (if he is reelected) as one of the four young turks.

Does The Report believe him?

Not really.

He will want to be a different type councilman but the SCPR does not see him as having the strength of personality to persevere on his vision for Canton in the face of inducements/pressures from Healy or his fellow council members.

Councilman Mack, in contrast, has demonstrated in this term of council by real action what former Councilman Butterworth aspired to during his 2010-11 cycle.

In his meeting with Cole and, perhaps, Healy; one should not totally dismiss the notion that it was part of a deal being cut as absurd as the setting was.

One would hardly expect Butterworth to fess up, if such were the case.

The SCPR's take on Butterworth's description of the conversation was that nearly everything was of a personal nature and very little was in fact political talk.

That is hard to believe.

Get a bunch of politicians in a room and they are going to talk about everything else but politics?

Where did you say that swamp land you wanted to sell is located?

COUNCILMAN JOE COLE WILL NOT BE STARRING ON "I AM A SURVIVOR." MARY CIRELLI DOES A NUMBER ON HIM AND HIS COUNCIL PAL JIMMY BABCOCK?

 CORRECTION

David Kiven (business agent for the Pipefitters and Plumbers, Local 94) has sent the SCPR a email correcting The Report's recollection of how Councilman Morris voted on the proposal for Canton City Council to authorize the expenditure of $25,000 for city of Canton promotional materials for products made in China.

Morris joined Kirven's candidate for the 9th Ward (Joe Cole) in voting for the measure.  Only 5th Ward Councilman Kevin Fisher voted no in an 11 to 1 vote.

The SCPR regrets the error and thanks Kirven for bringing the mistake to The Report's attention.

ORIGINAL BLOG (Revised to account for the error)

Probably due to a SCPR political analysis blog showing that if Bill Smuckler, Jimmy Babcock, Mary Cirelli, and Joe Cole were to run for the three slots up for election in Canton's council-at-large race this coming May that Councilman Cole would be the "odd man out," he apparently decided to play a game of "political musical chairs" with Cirelli on Wednesday, February 6, 2013.

A SCPR source (confirmed by Mary Cirelli herself) says that Cirelli and Cole (along with his fellow councilman and pal Jimmy Babcock) were camped out in their cars in front of the the Stark County Board of Elections (BOE) as the 4:00 p.m. filing deadline for the 2013 elections neared.

Cole seemed intent on waiting for Cirelli to declare herself as to whether she was going to run to be Canton's next treasurer or seek to retain her seat as councilwoman-at-large.

And any one who knows Mary Cirelli has to know she would not be outdone.

Cole had taken out petitions for his current seat (council-at-large) and to run against incumbent Democratic 9th ward Councilman Frank Morris.

Finally, Cole enters the BOE and Cirelli follows.

But she does not see Cole when she gets into the building.

She assumes Cole has already filed.  But que sera, que sera, Cirelli tells the SCPR.

She plomps her petitions for council-at-large down on the counter and asks the nearby Jeanette Mullane (deputy director of the BOE) to check them out as to accuracy.

While Mullane is doing the checking, Cirelli excuses herself to go to the ladies room.

Meanwhile, Cole makes his appearance at the counter of the BOE.

Likely, Cole sees Mary's council-at-large petitions laying on the counter and ASSUMES thereby that she has opted to run for re-election as councilwoman-at-large.

So Cole files for the 9th ward against Morris apparently figuring that running in the 9th was his best chance to stay on council.

Out comes Mary Cirelli.  She asked Mullane if the petitions appeared to be in order. 

Mullane responds:  "Yes".

Whereupon Cirelli whips out her treasurer's petitions and said:  "Okay, then these must be alright, too."

And she files for treasurer.

Cole has to be utterly shocked.

What a hoot!, no?

But worse for Cole, getting out maneuvered by Cirelli probably means his days on council are numbered.

Had he gotten the filing process right by filing for council-at-large, he would be a shoe-in to be reelected.  With Cirelli out of the race, and two political newcomers vying against him for the third of three slots (assuming that his friend Babcock and former councilman Bill Smuckler will win the first two slots as the SCPR does), The Report believes that the lackluster Cole would clearly be in a position to place third.

But there is more to the story.

Probably Cole's biggest booster is Dave Kirven who is the business agent for Plumbers and Pipefitters, Local 94 located down on 13 Street, SW.

