BREAKING NEWS! SHERIFF-ELECT GEORGE T. MAIER AVOIDS "PERSONAL LIABILITY" FOR NOW.

UPDATED & REPUBLISHED

The Stark County Political Report has just learned that Judge Linton Lewis, Jr. (of DeRolfe case fame [finding Ohio's funding of public education to be unconstitutional]) has found (in a ruling made yesterday) that Sheriff-elect George T. Maier will not be liable to former sheriff Timothy Swanson for damages in the approximate amount of $90,000 for having usurped to office.

Readers will recall that the Ohio Supreme Court found that Maier was illegally appointed to office as sheriff by the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee (SCDP-CC) on February 5, 2013 and removed him from office on November 6, 2013.

Subsequently, the SCDP-CC on December 11, 2013 reappointed Maier.

In unofficial returns published by the Stark County Board of Elections, Maier defeated Republican Larry Dordea in the November 4th election by about 3,000 votes.

Other than the defeat by virtue of the quo warranto filed by Swanson, Maier has survived every challenge to his candidacy to be sheriff including:

• a indirect attempt via a Writ of Prohibition filed by SCDP-CC challenger Louis Darrow against the SCDP-CC proceeding on February 5th,
• a challenge made to the Stark County Board of Elections (BOE) on the issue of whether or not Maier was qualified,
• which was deadlocked at the BOE with the Republican board members voting to disqualify him and the Democrat members voting to qualify him,
• Republican Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted while not saying he was qualified allowed Maier ballot access,
• the Ohio Supreme Court using an "abuse of discretion" standard said that Husted did not abuse his discretion is allowing Maier ballot access.

Local attorney and civic activist Craig T. Conley (who represented Swanson in the civil liability case) tells the SCPR that he thinks Judge Lewis erred in ruling against his Motion for Summary Judgment.

Moreover, Conley says, in granting Maier a summary judgment when the Maier attorney never filed such a motion is clearly in error and that he expects that the motion grant to "unasked" by Maier is clearly reversible error.

If Conley is correct in his assessment on the latter point and the Fifth District Court of Appeals reverses Lewis, then there will be a trial on the issue of civil liability.

The court of appeals could reverse Lewis on both rulings in which case Maier would be liable to Swanson unless his legal counsel can get the Ohio Supreme Court to hear an appeal (not as "a matter of right" as in original jurisdiction case such as quo warranto) of any personal liability determination.

As former New York Yankee catcher Yogi Berra is credited with saying:  "it's not over until its over" seems to apply with this case.

IS MASSILLON ABOUT TO PAY TWICE FOR AN "EXTRA" SERGEANT'S POSITION IN THE MASSILLON POLICE DEPARTMENT?

MASSILLON LOSES COURT CASE
ON
PROMOTION TO SERGEANT CONTROVERSY

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

CATAZARO-PERRY & HER ADVISERS

HAVE MADE A REAL MESS OF

MASSILLON FINANCES?

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

STATE OF OHIO AUDITOR

SAYS

MASSILLON CAN SAVE

$628,600 ANNUALLY!

UPDATE:  5:45 PM

Here is a follow up e-mail from Massillon Councilman Milan Chovan on the situation of Michael Maier.

From:  Milan Chovan   (Wednesday, April 2, 2014 at 5:25 PM)

To:  Martin Olson

Hi, Martin. 

I read the update to your blog that was made after my voicemail this morning.  I'd like to explain further to clear up a few things that I might not have made clear in the voicemail.

First of all, the city ordinance regarding staffing levels sets the number of sergeants at 6, not 7.  Rogers would have been number 7 without the retirement of an existing sergeant.  In that case, it would appear that Maier would have had to have been demoted, according to the city's Codified Ordinances. 

Earlier today, I found out that there might be another issue regarding Maier. As I understand it, if two officers pass the sergeant's test as did Maier and Rogers, the results are good for one year.  So, if the more senior sergeant candidate that passed the test is promoted, then another sergeant opening occurs within one year from the test date,  the junior officer could be promoted without retaking the test. I was informed today that, if Rogers would have been promoted when Maier was, well over a year ago, Maier's previous test results would now be expired.  The contention is that Maier should not have been made a sergeant  when he was and, therefore, does not have a valid test result to allow him to be a sergeant now, even though there would only be 6 sergeants on the department.  

In effect, right now, there should only be 5 sergeants with Rogers as one of them and an opening for a 6th sergeant that should be filled after a new test is administered to any officer qualified to take it.  If another officer with more seniority than Maier passes the test, he would be promoted before Maier.  At least that's what I was told. Confusing isn't it?

Thanks for the follow up Milan. 

It is confusing and that's why I wanted SCPR readers to hear from you in your capacity as chairman of Massillon City Council's Police and Fire Committee.

UPDATE:  9:15 AM

Republican Councilman-at-Large Milan Chovan (chairman of Massillon City Council's Police & Fire Committee) this morning in response to a SCPR inquiry as to whether or not Massillon's Fifth District Court of Appeals loss on the Rogers case is likely to result in Michael Maier being demoted said that he does not think so.

He explained that Massillon very recently had its full ordinance authorized seven sergeants on staff and that until the very recent retirement of one of the sergeants, a promotion of Thomas Rogers to sergeant would have put Massillon over the seven sergeant authorization.  Accordingly, it appears that Maier will be remaining a sergeant.

Chovan did say that the matter of retroactive pay to Rogers at the grade of sergeant is something else and he believes that it is an issue that Massillon government will have to deal with.

ORIGINAL BLOG

The Stark County Political Report thinks that if you had asked Johnnie A. Maier, Jr (executive vice chair of the Stark County Democratic Party) in January, 2013 if the family fortunes were flying high in terms of being dominant factors in Stark County police work (also Ohio:  2007 - 2011, George T. Maier, assistant director/director [for a few days] of the Department of Public Safety),  he most likely would have had ONE BIG SMILE on his face.

The Report's take on this former chairman of the Stark Dems is that he is a firm believer that "might makes right" and he has what it takes to play the political bully to take himself and his political allies to the apex of Stark County politics and government.

Maier, Jr learned power politics from one of Ohio's all time masters.

But these days, Johnnie might have a more sober look on his face.

Yesterday, the Fifth District Court of Appeals (5DCOA) came down with a decision which might result in his nephew Massillon policeman Michael Maier (George's son) losing his rank of sergeant in the Massillon Police Department (MPD).

Here's how Rogers attorney (Conley) put the significance of the 5DCOA ruling:

Yesterday, the Fifth District Court of Appeals issued its Opinion in the above-referenced cause affirming the Trial Court's (Judge Haas) reversal of the City of Massillon Civil Service Commission's decision denying Massillon Police Officer Rogers' promotion to Sergeant.

Accordingly, barring an unlikely successful appeal to' the Ohio Supreme Court, the City of Massillon is now obliged to retroactively promote Officer Rogers to Sergeant and to pay him back wages and fringe benefits therefor.

Ironically enough, the Massillon Police Officer unlawfully appointed sergeant in Officer Rogers' stead was George T. Maier's son, Michael Maier, noting that the younger Maier's promotion was effectuated while his father was the Massillon Safety Service Director.

To get a full appreciation of the full background on this story, readers of this SCPR blog should click on this LINK to access a blog published by The Report on April 29, 2013 providing quite a bit of background own how Micheal came to be promoted sergeant at the MPD by Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry over one Thomas Rogers even though the Stark Court of Common Pleas (Judge John Haas) and now the 5DCOA has found "as a matter of law" that Rogers has more seniority than Maier.

Originally the Massillon Civil Service Commission disregarded Rogers seniority factor (3 to 0) in coming to a decision as to recommend to Mayor Catazaro-Perry whom to promote.

And the SCPR believes that the commission was not politically motivated but was merely misinformed as to what the operative law was at the time of its determination.

How did that happen?

Well, that is a good question which the SCPR does not have an answer for.

Perhaps it is that there is something in the water in certain parts of Massillon?

But the disconnect between the law as it is - and how the Maiers and others think it is - seems to be common phenomenon at play when it comes to Michael and father George qualifying for public policing positions.

The erroneous Massillon Civil Service Commissioner interpretation of the law (at least at the Stark Common Pleas and 5DCOA levels) was rendered on November 27, 2012.

A couple months or so later, Michael's father George, after guaranteeing Stark Countians that if he applied to succeed November, 2012 Sheriff-elect Mike McDonald (who, due to illness, could not take office on January 7, 2013) he would be qualified, was proved to be wrong (after being appointed sheriff on February 5, 2013 by the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee) when on November 6, 2013 the Ohio Supreme Court (Swanson v. Maier, quo warranto) said he failed to meet the criteria of Ohio Revised Code Section 311.01(B)(8)(a) or (b).

