FREE SPEECH RIGHTS HIT DEEP FREEZE IN NORTH CANTON?

UPDATE:  7:40 AM

The Stark County Political Report has learned that at least one North Canton resident will be appearing before the North Canton Zoning Commission this coming Wednesday to weigh in on whether or not the commission should approve a zoning request for a cell tower to be erected on property owned by First Friends Church which is located near Montebello Estates in the northern part of Canton adjacent to the "within North Canton city limits location" of the proposed tower.

And she—though friendly to the allowance of the tower—will not be complying with North Canton law director Tim Fox's edict that her statement of support be done under oath.

She says that a far as she is concerned, her statement will be voice recorded, transcribed and thereby make part of the public record therefore making an "under oath factor" unnecessary.

The "under oath factor" became an issue as a consequence of statements by Law Director Fox in a local area report on the upcoming meeting to the effect that those wishing to address the commission will be asked to do so under oath and subject themselves to cross examination.

Some North Canton residents found cause for alarm in Fox's "under oath" requirement.  Even those who "have no dog" in this fight.

As the SCPR sees it, implied in Fox's statement is that any resident who makes a statement is subject to having the statement disregarded if not given under oath and objected to by legal counsel representing the tower applicant.

Here is exactly what Fox is reported to have said:

“We don’t want to inhibit anyone, we’re not going to prevent anyone from speaking."

“Our rationale is not to inhibit anyone, we just want to get it right the first time."

To some, Fox implied warning of sanction (the objection thing) fits within what the United States Supreme Court has defined as being a "chilling effect" on free expression, to wit;

... our overriding duty [is] to insulate all individuals from the "chilling effect" upon exercise of First Amendment freedoms ... .

(Walker v. City of Birmingham, 388 U.S. 307 (1967) citing Dombrowski v. Pfister, 380 U.S. 479 (1965)

It could be that Fox is correct in this instance that those who want their input to count in the final legal determination of whether or not the tower is allowed may be wise to make their input under oath.

And it could be that he has the best of intentions in looking out for the effectiveness of those who want to weigh-in on the matter.

BUT given his track record in being difficult with North Cantonians who want to their exercise rights under law for openness, transparency, coummunicativeness and accessibility, it reasonably appears that the tower testimony warning is just one more instance of Fox being in his heart of hearts an anti-democratic/republican-prone appointed public official who is following the marching orders of North Canton City Council.

He appears to be a top-down, arbitrary type who comes to government with a military background history and as a lawyer who is used to giving orders/dispensing "to be followed advice" and therefore does not abide the messiness of democratic/republican back and forth kindly.

In short, The Report sees Fox as an imperial type who does not do well in two-way communication.  Moreover, most of North Canton's council members demonstrate the same malady.

Accordingly, his disclaimers on not wanting to dampen citizen participation has a quality of "thou protestest too much!" about them and thereby betraying his true intent.

Here are what a number of North Canton citizens are saying about Fox's reported statements on citizen input in the upcoming Zoning Commission hearing, to wit: (excerpts)

... The last sentence of the article really made me laugh out loud.   Per Fox,  "Our rationale is not to inhibit anyone. - We just want to get it right the first time."  Wait,  hasn't the first time a[l]ready been around.  

----------

... The story reports that Law Director Tim Fox is going to require residents speaking before the Planning Commission to swear an oath and face cross examination.

North Canton Law Director Tim Fox continues to rein supreme and torment the citizens who pay his salary and City Council bows to every pronouncement made by Mr. Fox. 

The actions of Law Director Fox will continue unabated. 

I guess the voters have spoken and they get what they deserve.

---------

... It appears that those who wish to speak before the Panning Commission on Wednesday night, will be asked to swear an oath, and be subject to cross-examination.

I have no problem with the proposed cell phone tower, but these sure seem like bully tactics aimed at keeping people from talking. 

This is certainly not an example of open and honest government. North Canton's elected officials should be embarrassed at this, yet another anti-citizen move perpetrated by Law Director Fox.

----------

... 

Since when is a public speaks portion of a meeting subject to such activity?  Public speaks isn't an interrogation opportunity.  It's the outlet for the public to express concerns.