The Report's source tells yours truly that Kirven was told weeks ago that Cirelli was going to run for treasurer.

Kirven denies to The Report that he was told any such thing.

But now that the die is cast and his man is running against Morris, this is what he had to say:

Make no mistake Joe Cole is Local 94's guy in whatever race he would have decided to run in. Joe has been a good friend to Labor and in my opinion deserves our support (Local 94) and I will express my opinion to other Local Unions in the area. It's unfortunate that our local Dems put more energy into fighting each other than finding common ground.

This is just plain crazy.

One Stark County's main trade union guys campaigning against Morris who is himself a union glazier.

Democrat against Democrat.

Union member against union member.

And what's even stranger, is that Cole is superintendent/principal of a Canton-based charter school.

What is a prime characteristic of charter schools?

They do not hire union teachers!

Wow!  Kirven is big time advocate for "justice for local workers."  On July 1, 2010 he was the main organizer of a "justice for local workers" (LINK to a prior SCPR blog) rally.

While Kirven likes to say that the rally was not only for union workers but for all (union/nonunion) Stark County-based workers; make no mistake about it, the bottom line:   the rally was for union jobs.

As was the picketing effort in April of 2012 against the Outback Steakhouse and Bonefish Grill building projects adjacent to The Strip in North Canton (LINK to North Canton Patch article and video featuring Kirven).

Last year (May, 2012), Hall of Fame AFL-CIO president Dan Scuiry appeared before the Canton City Council to talk down a Healy administration plan to market city of Canton promotional materials made by non-union workers in China.  (LINK to prior SCPR blog)

Who was a major proponent of the plan which was ultimately passed by council?  You've got it:  Councilman Joe Cole.

But strangely enough so did Morris and everybody else on council.  It is hard to believe that Morris, being the strong union man he is, would vote for such a piece of legislation.

Apparently, everyone has his weak moments.

As the SCPR sees this race, Cole has very little chance to unseat Morris.

So not only does Kirven have a problem identifying with the councilman who best represents union interests (Morris); he picks a likely loser come November (Cole).

Hmm?

Morris is part of a group of Canton City council first termers (Morris, Fisher [5th], Mariol [7th] and Mack [8th] who the SCPR has termed as being "the young turks."

The young turks have banded together to defeat a number of Healy administration legislative initiatives and moreover have become aggressively proactive in a united effort to reverse Canton neighborhood deterioration.

The SCPR is well taken with their political courage and their positive plan to change Canton for the better.

They have been aided in their effort by Councilwoman Cirelli, Councilman Greg Hawk (Ward 1), both of whom are long time Healy foes, and here and there by Ward 3 Councilman Jim Griffin.

Cole, completing his second term, has decided to fall in line with the Healy administration and along with councilpersons Babcock (at-large), Dougherty (Ward 6), Smith (4th) and West (2nd).

The Report is told that "the young turks" will be campaigning together.

Cole, on the other hand has been a major disappointment.  Among his impressive credentials:  (from LinkedIn profile)

• -YSTARK and The Canton Repository’s “Twenty under 40,” (Inaugural Class)
• -Stark County Young Democrat of the Year, 2009

The SCPR once had high expectations for him.  But he has failed to deliver as an independent minded, energetic and visionary Canton legislator.  Rather he has decided to fall in with the mayor and base his political survival on being joined at the hip with Healy and his allies.

Come November 7th, the SCPR believes that Joe Cole will be ex-Councilman Joe Cole.

For he played the game of "filing for political office musical chairs" with Mary Cirelli and ended up without a chair.

Joe Cole outfoxed by veteran Canton/Stark County politician Mary Cirelli!

SHOULD CANTONIANS BE WARY OF MAYOR HEALY & HIS TALK ABOUT THE NEED FOR AN INCREASE IN TAXES?

UPDATE:  05/14/2014 at 12:45 p.m.

UPDATE:  05/09/2012 at 11:00 a.m. - President Allen Schulman (Canton City Council) responds to blog.  See comments section at end of blog.

ORIGINAL BLOG

To republish the headline of this blog:  SHOULD CANTONIANS BE WARY OF MAYOR HEALY & HIS TALK ABOUT THE NEED FOR AN INCREASE IN TAXES?

In a word:  YES!

Why?

Consider this background:

Councilwoman-at-Large Mary Cirelli called Healy a liar Monday night during the pre-regular-council-meeting Democratic caucus meeting.