Now George is under challenge once again in the Ohio Supreme Court as to whether or not he is qualified to be the Stark County Democratic Party's candidate for sheriff in the upcoming May 6, 2014 primary election.  (Balas-Bratton v. Maier, Writ of Prohibition, filed March 11, 2014)

The main point of this blog is to examine the financial implications to Massillon City finances in what appears to the SCPR to have been too hasty of a decision on the part of Mayor Catazaro-Perry to exercising her executive power to do so in promoting Michael to sergeant given the legal challenge that was surely to follow.

Presumably readers know about the dire financial condition that the city of Massillon is in these days.

Even before she took office as mayor (elected in November, 2011), Catazaro-Perry was trying to get the State of Ohio Auditor's (SOA) office to making an official finding that Massillon was in some sort of financial condition.

But the SOA rejected her overture.

If Catazaro-Perry has anything going for her, it is her doggedness.  And that could come from her political protege and sponsor Johnnie A. Maier, Jr.

Finally, she did persuade the SOA in 2013 to declare Massillon to be in fiscal emergency.  On May 13, 2013 she wrote SOA David Yost and on October 8th, he accommodated her.

Ironically, yesterday the SOA came out with the requested audit and here is its recommendation "savings" list:

Hmm?

$628,600 in "Annual Cost Savings/Revenue Enhancements."

Interestingly enough, the mayor is reported be saying that Massillon may not implement all the SOA's recommendations.

Hmm?

Who asked for the audit?

Of course, even if Massillon were to implement all the SOA recommendations, the savings will have to be reduced by the amount of money the Catazaro-Perry administration will likely have to pay Thomas Rogers.

And it has been one big merry-go-round and she (as the SCPR sees it) has chosen to lock horns with Massillon City Council over coming up with a plan to present to the Massillon Financial Planning Commission (set up as part of the SOA declaring Massillon to be in fiscal emergency) for its approval.

The Report hears that the mayor convinced her fellows on the commission to disapprove council's plan submitted to the commission recently.

Which in light of the recommendations of the SOA yesterday and the "miraculous" reduction in the deficit from $2.6 million to $1.1 million reported recently makes one wonder whether or not a declaration fiscal emergency was merited in the first place.

Nevertheless Catazaro-Perry and council are at loggerheads and who knows if, when and how the stand off will end.

The Report is told by a knowledgeable source that the State of Ohio member of the commission (having met with council at a work session on Monday night) may be changing her view of council's plan.

With all the financial hubbub going on, it cannot be good news that it is looking pretty certain (the 5DCOA decision is susceptible of being appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court) that Massillon will now have to promote Thomas Rogers to sergeant with retroactive pay and benefits.

In light of Massillon's financial problems, it will be interesting to see how much Massillon will be set back because of Catazaro-Perry's premature action on the sergeant promotion.

And, the SCPR is told, that it may be that Massillon's code of ordinances does not allow both Rogers and Maier to be sergeants.  (See UPDATE above).

If such proves to be the case, it appears that Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry (one would think under the advice of Maier, Jr [who is Massillon's clerk of courts] and his appendage and deputy clerk R. Shane Jackson) has made a real mess of things in Massillon.

While Johnnie, Jr and his political friends and allies may think that they can muscle their way through every situation; maybe, just maybe, political power has it limits.

If things have gotten worse for Johnnie, Jr and his political pals with the adverse 5DCOA decision - so what - might be the response. They only getting what they deserve.

And that may be.

But what should not be acceptable to the voters in Massillon and across Stark County (i.e. the sheriff thing) is for political power mongers to drag all of us into the consequences of losing the political power game.

There is yet a chance that the exercise of executive and political power may in the end prevail.

If they do or do not succeed, the play of ill-advised executive action and power politics will have markedly damaged Massillon (re:  its safety forces) and Stark County (the sheriff's situation) in terms of the public perception of the priorities of interests.

Which is prevailing, the public must be saying:  the public interest or somebody's personal interest?

GEORGE T. MAIER: RALLYING THE TROOPS?

The Stark County Report is hearing that on Monday of this week, when Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee (SCDP-CC) sheriff appointee GEORGE T. MAIER returned to 4500 Atlantic Boulevard (after having spent Friday battling a "protest" to his candidacy for Stark County sheriff), he was seen and heard to be "rallying the troops" to his cause.

It must have been an surreal scene.

For it is hard to imagine being through all that Maier has been through since launching his drive (January, 2013) to become Stark County's next "permanent" (more or less) sheriff, that it would be him who is picking up the spirits of his supporters rather than the other way around.

Let's walk through the chronology of Maier's quest to become sheriff.

EARLY JANUARY, 2013

As we all sadly recall, long time Stark County deputy sheriff Mike McDonald (chief deputy sheriff of the Jail Division of the Stark County at the time) became ill during his campaign to replace the retiring Tim Swanson effective January 7, 2013.

Though elected in November, 2012, he was unable to take office on the 7th due to the illness which resulted in his death on February 22, 2013.

It fell to the SCDP-CC to appoint a McDonald successor under the statutory law of Ohio.

The aspirants to the appointment were long time Stark County deputy sheriff Lt. Louis Darrow (a Democrat), fellow Democrat Maier (who spent most of his policing career in the Ohio State Highway Patrol) and Republican Larry Dordea who made his mark as a first rate policeman as nine year chief of the Alliance Police Department.

From the beginning, some questioned whether or not Maier was qualified to be Stark County sheriff because, of late in his career path, he was not "a cop on the beat," but rather a top level administrator with the Ohio Department of Public Safety (Columbus) and the city Massillon safety and service department.

Consequently, he was pounced on by local media with questions about his eligibility under the standards of Ohio Revised Code Section (ORC) 311.01 to become sheriff.

Blessed with a certitude that few people have, Maier made a very strong statement indeed on the issue of his eligibility.

However, the SCPR believes in his "heart of hearts" he knew well before February 5, 2013 (the date Democrats selected to me to choose McDonald's successor) that getting qualified to be sheriff was going to be a much more difficult undertaking than his bravado statement indicated.

In early January, his emissary and probably Stark County's most enthusiastic George T. Maier for Stark County sheriff (outside of his brother and executive vice chairman of the Stark Dems, Johnnie A. Maier, Jr - JAM) Stark Democratic Party chaiman Randy Gonzalez convened a meeting with Stark County commissioner Thomas Bernabei and Sheriff Swanson to devise ways and means to shore up George's "questionable from the beginning" credentials under ORC 311.01 to be sheriff.

Gonzalez naively believed that Swanson would help out.

But the retiring sheriff had plans of his own.

And they were not focused on Maier.

BACKGROUND TO SWANSON RESISTANCE TO MAIER

Swanson, when he started considering retirement (a second time) a few years ago, he first designated his other (other than McDonald) chief deputy sheriff (operations) Rick Perez to become his designated successor.

But then came along the Marlboro chief of police Ron Devies case in which Perez committed a big "no, no" in Stark County policing circles in investigating the case in which Devies and his son got indicted (including felony counts) for what the SCPR thinks was "merely" a "communications problem" over computer equipment and software issues between the Devies son and at least one, perhaps two, of the Marlboro Township trustee at the time (January, 2009).

A big "no, no?"

Yes, Rick testified in the case that he wore a tape recorder (unknown to Chief Devies) in questioning the chief about the allegations being made in Marlboro Township.

The SCPR believes that Devies investigation incident was the beginning of the end for Rick Perez's apparent anointment by Swanson as his successor.  Devies and his son, by the way, had charges dismissed at the end of the prosecution's case by then Stark County Court of Common Pleas judge V. Lee Sinclair, Jr (since retired).

So whom to take Perez's place?

The highly respected Mike McDonald, that's who.

It was a real blow to the Stark Dems that McDonald fell ill.

The SCPR believes that the Stark County Democratic Party "powers that be" worried with McDonald's resignation about their ability to retain the Party's hold on the sheriff's office most recently for the past 20 years with McDonald having to step aside.

Swanson's choice was Darrow.

While he knew Maier, the SCPR's take (though Swanson's says that he could get behind Maier if he (Swanson) could be assured that Maier had "no" qualifications problem.

The Report believes Swanson but also thinks that he was not all that enthusiastic about the Maiers (not so much George but rather "political power broker" brother Johnnie, Jr, who was Stark County Democratic Party chairman from 2003 through 2009) and was eager to find someone in-house (i.e. someone he had worked with in the sheriff's department) to be the Democratic replacement for McDonald.