I'm off the record here but I wanted to be sure you saw this.  Council President Jeff Peters needs to step up and represent the residents and put his foot down and rein in the law director once and for all.  

And if he doesn't, you've got more material to keep moving him right to the top of the top 10 worst list.

As readers of the SCPR know, yours truly has been highly critical of the way North Canton City Council and council enabled Law Director Fox interact with North Canton citizens who question council and/or Fox and/or seek public records of the city.

The only way to correct the North Canton City Council attitude towards citizen activists for one or more of the sitting council persons to be defeated.

A valiant effort was made on November 3rd to do just that.

However, none of the candidate candidate committed to a change of culture on North Canton City Council was elected.

But they should not give up. 

In less than two years, the offending of basic democratic-republican government values seven sitting council members will once again be up for election.

Foltz (Ward 1), Peters (Ward 2), Werren (Ward 3), Fonte, (at-large) Cerreta, (at-large), Griffith (at large) and Kiesling (at-large) all need to be opposed by vigorous challenging candidates in 2017.

Whether or not the current flap is an instance of citizen harassment is open to question.

What is unquestioned is that the current North Canton City Council membership is hostile to critiquing citizen input.

Because voters are largely uninformed about the shenanigans of the likes of the current members of North Canton City Council, challengers need to double down beginning now on changing the knowledge and understanding base of the North Canton voting public.

Then and only then will challengers be in a position to win those election contests.

NORTH CANTON LAW DIRECTOR TIM FOX A "STARK COUNTY" PERSONIFICATION OF OHIO'S CPIC "F" GRADE ON EASE OF GETTING PUBLIC RECORDS!

UPDATE:  5:30 PM

From: Holly Pierpont <holly.pierpont@att.net>
To: tramols@att.net 
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 1:11 PM
Subject: Today's blog

You wrote: "North Canton voters must be some of the most disengaged and ignorant of their self-interest in all of Stark County."

Yep.  I have to wonder what percentage of North Cantonians, who voted to end city paid health insurance three years ago, showed up last week and still re-elected those who basically ignored, disrespected and lied to them.  I believe we can expect nothing but more of the same for many years to come...  

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

Jamie McCleaster <rmccleaster@aol.com>  Today at 5:20 PM

To:  Martin Olson

Martin,

Great blog today! I think this is an accurate assessment of what's happening in North Canton. I think a lot of people would agree that changes need to be made, but sometimes those changes come slower than what people want. Thanks for your honest and accurate reporting.


Jamie

(TOP PART OF GRAPHIC EXTRACTED FROM CPIC WEBSITE)
(HIGHLIGHTING & CHECKMARKS ADDED)

North Canton's elections last Tuesday had to be a huge disappointment to those North Cantonians/Stark Countians/Ohioans who think Ohio government and specifically Ohio's local government should be accessible, open and transparent.

While the SCPR piles on Law Director Tim Fox and thinks this autocrat richly deserves being unloaded upon, it is clear to The Report he is doing the will of North Canton councilpersons Foltz, Peters (council president), Werren, Fonte, Cerreta, Griffith and Kiesling.

North Canton City Council (NCC) is an embarrassment to Stark County's citizenry in terms of being hostile to its citizens on basic democratic-republican values of accessibility, openness and transparency.

Ohio is rated by the highly regarded Center For Public Integrity as deserving of grade F because of "the struggle" Ohioans experience in trying to "obtain public records from state officials."

CFPI investigators need to come the North Canton, Ohio.  Undoubtedly, if they came to North Canton, they would be horrified at the pillaging of the open government rights suffered by North Cantonians.

For North Canton City Council working in cahoots with Law Director Fox have made it like "pulling teeth" for a citizen to get North Canton government public records.

And the SCPR includes North Canton mayor David Held (ran unopposed last Tuesday) for not showing more leadership in publicly taking North Canton Council and Fox to task for their obvious hostility to any North Canton citizen who appears to looking into North Canton matters and their look might prove to be embarrassing to elected and/or unelected North Canton government officials.