Really?

Indeed!

During the caucus meeting she pressed him on whether the proceeds of a "in the talking stages" safety forces levy would be an add-on to what the safety forces already get.

Cirelli says that Healy said in the context of a lot of double talk that the safety forces would not get "all" the money generated by a safety forces levy.

To her, this was justification for calling the mayor a liar.

Another basis for her being so "out-with-it" in calling Healy a liar has to do with the passage last week of a measure generated by Councilman David Dougherty (majority leader).

Readers of the SCPR will recall that Hall of Fame AFL-CIO president Dan Sciury (LINK here to prior blog which has a video of Sciury speaking) showed up at last week's council meeting to ask council to rescind Dougherty's ordinance that put Canton on a track to invest $25,000 in a "promote Canton"scheme.

Sciury was upset that the work was being contracted with a North Carolina based company (non-local, of course, and non-union) which he felt confident would be including promotional materials made in China, perhaps even Canton, China.

Under the shepherding of Councilman-at-Large Joe Cole (with Majority Leader Dougherty monitoring), the legislation had gotten passed the preceding week as an "emergency" matter.  Cole gave a number of reasons to his fellow council members as to why they needed to "rush to judgment" on the vote.

None of them (chiefly, for the youth of Canton), in the assessment of yours truly, hold water.

So what's the rush? 

Of course, we all know (except for the 10 other than Cole members of council) from life's experience that anytime one is being rushed along - watch out!

Apparently, Healy, Cole and Dougherty think the ordinance holds something politically good for them and accordingly they have to rush it along.

To her discredit, even Cirelli got hoodwinked. She doesn't know who she dealing with by now?

Before the vote, Cirelli says she talked to Healy about her concerns that the ordinance would connect Canton, Ohio city government to buying goods manufactured in, perhaps, Canton, China.

He promised her in no uncertain terms that if it came out (like he didn't already know) that non-USA produced goods were to be part of the contract:  "I will veto the legislation!"

Well, the veto never happened.

In a SCPR post-April 30th meeting videotaped press conference type interview with Cole, he all but absolutely conceded that Canton, Ohio under the contract would be very likely buying goods manufactured in China.

Healy's response to Cirelli (last week after the Sciury appearance) and a week after the 11 to 1 vote for the out-of-state; out-of-country buy (only 5th Ward Councilman Kevin Fisher voting no):

"Oh, I must have forgot!"

As the SCPR has written prodigiously over the last four years, Mayor Healy thinks everybody else is totally stupid whom he can politically use and abuse at-will.

When he gets caught, he gets angry.

To Cirelli according to Cirelli:  (paraphrase) "I never said any of that.  You are a f_ _ _ _ _ _ liar.  And don't you ever come to me for anything ever again!"

Indeed, Cantonians should be very wary of the mayor and any tax increase proposal he comes up with.

The Report believes that Healy could well be in the process of concocting "a bait and switch" to bamboozle council and the Canton electorate with.

With the "Canton, China" escapade in mind, it does not appear that more than a couple councilpersons have the inclination and/or the capability of analyzing proposed tax increase legislation to ferret out the loopholes that Healy is likely devising.

And, as the SCPR full well knows, the mayor of Canton is one of the most accomplished finessers that Canton and Stark County has ever seen.

Only council president Allen Schulman matches up ably against Healy.  But he is only rarely inclined to do so.  One has to wonder why.

Though he denies that it was his intention, Schulman did bounce around Healy surrogate David Dougherty on "the buy China matter" Monday night. 

A number of area politicians are telling The Report that there is no way Healy can get a tax issue passed.

Apparently, they do not know Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II very well.

In the view of the SCPR, no Stark County politician has the "bait & switch" and overall scheming skills of Healy.

Don't count him out!

(VIDEOS OF UNION LEADER SCIURY & COUNCILMAN COLE) CANTON CITY COUNCIL MAJORITY SHOWS DISRESPECT FOR STARK CO. ORGANIZED LABOR?

At last night's Canton City Council meeting Hall of Fame AFL-CIO president Dan Sciury was indignant (to use a nice word) with council as he scolded (another nice word) them during "Public Speaks" for voting last week to spend $25,000 of the money of Canton, OHIO citizens in a "promote Canton, Ohio marketing initiative" to possibly (i.e. who really knows) provide jobs for workers located in Canton, CHINA.