So Swanson settles on Darrow as being the only top administrator within the department who indicated he was interested in becoming McDonald's successor.

The Report believes two things happened which created a rift between the Maiers (remember, chiefly Johnnie, Jr.) and Johnnie's stand-in as chairman (Gonzalez) and Swanson.

First, The Report believes that when scuttlebutt developed within the inner circles of the Stark County Democratic Party during the McDonald campaign that McDonald was likely not going to be able to take office, Johnnie, Jr. planted the notion with George that he was an ideal candidate for replacement sheriff and that it became clear to Swanson he was not going to have any input as to whom McDonald's successor was going to be.

• SCPR note:  The Report believes that as part of his overall desire to see his political friends, supporters and family members achieve various stations in Stark County government units.
• For example:
• his wife is the elected Tuscarawas Township fiscal officer, 
• brother Chuck is chief security officer for the Massillon City Schools, and
• nephew Michael is a Massillon police officer.
• SCPR note:  Many of Johnnie A. Maier, Jr political friends and supporters hold Stark County public positions:
• For example: (just to provide a flavor Johnnie's connections)
• Randy Gonzalez is Stark County Dems chairman as Maier's successor (2009) and the "elected" Jackson Township fiscal officer and a former trustee,
• Gonzalez nephew Larry St. Jean holds a position in the Kathy Catazaro-Perry administration (see next paragraph)
• Massillon mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry was groomed by Maier to challenge long time political competitor Francis H. Cicchinelli, Jr for the mayoralty of Massillon.  She defeated the 28 years as mayor Cicchinelli in the May, 2011 Democratic Party primary election,
• Massillon Municipal Court judge Eddie Elum (his wife Margaret is the Catazaro-Perry's top administrative assistant).
• David Maley (the spouse of Johnnie's secretary Tammy Maley) works in the Massillon Building Department,
• R. Shane Jackson as Maier's chief deputy clerk of courts (see JAM/Jackson family connection below)
• SCPR Note:  Do not for a nanosecond thinks that Johnnie A. Maier, Jr's friends and family are limited to the Massillon area,
• For Example:
• Stark County Recorder Rick Campbell who is married to the daughter (the chief administrator of Plain Township [where Louis Giavasis is a long-term trustee]) of former Stark County commissioner and Perry Township trustee Gayle Jackson (who was the very first Stark Countian to embrace JAM as a candidate for public office when he defeated the legally troubled Red Ash for state representative in the early 1990s),
• Canton clerk of courts Phil Giavasis with whom Randy Gonzalez served as chief deputy until very recently and whom was replaced by Giavasis with Randy's son Kody who had been chief deputy for Rick Campbell

Second, The Report believes that the Maiers tried to "muscle" Swanson into appointing George as a Stark County deputy sheriff so that George could use the appointment (as he was later to do as a consequence of having his friend Sheriff Ronald J. Myers appoint him as a Harrison County deputy) as being "the appearance" of being a full-time peace officer as required by ORC 311.01.

Well, nobody, but nobody muscles Tim Swanson.

They did not know it then, but Swanson was to become "the person" who stands in the way of George T. Maier ever becoming the replacement for Mike McDonald in the sense of serving out McDonald's term through early 2017.

When the Stark Dems met on February 5, 2013 to select McDonald's successor, one could see the disgust on Gonzalez's face as he intoned "your Stark County prosecutor" (John Ferrero) has filed an affidavit to the effect that George T. Maier is not qualified by virtue of ORC 311.01 to be Stark County sheriff.

The Report's take is that Gonzalez humiliated Ferrero (a former Stark County Dems chairman, himself) and thereby created an enduring enemy for George Maier to have to deal with.

But there is another, the SCPR thinks "political" factor that likely flavors Ferrero's willingness to step forward to challenge George.  That is the political competition between Ferrero and Johnnie A. Maier, Jr within the bowels of Massillon Democratic politics.

In Massillon there are the Maier Democrats, the Cicchinelli Democrats and the Ferrero Democrats.  However, Ferrero does have a loose association with the Cicchinelli folks.

So not only is Tim Swanson to prove to be the main reason (in the opinion of the SCPR) that George Maier does not end up as McDonald's successor; you have John Ferrero working at a fever pitch to double down on keeping George from "permanently" (more or less) filling out McDonald's term.

FEBRUARY 4, 2013 

The day before the SCDP-CC meets to select a McDonald successor, Louis Darrow (a Swanson protege) files a Writ of Prohibition with the Ohio Supreme Court to stop the Dems from meeting.

Reason?

Darrow wants the Supremes to look at Maier's qualifications.

But it was a pipe dream to think that the high court would act within 24 hours and the matter goes "moot" when the Stark Dems act on the 5th in selecting Maier.

Case dismissed on February 13, 2013.

FEBRUARY 5, 2013

Everybody in political circles that the SCPR knows was stunned when George T. Maier narrowly defeated the virtually unknown (within SCDP-CC politics) Louis Darrow 92 votes to 84 votes on February 5th.

Most of us assumed that Johnnie and Randy had done their nose counting and lobbying with SCDP-CC members and that Darrow would prove to be "token" opposition.

Well, the 92 to 84 vote count, meant that "the fight was on" and such a close vote within the Democratic fiefdom itself would encourage the likes of Tim Swanson to mount a legal challenge.

FEBRUARY 12, 2013

Ferrero's filing the affidavit was one thing, but the Maier political force never in their wildest dreams thought Swanson would have the "chutzpah" to actually file a legal action against Maier.

The SCPR predicted from "the get-go" that the Supreme Court would find for interim Sheriff Tim Swanson and oust Maier from office, which it did on November 6, 2013.

If JAM et al thought they were going to go "untested" in bullying through the process to make George sheriff, then this case should have been the clarion call that such was not going to be the case.

NOVEMBER 18, 2013

In its November 6, 2013 ouster of George Maier as the SCDP-CC appointed sheriff of Stark County, the Ohio Supreme Court provided for a re-do of the February 5, 2013 original appointment

But the court was unclear what the "new" qualification date would be.

Was it to be the original February 6, 2013 date or by virtue of the November 6th decision was it thereby changed to November 6th?

Well, Stark County Court of Common Pleas judge Frank Forchione (who had contributed $40 on September 25, 2013 to George T. Maier in a campaign fund raiser; one has to wonder why he didn't recuse himself in favor of another Stark County judge to make the determination) decided to "err on the side of Democracy" and picked the November date rather than the February date which then allowed Maier to re-apply.

Darrow and Swanson believed the date should be construed to be the February date.

Accordingly, they filed a Mandamus action in the Ohio Supreme Court asking the court to limit the SCDP-CC's selection to Darrow and Dordea (the only two other candidates in the February 5th proceeding).

Nobody expected the court to act before the date (December 11th) picked by Chairman Gonzalez to re-appoint.

But they did.

The justices refused to rule one way or the other in dismissing the Darrow/Swanson instituted mandamus on December 10th; one day before the new selection date.

The Maier forces were in a celebratory mode over the dismissal.

NOVEMBER 27, 2013

This date may prove to be George T. Maier biggest nightmare in that it is  the of the filing of a taxpayer suit against Maier to recover county monies received by and expended by Maier while he was "usurper' sheriff.

 So?

"Biggest nightmare?"

Really?

Indeed!

For legal counsel on this case is none other that Stark County's most effective and dogged civic activist Craig T. Conley.

Conley became incensed when he realized (on reading Swanson v. Maier, quo warranto)  that Maier had gone to Harrison County and got his "friend forever"  (see Balas-Bratton "protest" material below) Sheriff Ronald J. Myers to take him on as a deputy sheriff (he served two weekends) for what Conley thought and still thinks was a "sham" hire which Conley feels indicates a Maier "lack of character."

On top of Conley's disgust on Maier's "opportunism," Maier's legal counsel Thomas L. Rosenberg launched in his pleading response to the November 27 taxpayer lawsuit what Conley views to be "a personal attack" on Conley himself.

Big mistake Thomas!

And, as radio commentator of yesteryear Paul Harvey used say "and now for 'the rest of the story."'  (see additional material on Conley's involvement below)

DECEMBER 11, 2013

The SCDP-CC meets once again and re-appoints George T. Maier as Stark County sheriff.

The vote this time was 101 - 65.

Still considerable opposition which the SCPR thinks had to be distressing to the Maier folks.

This vote likely means that even if Maier gets through the legal challenges "on the table" and "yet to come" the JAM/Gonzalez-led Dems have a major job on their hand to get Democrats behind a George T. Maier candidacy let alone convince political independents and Republicans.