Held implies in conversations with the SCPR that he disapproves of the anti-citizen attitude demonstrated by Fox in his apparent compliance with the seeming "wish of council mandate" to him, but Held does very little of a concrete nature to give credibility for his finessed rhetoric.

The only thing that Held has done of note in this regard is to force the release in February, 2014 of Tim Fox's legal opinion  (LINK)  to council members that North Canton's 72% voter approved health care ordinance was illegal.

But that was January, 2014.  He sat on his duff from November, 2013 until then and let North Cantonians uninformed as to why council was dragging its feet in complying with the North Canton voting public's desire on the matter of part-time council members not being eligible for taxpayer subsidized family coverage.

North Canton voters must be some of the most disengaged and ignorant of their self-interest in all of Stark County.

All that was needed in last Tuesday's election was for one of the challengers as among Pierpont (Ward 2; Peters), Hoagland or Osborne (Ward 3; Werren), McCleaster (at large; Cerreta, Griffith, Kiesling) and even perhaps Snyder (Ward 4; Fonte) to be elected and Mr. Fox's apparent mandate of foisting barrier after barrier after barrier on requesters of North Canton government records would come to a rapid end.

The SCPR trusts that the 2015 incumbent council member challengers will continue their campaigns unabated through to the general election of 2017.

North Canton voters seem to be some exceptionally ignorant in that they cannot see that the denial of others of core democratic-republican core values will likely one day come back on any of them who want the check up on the inner workings of North Canton government.

Also in for a tongue lashing at the hand of The Stark County Political Report are the core Stark County members of the county's delegation to the Ohio General Assembly.

Oeslager (Republican, Ohio Senate, 29th) in particular should ashamed of Ohio "F" grade on public records.

Seemingly, many, many, many years ago he made a name for himself as someone who fought for open records in Ohio has gotten "fat, dumb, happy and disinterested" on this issue and in representing almost all of Stark County (except extreme eastern Stark County).

A couple of years ago he outright rejected a plea from Canton officials to come to Canton City Council to discuss fiscal problems (he was then chairman of the Senate Finance Committee) saying "he was too busy."

Schuring (Republican, Ohio House, 48th) did heed Canton's plea, but proved ineffective in helping not only Canton but other Stark County political subdivisions.  Moreover, he has shown to inclination whatsoever to push for legislative enhancement of fundamental democratic-republican system values.

Hagan (Republican, Ohio House, 50th) seems totally disinterested in doing anything but pushing the agenda of the far right Republican-religious fringe group.

Slesnick (Democrat, Ohio House, 49th; term-limited out after the current legislative session) has been a total waste in terms of being productive for Cantonians/Stark Countians as a member of the Ohio House.

He does have the excuse of being a member of the House Democratic Caucus which because of their exceedingly low numbers get steam-rollered by the supermajority Republicans.

But the SCPR's take on Slesnick is that were he a member of the Republican supermajority he still would be ineffective because is political competence level is a near zero.

Mark the SCPR's word, Slesnick now that he has been a part of government is looking frantically at a way to stay on the taxpayer role.  He is now "entitled," is he not?

All any of Stark's Ohio General Assembly members have to do is to go to the Center for Public Integrity website and pick those aspects of the F grade which make the F grade an F grade and initiate legislative corrective action, to wit:

The foregoing are the "0" scores in the march to Ohio getting a grade F at the hand of the prestigious Center for Public Integrity.  There are moreover other questions that score 25, 25, 50 and 50 which, of course, are failing grades.

Only one of the questions was graded as passing and that question was only scored at 75 which in most grading circles is a middle level C.

So Oelslager, Schuring, Hagan and Slesnick have plenty to work on - if they care about enhancing the rights of North Cantonians, Stark Countians and Ohioans having a greater degree of open government.

And "if they care" is the appropriate overall question to put to Stark County's legislative delegation.

A F grade coupled with their inaction in remediation of a deficiency that has been of many years duration which, if they are aware legislators, have known about or should have known about indicates to the SCPR that they do not care about making all levels of Ohio government more responsive to Ohioans.

On top of the Ohio General Assembly's disinterest you have a North Canton City Council who through its law director takes full advantage of the legislative low priority for fundamental democratic-republican government accountability values.