Here is a video of Sciury's admonition:



Stark County unions have poured mega bucks into the collective political campaigns of Democratic members of council over decades and decades only to seemingly get kicked in the teeth by the council beneficiaries of union largesse.

Only 5th Ward Councilman Kevin Fisher (new elected in 2011) stood by organized labor in voting "no" on Ordinance 61/2012.

The SCPR has to believe that council President Alan Schulman too would have voted no had there been a tie (the only time the president votes) as he has always been the most vocal pro-organized-labor member of council.

The lopsided 11 yes and 1 no vote occurred notwithstanding Sciury's lobbying council to reject the proposal days before the vote was called.  He pled with a primary proponent of the ordinance; namely, Councilman Joe Cole (who joined with the author of the legislation, according to Cole, Councilman David Dougherty of the 6th Ward who serves as the majority leader in a council that has no Republicans) to stop the project.

But to no avail.  To The Report it is no surprise that Cole is not moved by a "for union jobs" argument.  After all, he is the principal of a charter school which has no union teachers.

Here is a video of Cole's (last night) weak defense of the out-of-area contract, to wit:  "this was the only full service vendor we could find."



Sciury later told yours truly that Cole's point was utter nonsense.  That he can provide council with the names of companies who do full service promotional services work.

Joining in with council members was Mayor William J. Healy, II in that he had to sign the legislation for it to become the law of Canton, Ohio.

He gave the lame reason why the legislation got his signature:  "in the rush of winding up the meeting."  Really?  Obviously, the mayor thinks everybody is totally stupid.

The SCPR has underway a compilation of campaign finance contributions to Healy going all the way back to when he first sought public office in Stark County.

So far the consolidation of Healy's campaign contributions goes back through the successful re-election bid for a second term as mayor.

Healy collected a whopping $70,000 plus from Canton/Stark County/Ohio/USA in campaign contributions!

He signed the legislation inadvertently (i.e. "in the rush of winding up.")

Hmm?

A $70,000 plus contribution and you can't keep track of a piece of legislation that you know your union friends do not like?

He did promise to push for council to revisit the matter.  In a post-council-meeting with Councilman Cole, the SCPR did not get the impression that Cole was in favor of undoing the ordinance.  But he did not completely rule it out.

So what are the unions going to do about Council's "in your face?"

Probably very little.

Unions are so tied to Democrats that they have nowhere else to go and accordingly they get treated as the proverbial "step-child."

They do have opportunities.  For instance, they could draw back on their support of Healy's sister Joyce Healy-Abrams in her quest to unseat Republican Congressman Bob Gibbs.

But do not look for them to do it.  Healy and Canton council members may use and abuse them, however, it would be quite a step for them

Democrats have unions exactly where they want them:  no place to go.

Beyond the jobs for unions question are a number of other issues with the expenditure of $25,000.

First, what about the point Sciury made:  jobs for Canton and Stark County at large even if they are non-union jobs.

Canton Council and the Healy administration makes a huge public relations to-do out of "new" jobs brought to Canton.

Then to support sending Canton taxpayer money out of the city perhaps all the way to the likes of Canton, China?  Hmm?  Will that play with the citizens of Canton, Ohio?

Second, as Councilman Fisher pointed out to the SCPR, how is it that an administration and council who has a looming $4 million plus budget shortfall to make up come 2013 can spend $25,000 on anything but absolutely essential city services?

Of course, this is not the only glaring inconsistency that Canton government has engaged in lately.  Last year Canton Council approved an ordinance with the blessing of the Healy administration that resulted in tens of thousands of dollars for pay increases for Mayor Healy, other members of his administration and council members.

It appears to The Report that Healy and council are building up to asking voters to increase Canton's city income tax from 2% to 2.5% in this November's election.

Hmm?

Multiple thousands upon thousands of dollars being spend on non-essentials and you're are asking for a tax increase?

For the SCPR what is happening in Canton government is a consequence of the arrogance of one-party-rule.

Even the union-bankrollers of the Democrats' absolute control of the seat of Stark County government are powerless to check the cockamaimee ideas that come from the likes of Dougherty and Cole.

MAYBE IT WON'T BE FIVE COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT SCUTTLES THE CHARTER INITIATIVE IN CANTON; THE NUMBER MAY BE DOWN TO THREE?