FEBRUARY 11, 2014

Massillon Democratic precinct 2A - on the 11th - produced a protester to the candidacy of George T. Maier (with the Stark County Board of Elections [BOE, Board] to be on the ballot as a Democratic candidate in the May 6, 2014 Democratic primary election; namely, Cynthia Balas-Bratton.

At both the February 5th and December 11th SCDP-CC meetings, Balas-Bratton had raised her voice against Maier.

Interestingly enough, word must have leaked out that Balas-Bratton was going to be a thorn is the side of the Maiers, in that a JAM ally Dave Irwin who works for Stark County recorder Rick Campbell) filed petitions to oppose Balas-Bratton for reelection on May 6th.

FEBRUARY 17, 2014

The BOE meets to set a hearing date for the protest, to consider requests to issue subpoenas and to do other housekeeping matters.

February 21, 2014 at 9:00 a.m. at the Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce's Millennium Center (200 Market Ave, North) is the date, time and location of the hearing set by the Board.

FEBRUARY 18, 2014

Interim Sheriff Tim Swanson files a "personal liability" lawsuit in the Stark County Court of Common Pleas against George T. Maier to recover some $88,000 in compensation that was denied Swanson because Maier usurped to his office for the period February 11, 2013 through November 6, 2013.

Swanson says that any money he obtains from the action will, after recouping his legal expenses in litigating with Maier (including his successful quo warranto), will be donated to Wishes Can Happen.

February 20, 2014

After having asked the Ohio secretary of state (earlier in the week and the request not being acted upon):

• to prohibit Stark County Democratic Party member Deametrious St. John of the Stark County Board of Elections from participating in the BOE vote on whether or not Maier was to excluded from the May ballot because - she alleges - he had indicated in pre-hearing press statements that St. John had already made up his mind on the matter without hearing,

Balas-Bratton filed an action (two each, prohibition/mandamus) asking the Fifth District Court of Appeals (as its core objective) to remove him.

The complaint was filed too close to the February 21st hearing date to enable to court to rule.

However, Balas-Bratton's attorney (Conley) says he will resist the case's dismissal as being moot on that part of the case having to do with St. John himself on the possibility that the Ohio secretary of state will break a 2 to 2 tie between the Republican and Democratic members of the BOE (see below) on the 21st in favor of the Democrats.

In such an eventuality, Conley says he will then ask the Court of Appeals on whether or not St. John should have recused himself.

If so and the court invalidates the vote of the 21st, presumably a re-vote will be 2 to 1 in favor of keeping Maier off the ballot thereby negating the secretary of state from breaking the tie.

FEBRUARY 21, 2014

The Stark BOE votes 2 (Republicans for) to 2 (Democrats against) on the Balas-Bratton protest to keep George T. Maier off the May 6th ballot.

The Board has 14 days (until March 7th) to file February 21st hearing documents (e.g. transcript and exhibits) with the Ohio secretary of state for consideration in rendering his tie breaking vote.

OTHER LEGAL ACTIONS?

Most certainly!!!

No matter who wins with the secretary of state, there will be an appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court.

However, the review standard with the Ohio Supreme Court is so high that it is likely that secretary's decision whatever it is will stick.

Moreover, if the secretary rules for removing Maier from the May ballot, then the SCPR has reason to believe that a "second" Tim Swanson quo warranto will be filed.

CONCLUSION

No matter what one thinks of George Maier's cause, his endurance has been and continues to be impressive.

He does not give the impression that "he is the worse for wear" for what he has gone through.

Should he stay on the ballot and ultimately win election to fill out McDonald's term, it is highly unlikely the victory will be without cost.

Maier may appear to be unflappable after going through all that he has and may yet have to endure, but certainly nobody believes that he hasn't thought from time-to-time:  "what did I get myself into?"

Moreover, the prospects of Swanson prevailing of holding Maier "personally" liable for the nearly $90,000 in monies that Swanson lost as a consequence of Maier usurping his office are said by number of observers to be very likely.

And there is the matter of legal fees that he is engendering in defending the multiplicity of legal actions past, present, and future.

The Stark County commissioners have paid $20,000 towards his fees.

But The Report believes it is highly unlikely that they will volunteer to ante up fees (as they did in the first quo warranto) should a second one follow.

But the big downer has to be that:

• last Friday's 2 to 2 vote and a Republican secretary of state breaking the tie, and 
• his having plenty of legal justification for supporting (and have the Ohio Supreme Court on appeal uphold) a vote to keep Maier off the ballot,

the ultimate prospects succeeding McDonald seem to be rife with "doom and gloom,"

For George T. Maier to be cheering up anybody simply unbelievable!

(VIDEOS) COMPREHENSIVE LOOK AT BALAS-BRATTON PROTEST HEARING IN THE CONTEXT OF THE OVERALL "POWER POLITICS" APPROACH OF THE MAIER POLITICAL MACHINE

REVISED & REPUBLISHED
02/24/2014 AT 7:00 AM

VIDEOS

CONLEY & ROSENBERG STATE THEIR CASES

ALSO

CONLEY

OBJECTS

TO

FIREARMS BEING IN ROOM

&

BOE MEMBER PARTICIPATING IN DECISION

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

PART I

CONLEY
GRILLING 
OF
HARRISON COUNTY SHERIFF
RONALD "JOE" MYERS

MAIER "FRIEND FOREVER" 

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

PART II
 
CONLEY "NAILS" MYERS
ON
SF400
DATES INCONSISTENCY

DATE-GATE? 

(REVISED EDITION)

INCLUDES

"YOU AREN'T PSYCHIC ARE YOU, SHERIFF MYERS?"

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

GEORGE MAIER

UNDERGOES

CONLEY'S CROSS-EXAMINATION

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

ROBERT CORNWALL
OF
THE
OHIO BUCKEYE SHERIFF ASSOCIATION

FIRST
THE ROSENBERG EXAMINATION

SECOND
THE CONLEY EXAMINATION

When the SCPR was politically proximate to Johnnie A. Maier, Jr (2002 through 2006), one of things, seemingly, to oft come out of the mouth of the "Mount Sinai of Stark County Democratic Party" (SCDP) politics was that anybody who differed with Johnnie (JAM) - to put it simply - was crazy.

That is one of the labels (an example of deep thinking, no?) that he has ascribed to the SCPR (in an e-mail which The Report has a copy of) is that The Report is crazy. 

And the label may not even have been generated by Maier himself.

It may come from "R." Shane Jackson, the Stark County Democratic Party political director who owes his livelihood to Maier as Maier's chief deputy clerk of courts and, who, at last check, makes more money in that post than the mayor of Massillon.

The Report has been - literally - "screamed at"  (at a "for state representative Celeste DeHoff rally in October, 2008, LINK) and - figuratively - "screamed at" via e-mail (LINK).

Moreover, in the my pre-SCPR days, I have witnessed Jackson go into a number of political diatribes against various Democrats who were not in sync with the Maier/Jackson political machine.

Shane is "the authorized" deep thinker for "all things Stark County Democratic Party" and if you do not believe the SCPR just ring up Shane and ask him - himself.

(Note:  Another favorite tactic of JAM/Jackson is to "label" those who differ with them as being "evil" incarnate)

All the foregoing brings the SCPR to the point of a definition of "crazy" which "rational" people subscribe to:

 

Okay, Martin, what is the point?

Here goes.

FIRST: THE SCPR "MAJOR" PREMISE

The Johnnie A. Maier, Jr. political juggernaut is currently embarked on a "political power play" to force his brother George T. Maier (GTM) in as Stark County sheriff?

SECOND:  THE SCPR "MINOR PREMISES, WHICH COLLECTIVELY, INDICATES AN EINSTEIN DEFINITION OF INSANITY BEING IN PLAY

Yesterday, JAM et al suffered yet another setback in a series of "political power play failures" as the Stark County Board of Elections deadlocked in a 2 to 2 tie (Republicans Braden and Cline against GTM;  Democrats Ferruccio and St. John for GTM).

•  SCPR Note - Maier's political advisers' list of failures:
• Not convincing Stark County prosecutor John Ferrero that he is qualified under the standards of ORC 311.01 that he is qualified to be Stark County sheriff,
• and, apparently, believing that Ferrero would not be able to file a sworn affidavit to that effect in the light of Ferrero's political history and connections (i.e. a former Stark Dems chairman and, likely, a with future political aspirations as a Democrat,
• Not convincing interim Sheriff Tim Swanson that there were inadequate legal bases for asking the Ohio Supreme Court to oust Maier as a usurper Stark County Democratic Party Central Commmitee appointed sheriff,
• and, apparently, believing that Swanson would sail off in to the sunset of Florida's gulf coast to never again be concerned with Stark County government and politics,
• Not convincing the Ohio Supreme Court through (according to the understanding of the Stark County commissioners) quo warranto expert Thomas Rosenberg of Roetzel and Andress/Columbus, Ohio that he is qualified to be Stark County sheriff,

It would be surprising to the SCPR, if the Maier, Jr. group and its "power play" political model  is not in for another failure in the coming days as the lot now falls to Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted to break the tie.