Shame on North Canton's city council.

Shame on Mayor David Held.

Shame on legislators Oelslager, Schuring, Hagan and Slesnick.

And shame on North Canton voters for not being aware enough to place at least one caring citizen on the North Canton City Council to begin the process of reining-in the rest of council and their beholden law director Tim Fox!

BREAKING NEWS! OSBORNE & CITIZEN ACTIVISTS WIN APPEAL WITH JUDGE FARMER OVER NORTH CANTON LAW DIRECTOR TIM FOX

JUDGE FARMER'S DECISION POSTED

 AT END OF BLOG

Court Rules against North Canton

• cosborne@neo.rr.com
• Today at 1:31 PM
  

...

Hello Martin,

My attorney, Robert Cyperski, called first thing this morning to relay good news that Judge Farmer has ruled in our favor in our quest to get City Council to hear our appeal of the Planning Commission's decision on the Hoover District South Parking lot expansion. Will send court decision when I receive it.

While North Canton Law Director Tim Fox is not listed as counsel of record (but it will be interesting to see North Canton's pleadings which are not available on the clerk of court's website) on the online docket of the Stark County Court of Common Pleas, you can be sure that Fox was in the thick of things on advising North Canton City Council (North Canton Planning Commission/Mayor David Held) on matters related to the Osborne-led citizen appeal on the Hoover District South Parking lot expansion.

The SCPR is making a big deal out of this turn of events because North Canton government officials and Fox trumpet it when Fox and North Canton win in other litigation that Osborne has been involved in since Fox became law director in September, 2012.

From yours truly's perspective, if one chortles on wining (LINK 1) (LINK 2); then you need to own it when you lose.

This is a case that North Canton government obviously on the advice and counsel of Director Fox did not comply with the law.

Is there any chance that Fox or his unnamed adviser will highlight this development on North Canton's website?

THE WRITTEN OPINION/DECISION 
OF 
JUDGE KRISTIN FARMER

IS IT "DO OR DIE TIME" FOR NORTH CANTON LAW DIRECTOR TIM FOX AS A PUBLIC OFFICIAL?

UPDATE: 5:05 PM

Chuck Osborne comments:

From: Chuck Osborne [mailto:cosborne@neo.rr.com]
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 10:29 AM
To: Martin Olson
Subject: My Remarks to Today's Post

 

Hello Martin,

 

I would like to make a few remarks regarding today’s post. You have done numerous “posts” regarding North Canton Law Director Tim Fox and his (Fox) arrogance and hostility to the citizens of North Canton.

 

You state that Mayor David Held and a majority of Council members concur with the view that Fox needs to turn over a new leaf. How many times have you reported that City officials had to ask Mr. Fox to “straighten up and fly right” as one might say?

 

When is enough enough?

 

I think your comment that “Osborne can and does get dug in and there is only one way, his way” is misconstrued.

 

What else can one do after the facts have been gathered, than to come to a logical decision on an issue and take a position?

 

Would you say that 72% of the voters of North Canton dug their heels in when they voted in favor of an initiative to deny part-time elected officials health insurance benefits at taxpayer expense?

 

I have talked to a lot of citizens over the years and when they are given the facts, they will take a position on an issue. Are they then “dug in?”

 

For many years, I have researched issues and after gathering the facts, have taken a position, only to be attacked for standing in support of the position.

 

What happens when other North Canton citizens, gather facts and take a position on an issue? As with me, they too are being attacked for “digging in” and holding to their position.

 

If one has not caught on to the pattern of attacks in North Canton, it is not just Osborne. Now it is Jamie McCleaster and Miriam Baughman. It is anyone who dares stand up on an issue contrary to what North Canton government wants its citizens to think.

 

You say discussion and attempts to remedy complaints are always better than litigation. I wholeheartedly agree!

 

Did North Canton officials really care to remedy citizen complaints regarding a salary increase in 2013 passed as “emergency” legislation “necessary for the preservation of health, safety and peace of the City of North Canton”?

 

No!

 

Thus, the lawsuit was filed.