AN AMPLIFICATION:  It has been pointed out by a reader of the SCPR that by the Rules of Procedure of the Canton City Council that a council member may ask Council as a body to remove an item from within a committee. If Council refuses to remove the matter from committee and the committee never reports it out, then the matter is effectively killed at the end of Council's term.  It would have to be reintroduced in a new term.

If Council does remove, by a majority vote, the measure from Council, then it goes to Council's Committee of The Whole where it will need seven votes (a simple majority) to get on City Council's agenda for consideration of passage.

ORIGINAL POST

The SCPR wrote on Tuesday that Councilman Mark Butterworth (R - 8th Ward) may have trouble finding eight of twelve votes within Canton City Council to get a measure on the May, 2011 to create a Charter Commission to formulate a charter for Cantonians to vote on in November, 2011.

Like it or not, this measure is getting caught up in politics and the political insecurities of at least two of the councilpersons who sit on the Judiciary Committee headed up by Councilman Thomas West (D - 2nd Ward).

So it could turn out that only three "no" votes (25% of the voting members of Council) refusing to report out the measure to full Council will kill the charter movement for Canton.

Another factor is that the Healy administration is cool to the idea of Canton going to a charter.

In a larger since, it is also probably a case of the "establishment" caucus of the organized Stark County Democratic Party on Canton Council who are trying in a stealth manner to kill the charter proposal.

Why?

Because the establishment folks are in charge now and any change is likely seen by them to threaten their control of Council.

Who are some of these folks?

A source tells the SCPR that Councilmen West, Cole and Hawk, if they can conjure up a superficially plausible basis for voting "no," they will do so.  The source says that one of the consequences that West and Hawk fear is that the drawing of new council district lines under a charter would put them in the same district and therefore have to run against one another in a face off.  Such a race would likely mean the end of Hawk's career on Council.

The SCPR believes Mayor Healy is "cool" to the idea of charter because Councilman Bill Smuckler is for it.  Smuckler has for many years advocated for Canton going to a charter form of government.  Smuckler is likely to run against Healy in next May's Democratic primary to be the Democratic nominee for mayor in November's election.

An important factor in all of these political maneuverings is that a Republican (Mark Butterworth) is pushing the charter thing.  A mistake that Butterworth made in proposing a charter commission is not getting a Democrat, any Democrat, to join him.

His mistake seems credible to the "establishment" Democrats being whispered around City Hall that this is a plan by Republicans to gain more representation on Council.  After all, it was Republican operative Michael Cunnington who earlier this year call a community meeting at Malone College to discuss the idea of circulating petitions for a ground-up movement to install a charter in Canton.

The SCPR is told that Cunnington ran into a buzz saw of "establishment" Democrats beholden to Mayor Healy who caused a ruckus at the community meeting over the Cunnington proposal.

The SCPR believes that it is a difficult task that the "establishment" Democrats have to pull off.  With Canton being in the financial/economic doldrums, it is clear that something has to be done to reverse Canton's fortunes.  But what?

Well, how about a change in structure of government which suggests the infusion of "new" blood into Canton government?  One not overwhelmingly controlled by the organized Stark County Democratic Party.

Cantonians are likely to be infuriated if they come to believe that they are being denied the right to vote on whether or not they want to go to a charter government by insecure Democratic politicians.

So the "establishment" Democratic forces have a touchy matter in their hands.

We will know better after August 9th and a meeting of the West-controlled Judiciary Committee at which Councilman Butterworth will seek to educate committee members on the ramifications of going charter.

Will this matter get out of Judiciary?

The SCPR thinks it depends on Councilman Joe Cole.

Why Cole?

Well, he is the new kid on the block in Council and has not really identified himself as being part and parcel with "establishment" Democrats on Council and also with the Healy administration.

The Report believes that if Cole signals he favors a vote of the people, then West and Hawk will likely flip over to voting "yes" with him.

But if he indicates strong reservations about charter proposal, it would not be surprising at all to see 25% of the members of Canton City Council deny the entire City of Canton electorate the opportunity to vote on the charter measure.

It all boils down to what the anti-charter folks can cook up that makes it appear to Cantonians that they are not being obstructionists.  But, rather, they are doing the responsible and productive thing for Canton.

The charter thing presents an interesting sideshow to the looming showdown between Mayor Healy and powerful Canton Council Bill Smuckler in a mayoralty face off in May of 2011!