(SCPR Note:  ORC 3501.11(X):  In all cases of a tie vote or a disagreement in the board, if no decision can be arrived at, the director or chairperson shall submit the matter in controversy, not later than fourteen days after the tie vote or the disagreement, to the secretary of state, who shall summarily decide the question, and the secretary of state's decision shall be final.

• The SCPR thinks that there is plenty of legal grist for Husted to base a decision denying Maier ballot status upon.  
• Undoubtedly, there will be those (who The Report thinks will be the pro-Maier side of the Balas-Bratton protest) who will question the basis of the Secretary's decision "as a being a 'politics based' decision," (i.e. a Republican secretary of state siding with Stark County Republican BOE members Braden and Cline).  
• For all of us who believe in "the rule of law," the expectation is that the Secretary will avail himself of the solid case that Balas-Bratton attorney Craig T. Conley put together at yesterday's hearing and "run with it."
• If he does, his decision - obviously, in the opinion of the SCPR - withstand the "certain to come" Ohio Supreme Court challenge to his decision. 
• Should he see things differently than the SCPR does on the merits of the legal arguments made and side with Democrats Ferruccio and St. John, he needs to assess that Ferruccio's legal arguments in support of his decision (not Rosenberg's take on the case) are more compelling than Conley's and therefore likely to be sustained by the Supreme Court.
• It goes without saying that should he decide with the Democrats, that "political bias" is "out-the-window."  However, there will be a legal challenge from the Balas-Bratton side, nonetheless.

The last thing that Stark County needs now is more "instability" on the "who will be Stark County sheriff in futuro.

In short, the SCPR's bottom-line position is that the Secretary must make his decision supportable in law.

If he does so, his ruling should easily withstand any legal challenge.

Boards of Elections as they are presently constructed (the "Cold-War" model) are not changing anytime soon.

For the stability and certainty of Ohio's elections, it is critically important that when Boards of Elections (and the Secretary himself) make decisions, they do so consistent with "the rule of law;" not one which satisfies the political druthers of affected persons and political parties.

THIRD:  THE CONCLUSION & FIRST LEVEL CONSEQUENCES

Power politics (or as some say "the big bluff," likely fails for the Maier political group as controllers of  the Stark County "organized" Democratic Party.

The Stark County Democrats, who have controlled the sheriff's office for 20 years (in the modern era), may not have a candidate in the November, 2014 election.

FOURTH:  ULTIMATE CONSEQUENCES

Can you imagine Republican Larry Dordea waltzing into office unopposed?

FIFTH:  THE FUTURE ON THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE

Larry Dordea ain't no Robert Berens and the SCPR thinks he is likely to do well as sheriff and have the foresight to prepare a respected and politically adroit successor so that the Republicans maintain their grip on the sheriff's office for years to come.

SIXTH:  THE BERENS FACTOR IN THE CURRENT CONFLICT OF WHO IS TO BE SHERIFF OF STARK COUNTY

As it turns out, Robert C. Berens was a Stark County Republican Party nightmare as Stark County sheriff circa 1981 through 1984.

• Berens was an "insurance industry" person who appears to have been ill-prepared to be a sheriff,
• Here is an Internet LINK to an account of the turmoil that seems to have wracked the Berens sheriff's office administration during Berens' years,

But at the time, the Republicans were beside themselves in political joy in that in November, 1980 Berens (an insurance man) took down a yesteryear icon of Stark County Democratic Party "power politics;" namely, George Papadopolous who served as sheriff.

Because of the turbulence of Berens' time as sheriff, it is thought that this Stark County experience prompted Ohio policing officials (e.g. the Ohio State Buckeye Sheriffs' Association, "BSA") to launch an effort to make it that "just not anybody" could run for county sheriff.

SEVENTH:  THE START OF THE VIDEO TRAIL OF THIS BLOG

Yesterday, one George T. Maier's key witnesses was Robert Cornwell of the BSA.

Between Craig T. Conley (representing Balas-Bratton) and Thomas Rosenberg (representing George Maier), for the SCPR's money, it was Conley "hands-down" in terms of the quality of the legal representation evident yesterday.

Kind of amazing to The Report given that Conley is a "piss-ant" local attorney compared to the "eminent" Coumbus-based, Roetzel & Andress associated Thomas L. Rosenberg.

Take a look at the opening Conley and Rosenberg presentations:

For the most part, Friday's protest hearing was "the Balas-Bratton Show" (Conley) inasmuch as she had the "burden of proof" to convince at least three of the four BOE members that George T. Maier to be unqualified under the standards of ORC 311.01.

Maier legal counsel Thomas Rosenberg for the most part was relegated to "poking holes" in the effort by the Balas-Bratton side of the case to - through cross-examining the likes of Ronald "Joe" Myers, George T. Maier, and Robert Cornwell (a representative of the Ohio Buckeye Sheriffs' Association) that in combination, the Maier candidacy to be deficient as a matter of law in that:

• Maier was not a full-time peace officer for the statutorily defined period of time (while Balas-Bratton conceded Maier to be a certified peace officer, she contended that his Harrison County employment in November/December, 2013 "was a sham" in terms of "really" being full-time),
• Maier did not serve in a supervisory capacity at the rank of corporal or above for two consecutive years,
• SCPR Note:  Rosenberg argued that Maier was not required to serve two consecutive (meaning continuous, "unbroken" years) but rather a total of two years within the past five years going back from February 5, 2014,
• Maier has not completed two years or its equivalent of post-secondary education at a State of Ohio certified institution of higher learning (i.e. a college or university or the like),

THE ROBERT CORNWELL TESTIMONY (TAKEN OUT OF ORDER)

As pointed out above, the core of the Maier case, the SCPR believes, is wrapped up in the testimony of one Robert Cornwell.

In his examination of Cornwell, Maier attorney Thomas Rosenberg brought out the following:

• Cornwell is the executive director of the Buckeye Sheriffs' Association (BSA) for over 30 years,
• Cornwell has been with the BSA since 1983,
• Cornwell, as a BSA lobbyist, was instrumental in 1987 in lobbying the Ohio General Assembly to pass ORC 311.01 (somewhat different from the current legislation) so that:
• the likes of Stark County's Robert Berens (1981-1984) could not qualify to become a county sheriff, and
• to raise the professionalism of county sheriffs so as to get legislators to raise their pay grade,
• Cornwell has had experience working with interim Sheriff Tim Swanson (a past president of the BSA [2008]) and the contested George T. Maier,
• Cornwell set up by Rosenberg (challenged by Conley) as being an expert on ORC 311.01,
• SCPR Note:  Cornwell revealed in his testimony that he had worked with state Representative Ron Gerberry (back in the late 1980s whom George's brother Johnnie Jr would become close to when Johnnie was a state legislator in the 1990s)
• Cornwell expressed his opinion that George T. Maier does meet the criteria of ORC 311.01 and therefore is qualified to be a county sheriff,

(SEE VIDEO BELOW)

On the face of it, Rosenberg's examination of Cornwell is quite impressive.

However, when Craig Conley gets done with him, the SCPR thinks the value of his so-called "expert" opinion is diminished considerably as Conley points out that he did not in the BSA amicus (friend of the court) brief in Swanson v. Maier, quo warranto, convince the Ohio Supreme Court that Maier was qualified.

One particularly humorous part of Conley's examination occurs as Cornwell persists in saying that the Supreme Court was wrong in its determination that Maier was unqualified to the point that Conley "pretends" to be convinced that Maier had actually won Swanson v. Maier.

THE SHERIFF RONALD "JOE" MYERS TESTIMONY

There also is Conley's examination of Harrison County Sheriff Ronald J. Myers, who has described himself (Swanson v. Maier, quo warranto deposition) as George Maier's "friend forever."  Myers was purring along just fine - if not believable, at least plausible to those who were "sitting on the edge of their seats" for "something; anything" positive for their man Maier, until Conley got to what is called Form SF 400 (Notice of Police Officer Appointment).

Here is a copy of the form that Conley (see video below) rips into Myers about on the contradiction in dates.

SCPR Note:  The Report has redacted the social security number from the form that Attorney Conley provided.  Conley says that the form came from the packet that Maier attorney Thomas Rosenberg submitted to the BOE as part of Maier's candidacy documents. 

That Rosenberg had this oversight is more than a tad ironical in that in the Swanson v. Maier, quo warranto, he (Rosenberg) filed a formal motion to compel Swanson attorney (Greg Beck) to redact sensitive information which Rosenberg himself had submitted unredacted to the Supreme Court.

Next, the - let's be kind now, Martin, Steve Okey may be reading this blog (be sure to get your grammar and spelling absolutely flawless) -  the "not so good part" of Conley's withering "taking to task" of Myers.

One has to wonder whether or not Myers from the testimony that he gave at Friday's hearing brought some legal problems on himself with the "under oath" contradictions which appear to populate the document (i.e. SF 400) testified upon.  

Highlights of the "not so good part of Myers' testimony" include:

MYERS TESTIMONY ON VARIOUS MATTERS

• Conley opening up with establishing that Myers had testified in his deposition in Swanson v. Maier, quo warranto that Myers have been "good friends forever" (Myers' description),
• Myers first came to know Maier in 1998 when he served as a post commander for the State Highway Patrol (located in adjacent Jefferson County but which also served Harrison County which Myers is "now" (not then) sheriff of,
• Anticipating where Conley may be heading in his interrogation, Myers - early in his testimony - offers a gratuitous offhand remark "friendship has nothing to do with it" (whatever "it" means in Myers mind),
• Note:  Conley frequently throughout the examination is to be observed repeatedly suggesting (The Report's take) that the Myers/Maier relationship was such that "normal" (the SCPR's word) hiring process was truncated and that Myers was part of a scheme whereby the "real" purpose of Maier going from Stark County to Harrison County was "merely" to qualify Maier under ORC 311.01 provisions and therefore under Conley's interpretation of the law was a "sham" hire,
• Note: According to "distancecalculator.com" the distance from Maier's Massillon located home to the Harrison County sheriff's office is 56 miles and on average should take 1 hour and 6 minutes to travel.
• Myers testified that on Friday (to come to the BOE Balas-Bratton protest hearing), it took him about 45 minutes,
• This testimony prompted some amusement when Conley questions whether or not Myers was speeding in making his way from Cadiz to Canton
• On the truncated hiring procedure "special for Maier," 
• After Myers testifies with respect to Maier's initial hire on January 7, 2013 (Maier worked two weekends in January, 2013 in Harrison County) that Harrison County does not have an application for Harrison County deputy process,
• Conley at one point says"  You mean people can just walk in the door and say, "Here I am, hire me,"
• A key (the SCPR thinks) to understanding Maier's rehire in November, 2013 (after his November 6, 2013 ouster as Stark County sheriff by the Ohio Supreme Court) is that out of the January, 2013 hire (when Maier returned to Stark County to take up being Stark County sheriff as the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee appointee [February 5, 2013], Myers put Maier on his "special" deputy list,
• On Maier's "second" hire of November 8, 2013: (two days after he had been removed from office)
• Again, the SCPR's take is that Myers anticipating that Conley was going to focus on more than suggesting that he (Myers) fully understood that he was rehiring Maier for the sole purpose of qualifying under ORC 311.01 to be a county sheriff prefaced his testimony:
• with a recitation of having a need to hire someone because of increased oil and gas exploration and drilling activity in the county, and
• lo and behold! who walks in the door  but one George T. Maier who just happened to be out of work and, what's more, he is already on his list as a "special" deputy,
• "what good fortune Sheriff Ronald J. Myers has, no?"
•  Myers testified that he was getting "one Hell of a deal" (the SCPR words) in rehiring the highly experienced Maier and thereby bypassing locals:
• on as an entry level deputy at base pay (never joined union and did not serve the entire probationary period [one year] ,
•  for a period - as far as he knew - "the foreseeable  future" which, as it turns out was about 30 days" when the Stark Dems reappointed Maier,
• that in having placed Maier on "special" deputy status he was emulating and relying on the judgment of interim Stark County Sheriff Tim Swanson (whom had served in the prestigious role as president of the Ohio Buckeye Sheriffs' Association),
• Myers:  "I felt that if he [Maier] was good enough for Stark County, to be here [under Swanson], he was good enough for Harrison County."
• In a dig, Conley inserts:  "plus, of course, Mr. Maier is your good friend forever, right?"
• Myers:  (incredibly in the view of the SCPR) "that has nothing to do with it."
• Conley points out Myers made a political contribution to Maier ($200, 09/25/2013),
• Conley underscores that though Myers repeats his testimony as needing more deputies because of the oil and gas industry influx he had not advertised his need prior to Maier happening onto the Harrison County scene a second time,
• Myers testified (as to the second hire) that he and Maier never talked (before the fact of his second hire) about a rehire that Maier just showed up and said he needed a job and that was how the second hire went down,
• Myers:  "I didn't know if he was going to be there [on the Harrison County job], 2 weeks, 6 months or 2 years,
• Myers:  Maier was replaced on leaving Harrison County employment on December 5, 2013 about a month and one-half later,
• Myers:  After the Maier hire/rehire circumstance, Harrison County institutes a "new hiring policy,"
• SCPR:  "Hmm?  Why was that necessary?"
• Post-"new hiring policy," guess what?
• Myers posts new hire ad,
• SCPR:  Interesting, no?
• Myers admits that he has not read the entire deputy sheriff union contract.
• SCPR:  Interesting, no?

A "do not miss" video of Conley grilling Sheriff Ronald "Joe" Myers - "friend forever" of George T. Maier:

MYERS TESTIMONY ZEROED IN ON FORM SF 400

In The Report's 40 years as an attorney, I have seen few witness decimations to equal of Craig Conley's grilling of Harrison County Sheriff Ronald "Joe" Myers.

If I were a Harrison County citizen, I'd be mighty upset and full of questions of the county sheriff after viewing his testimony under Conley's cross-examination on Friday.

Part I did not, in the view of the SCPR, do anything to validate Myers as being a credible witness, unless, of course, your name is Sam Ferruccio or Deametrious St. John.

If Part I was bad for the sheriff from "down south," the SCPR thinks Part II was highly devastating to Maier's "friend forever."

The focus of Part II is the SF 400.

The SCPR has taken the full version of SF 400 and extracted key material for the readers of The Report "to 'easily' follow" the Myers testimony elicited by Conley.

It was pretty apparent that Myers was in trouble in terms of explaining to "reasonable minded" audience and BOE members the dates on the SF 400 (re:  the second hire) and dates that he says he had personal conversations with George T. Maier regarding Maier's return to Harrison County after having been ousted as Stark County sheriff by the Ohio Supreme Court.

The form says that everything transpired on November 6th and yet Myers had testified earlier that he first spoke with Maier on November 7th and as the SCPR recalls that Maier "just showed up on the 8th" ready to go to work, no?

Readers, were those Myers' words in the earlier video segment?

Although Maier was not hired until November 8th and Myers testified that he first talked to Maier on November 7th, SF 400 was singed on November 6th AND notarized on November 6th.

Hmm?

Unless the SCPR is missing something, it seems to The Report that he is not entitled to credibility by the Board members (any of them) on:

• the larger issue of whether or not the George Maier hiring was specifically tailored to get him qualified under ORC 311.01 (which both Myers and Maier in their testimony denied was the case), and
• on the specific issue of when the form was prepared,
• Myers suggests if not outright says that while the form says it was signed on November 6th, it was not actually signed on the 6th that the recitation of the 6th was simply a mistake or maybe "on second thought" he did talk with Maier on the 6th.

Hmm?

The problem with Myers' explanation of the date problem simply being a mistake is that IT IS A NOTARIZED DOCUMENT.

It is really, really hard to believe - at least for me, a notary in my own right - that a notary public would make a mistake on what date he/she subscribes the affiant and "actually" with his/her own eyeballs sees the affiant "actually" sign the document

And as it dawns on Myers that Conley has boxed him in, "all of sudden" his previous certainty they (he and Maier) had not talked until the 7th becomes "maybe we did talk on the 6th."  (see the video)

Conley counters:  "So your secretary typed in the wrong date in box 14, you wrote in the wrong date in box 19 and the notary wrote in the wrong date on her notary clause?"

Conley:  Is that what happened?  Three people screwed up on the same document. Is that what happened Sheriff?"

Myers:  "Could have."

Conley:  "I am tempted to say that I have some swamp land for sale, but I am sure... "

Rosenberg:  Objection!

Here is the "exciting" video of Conley and Myers squaring off.  Be sure to see the ending in which Conley asks Myers "rhetorically and sarcastically" (for which Conley apologizes)  "You aren't psychic, are you?"



THE GEORGE T. MAIER TESTIMONY (BY CRAIG CONLEY)

And there is the matter of the testimony of George T. Maier himself, the candidate for Stark County sheriff which is under protest by Cynthia Balas-Bratton.  Ms. Balas-Bratton is a Democratic precinct committeeperson for Massillon's Ward 2A.  Election law requires that the challenge come from a Party member of the candidate being challenged.

Conley "comes out of the box" swinging at SCDP-CC sheriff appointee Maier.

Balas-Bratton makes the following points:

• Maier's candidacy packet to the BOE was 244 pages long.  
• SCPR Note:  By contrast Republican candidate Larry Dordea's packet (The Report is told) was 53 pages long.
• Included in Maier's packet is:
• his policing history going back to the 1980s whereas the requirement is for 5 years,
• what Conley describes as being "atta boy" certificates (honorary awards),

Other points of the  Maier testimony:

• Maier never joined the Harrison County deputies' union because, he said "he was never asked to."
• Maier denies Conley's allegation that he did not seek "union joining information" because he (Maier) knew he was not going to be in Harrison County very long,
• Maier says (in response to a Conley question) that he learned of the Supreme Court's ouster in the morning hours of November 6th but that he did not talk with Sheriff Myers about it until the 7th,
• Maier made only one application for deputy sheriff in Harrison County (the January, 2013 occasion and no other application,
• Maier's attorney (Rosenberg) spars with Balas-Bratton attorney (Conley) over whether or not Conley will be permitted to inquire of Maier regarding certain SCDP-CC appointment candidacy documents (one of which was signed by Stark BOE member Deametrious St. John endorsing Maier's candidacy),
• Maier did confirm a second document (campaigning for the December 11th SCDP-CC appointment) had been submitted to the SCDP-CC but denied that a reference in the document to his November 8 through December 5 Harrison County employment was confirmation that his primary reason for working in Harrison County was to cure his problems with ORC 311.01,
• Maier distinguished "from his perspective" (under Conley questioning) his filing an application with the Stark County Court of Common Pleas (11/26/2013) to one filed (12/06/2013 [one day after his 12/05/2013 resignation from Harrison County) with the SCDP-CC for the SCDP December 11th appointment and that therefore he was not in violation of ORC 124.57.
• Maier contended (in response to Conley questions) that his work:
• at the Ohio Department of Public Safety (second-in-command, first-in-command),
• as the service and safety director for Massillon, and
• as SCDP-CC appointed sheriff (from December 11th on)
• qualified him as a "corporal or above" for the requisite two years under ORC 311.01,
• Maier contended (in response to Conley questions) that documents from Stark State College (SSC) to the effect that were he to enroll in and successfully complete certain minimum course work he likely would be awarded enough additional SSC educational hours for  training in law enforcement over his years in law enforcement to qualify under certain provisions of ORC 311.01,
• Maier admitted that he never had enrolled at SSC

Here is the Maier video



Returning to the stellar "in his own mind" Thomas Rosenberg and his "star" witness Robert Cornwell.

Normally, organizations like these do not like to take sides between policing officials on disputes such as the one between Tim Swanson and George T. Maier.  It is particularly odd that they would do so in light of the fact that Swanson is a past president of the organization.

To the SCPR, it shows that perhaps Johnnie A. Maier, Jr (his Ohio Democratic Party (and George by virtue of having been second (and for a few days, first) in command at the ODPS. may have lingering influence in Columbus that helped them coach the BSA out of it normal neutral position.  

In any event, Rosenberg has his finest hour yesterday when he put Cornwell on the stand.  But that did not last long.  As soon as Conley got his mitts on Cornwell, he methodically went about the business a tearing the BSA lobbyist apart.

Here is video of Cornwall's testimony by Maier attorney Rosenberg:

The SCPR ventures to say that Mr. Cornwell will not be forgetting the Conley cross-examination experience for "a very long time, to wit:

By the end of the examination, Conley "sarcastically" asks him: (paraphrase), "Oh, George Maier won the Swanson v. Maier, quo warranto case?"

As we Stark Countians know, on November 6, 2014 the Ohio Supreme Court ousted George T. Maier notwithstanding the BSA's Cornwell expertise on the origin and the thinking that went into the legislative formulation of ORC 311.01.

THE BACKGROUND - THE "JOHNNIE A. MAIER, JR 'STEAMROLLER EXPRESS'"  (REPEATED [THE ITALICIZED PART] FROM ABOVE AS A REFRESHER)

Back in 2012, when the Maier folks figured out that Mike McDonald's health was not going to allow him - if elected (which he was in November, 2012) as sheriff to take office. 

They likely got to thinking:  "Aha! is this not an opportunity for George T. Maier, Stark County's very own home grown police product to be inserted as Stark County sheriff?"

After all, JAM, the SCPR thinks, had parlayed brother George into being the number 2 in charge at the Ohio Department of Public Safety (ODPS) early in 2007 when victorious Democratic 2006 gubernatorial candidate Ted Strickland took office.

As the-then Stark County Democratic Party chairman, Maier, Jr appears to have used the Party to be in a position to - as Party chairman - to be the very first Ohio county Democratic Party chairman to endorse Ted Strickland in his primary face off against possible opponents (LINK, e.g. Eric Fingerhut)  and Bryan Flannery (LINK) in securing the 2006 Democratic nomination for governor.

Lo and behold!

Guess who gets appointed to be "second-in-command" at the ODHS?

You've got it!  George T. Maier.

Of course, they could not have known it then, but "irony" surfaced again yesterday as Maier's attorney tried:

• to use his 23 months and some odd-days as the "second-in-command" and "seven days as 'first-in-command'" 
• (in the waning days of the Strickland administration) (Strickland lost to Republican John Kasich in November, 2012) 
• plus his stint as the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee appointee (after December 11th)

to overcome Maier's current difficulty as being qualified under ORC 311.01(B)(9)(a), to wit:

(9) The person meets at least one of the following conditions:

(a) Has at least two years of supervisory experience as a peace officer at the rank of corporal or above, or has been appointed pursuant to section 5503.01 of the Revised Code and served at the rank of sergeant or above, in the five-year period ending immediately prior to the qualification date;

Okay, so JAM uses political heft to get his brother appointed to the high reaches of the ODHS, what's next?

Well, after losing out in Columbus any many "local Boys/Girls-wonder" are wont to do, the natural thing to do is to "come back home" and "share with the locals" what they have been missing out on "all these years - away from home," no?

That's what George and eldest brother Johnnie seem to be up to.

First, Johnnie in 2011 got behind Kathy Catazaro-Perry (KCP) to challenge long time mayor (about 28 years) of Massillon Frank Cicchinelli.

Apparently, Cicchinelli underestimated KCP and she took his measure in May, 2011 in the Democratic Primary.  And, of course, Massillon - citywide - being the Democratic stronghold it is, it was a "walk-in-the-park" for her to get elected mayor in November.

• A SPPR Note:  Frank Cicchinelli and Johnnie A. Maier, Jr have been competitors for dominance in Massillon Democratic politics since the days they were students at Kent State University - Stark County campus.

• A SCPR Note:  The Report is told that KCP was calling around on Thursday this week for someone to try to get the ear of Balas-Bratton's attorney to encourage the dropping of the Balas-Bratton protest of Maier's candidacy.

Lo and behold!

Guess who ends up as Massllion's director of public service and safety.

Readers of the SCPR.  You folks are way too smart!!!

You've guessed correctly again:  Indeed!  Hometown "Boy Wonder" George T. Maier.

You folks are impressive!

Again, as if Johnnie, Jr had a "crystal ball" when arranging for little brother George to take over in Massillon, George's stint as safety director show up in yesterday's Balas-Bratton protest of George T. Maier's candidacy hearing.

Bingo!!!

Folks, The Report is not going to repeat.

Just go up 50 lines or so (the gold text area) and read.

BACK TO THE BEGINNINGS

THE BACKGROUND - THE "JOHNNIE A. MAIER, JR 'STEAMROLLER EXPRESS'"

Recall from above:  Back in 2012, when the Maier folks figured out that Mike McDonald's health was not going to allow him - if elected (which he was in November, 2012) as sheriff to take office. 

They likely got to thinking:  "Aha! is this not an opportunity for George T. Maier, Stark County's very own home grown police product to be inserted as Stark County sheriff?"

That's when the Maier "bombast" began:

Here is a George T. Maier ditty when asked whether or not he was interested in becoming Stark County sheriff when in early January, 2013 McDonald let it be known that he was not up to it healthwise to take office as sheriff on January 7, 2013.

The SCPR's take on the Maiers is that they think all they have to do is say something for it to be a fact of life.

And George's "guarantee" statement is indication that he may be infected with the JAM "imperial" virus.

Isn't that what we want as Stark County sheriff?

A guy who might think he sits to "the right hand of the Father?"

From the get-go, it appears to the SCPR that the Maier political clan (with Stark County Dems' chairman being "the torch bearer") realized that there was a "Houston, we have a problem" moment.

But the problem (George's qualification under ORC 311.01) was  "eyes only" for the inner recesses of the Maier political circle, at least early on.

(SCPR Note:  While some of the public officials/public figures appearing on the George T. Maier campaign Finance list below are not necessarily a part of any Maier loyalists club, they have varying degrees of connection and interest in whether or not Maier gets approval to be the Stark County Democratic nominee for Stark County sheriff in November)

SCPR commentary on the people listed (extracted by The Report from Maier's 2013 Annual Campaign Finance Report), is as follows:

• Ronald J. Myers, Harrison County sheriff and witness in Balas-Bratton protest of George T. Maier candidacy,
• policing "Friend Forever,"
• Sam Ferruccio, Stark County BOE member (Democrat), voted Friday to qualify Maier as sheriff candidate,
• Steven P. Okey, Canton attorney and Stark County Democratic Party activist,
• represented Stark Dems chairman Randy Gonzalez and the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee (SCDP-CC) in Darrow/Maier lawsuit in Mandamus immediately prior to the the SCDP-CC's second appointment of Maier as sheriff on December 11th,
• Was cited by Gonzalez before the first Maier appointment (February 5, 2013) as being one of several attorneys who had the opinion that Maier is qualified under ORC 311.01,
• On November 6, 2013, the Ohio Supreme Court found that the February appointment was invalid as being unlawful "from the beginning" and ousted Maier from office,
• Says he represents Stark BOE member and Democrat Deametrious St. John (who voted Friday to qualify Maier) in a Writ of Mandamus/Prohibition (2 each) filed by Balas-Bratton attorney Craig T. Conley with the Fifth District Court of Appeals to have the court remove St. John from considering the Balas-Bratton protest because of pre-hearing statements indicating to Conley that St. John has pre-determined how he was going to vote,
• Conley takes the position that Okey is not allowed to represent St. John in his capacity.  He says the job is that of the Stark County prosecutor, or in the case of conflict-in-interest, the appointment of "special counsel,"
• Jeanette Mullane, Democrat deputy director of the Stark County Board of Elections who sat as the hearing table during the Balas-Bratton protest hearing of Maier's candidacy,
• SCPR Note:  Republican director Jeff Matthews also sat at the hearing table and as chairman of the Stark County Republican Party is part of the process whereby Republican members of the Stark BOE (Cline and Braden [a former Stark GOP chairman]) are appointed,
• Frank Forchione (a Democrat) is the administrative judge of the Stark County Court of Common Pleas who defined who could and who could not apply for the SCDP-CC (the December 11th selection process),
• ruled that "in erring on the side of Democracy," George T. Maier would be allow to apply to the court which he did on November, 26,
• Balas-Bratton attorney Craig Conley has taken the position that Maier is in violation of ORC Section 124.57 in that he was a "classified employee" (by Maier's own statement) on the 26th as a deputy for the Harrison County sheriff,
• Scott Gwin (a Democrat) and a judge on the Fifth District Court of Appeals which had filed with it on Thursday the extraordinary writs referred to above in this blog,
• Randy Gonzalez, chairman of the Stark County Democratic Party and ardent George T. Maier support from the very beginning.
• Gonzalez has openly advocated for and urged SCDP-CC to appoint Maier on both February 5th and December 11,
• Ohio Democratic Party State Campaign Account,
• obviously wants to keep a Democrat in the Stark County sheriff's post as the Party has held the office for approximately 20 years in the latest unbroken cycle of Democratic Party dominance of the office.

The George T. Maier qualification problem could not be kept out of public view.

In order to have a chance at solving "the problem," the Maier insiders needed to involve public officials in their official capacities.

"Right out the chute," loyalist-in-chief and Stark Dems' chairman Randy Gonzalez schedules a meeting "at the Stark County Office Building" with Commissioner Tom Bernabei and interim Sheriff Tim Swanson to explore ways and means to solve George Maier's "problem."

They even get George Maier on the telephone with them as they "brainstorm" ways to make his "guarantee language" stick.

But there one "huge problem," that the Maiers had not counted on.

Really?

What was that?

Sheriff Swanson was working on having his own candidate!

And that candidate was to be Lt. Louis Darrow, a long time employee and highly respected administrator within the Stark County sheriff's department.

With McDonald's resignation of early January, Chairman Randy got busy scheduling a hearing for the SCDP Central Committee (SCDP-CC) to meet and select his successor.

The meeting was set for and took place on February 5, 2013.

In a shocking turn of events, Maier only defeated the heretofore "non-political" Darrow 92 to 84.

The SCPR was taken unawares regarding the amount of opposition to the "let's make George T. Maier sheriff of Stark County within the rank and file of the Party (i.e. the precinct committeepersons).

The Report has leaned since that nearly everybody was surprised at the closeness of the vote.

These so-called "expert" Stark County Democratic politicians (chiefly, tactician and strategist "R." Shane Jackson, remember:  "the political director," Gonzalez and Johnnie A. Maier, Jr.) DID NOT SEE "THE CLOSE VOTE" COMING!

Would anyone expect Jackson, Gonzalez and Maier, Jr. to blame themselves and their candidate for his not being prepared on the 311.01 qualification criteria.  Lou Darrow and Republican candidate Larry Dordea were.  Nobody then nor since has questioned whether not they are qualified to be sheriff under the criteria of 311.01B(8) and (9).

No, the blame (Shane Jackson is likely thinking) belongs on:

• that "evil" Stark County prosecutor John Ferrero (filed affidavit:  saying George T. Maier is not qualified), 
• that evil, evil Stark County sheriff Tim Swanson (filed quo warranto against George T. Maier), and, thirdly 
• that evil, evil, evil Cindy Balas-Bratton for "protesting" the George T. Maier candidacy

and concomitantly denying the Maier political clan their "divine right" to have what they want, when they want it, and whatever manner in which they may wish to use in achieving their "heart of heart" political desires!

That's the SCPR's take on the Maiers and their close-in supporters.

It could be that George T. Maier will eventually become Stark County sheriff.

What Stark Countians should insist upon is that he get there through "the rule of law."

To the SCPR, it is unthinkable that one who aspires to be Stark County's chief law enforcer would try to circumvent the law.

That the Maier political operatives keep trying power politics as a short cut over simply stepping back and crossing all the t's and dotting all the i's seems to the SCPR to put them squarely within Einstein's definition of - let's be nice - "political" insanity.

Johnnie should not be looking to call others crazy.

Maybe, just maybe some self-examination is in order?

His "let's force this" attitude in his apparent mission to drive brother George onward and forward for sheriff is not helpful to the stability of Stark County government.

As we all know, Stark County has been under a lot of duress in recent years beginning in April, 2009.

There are quite a number of Stark Countians who think that the Stark County Democratic Party did not serve the Stark County well in appointing Gary Zeigler as county treasurer in 1999.

And there are citizens who resent what a number of folks consider to be "political bullying" in the Stark Dems' leadership unrelenting effort to impose George T. Maier on the Stark County electorate.

The Report does not expect the Maier political machine to stop its march forward now.

They are way too invested in pushing George through to think of anything but trying make the Machine's political will the reality for all Stark Countians.

In short, the SCPR's take on the Machine's persistence is:  the Stark County public be damned!

On Thursday, Cynthia Balas-Bratton had her attorney file Writs of Prohibition/Mandamus with the Fifth District Court of Appeals.

The primary objective of the action was to get Deametrious St. John removed as a hearing official on the Balas-Bratton protest of the George T. Maier candidacy.

Of course, the filing was not done enough in advance of Friday's BOE protest hearing for the COA to have time and space to respond to Balas-Bratton's request that it remove St. John from the protest consideration.

With the decision of the BOE yesterday, one might think that the Writ action may be moot.

Not so. says Conley.

He plans to leave the case pending.  His thinking is that should the secretary of state vote with the Democrat Stark BOE members, he will pursue having the original vote invalidated by the Fifth District because St. John refused to recuse himself as demanded by Balas-Bratton.

Such a result would revert the Stark BOE to a 2 to 1 vote thereby eliminating the secretary of state having a vote.

One final point on the Maier forces persisting in seemingly doing the same old thing (i.e.the repeated exercise of political power) as the "tool of choice" to make George Stark County sheriff.

What would Einstein say about doing "the same old thing and getting the same result?"