 

Ohio’s Auditor of State has cited North Canton on numerous occasions over the years for the excessive use of “emergency” legislation.

 

In regards to the healthcare initiative, did North Canton City officials want to recognize the right of citizens to propose and pass their own laws?

 

They did not, thus the litigation filed by the City, not me.

 

Previous to Mr. Fox becoming law director, two North Canton Law Directors had no objections to the healthcare initiative when presented to the City in May of 2012.

 

Interestingly enough, it was a North Canton Law Director with over 24 years-experience as the City’s Law Director who sent the issue to the Stark County Board of Elections.

 

As you point out in today’s post, the City will not even participate in mediation offered by the Ohio Attorney General regarding a simple public records request.

 

City officials in North Canton have no respect for any citizen who takes a position contrary to their official position.

 

It does not make a difference whether that citizen is Chuck Osborne, Jamie McCleaster, or Miriam Baughman.

 

When Mr. Tim Fox was appointed to be the City’s first full-time law director in September of 2012, they chose someone who would carry out their attacks on citizens with a vengeance.

 

For political expediency, I expect Law Director Fox will ultimately pay the price for his actions and Fox’s reign of terror as law director will be ended.

 

And hopefully, the voters will see that the councilmembers who have fostered this kind of atmosphere and ignored the healthcare mandate of the voters will also pay a price for their actions and be voted out of office this November.

 

Thanks,

Chuck Osborne

ORIGINAL BLOG

The Stark County Political Report has learned that North Canton Law Director (unelected, appointed by North Canton City Council) could be nearing the end of his time as the city's legal counsel.

As The Report interprets the words of Mayor David Held in a conversation with him yesterday, Fox must adjust from having been in the private sector to being a public official or else it is likely that North Canton government will be asking him to move on from North Canton public employment as not being the right fit in terms of his temperament and concomitantly his ability to relate responsively and respectfully to community activists who make requests (e.g. public records) of North Canton officials.

Held did not state how long Fox has to show that he has has had "a road to Damascus experience."  However, the SCPR gets the impression that Fox's conversion had better happen soon indeed.

On September 18, 2012 Fox was sworn-in by then-former law director Roy Battista.

The SCPR's take is that Battista was the last law director that North Canton has had who had the confidence of North Canton's administration, its city council and the citizens of the city.

The first thing Fox should have done, which it appears he did not do, is to have sat down with Battista and vet him on the "ins and outs" of being a successful law director in all the dimensions that being law director entails.

From a legal technician standpoint, a number of Stark County jurists (attorneys and judges) rate Fox as being first rate.  One of his high marks from the standpoint of some if not all current city council members and Mayor Held is his sterling track record in winning lawsuits initiated by community activist and Ward 3 council candidate in November's general election Chuck Osborne.

One might think that building on his winning ways vis-a-vis Osborne on his lawsuits, Fox really, really, really over estimated his support by North Canton government elected officials.

Seemingly, think himself unaccountable, he stepped up the ante in terms of arrogating to himself the authority to direct a taxpayer paid for webpage rendition that some North Cantonians saw as a political attack on Osborne,  Jamie McCleaster (a council-at-large candidate in November's election) and Miriam Baughman.

Fox has denied to area media that he ordered the publication in support of incumbent councilpersons being challenged by McCleaster and Osborne saying that he was encouraged by an unnamed person to do so.



Who believes that Fox was merely being informative?

Who believes that he acted at the suggestion of an anonymous person?

More believable is a premise that he thought he was so in control in North Canton government that he could virtually do anything he wished, acting on his own.

It was David Held who ordered him to take down the webpage.

That had to be a shock for Director Fox for the SCPR is told by another highly reliable North Canton source in a position to know that Held has been Fox's most dedicated supporter for his nearly two years as law director.

Held himself told the SCPR that he tries to be patient with members of his administration.

However, it is clear to yours truly that Held's patience is running thin with Fox's perceived by the public anti-citizen stance as evidenced by what the SCPR thinks have been "way over the top" Fox denials in too many instances of public records requests.  And, Held, says that he is confident that a majority of council's views concurs with view that Fox needs to turn over a new leaf.

Administration officials and a number of councilpersons are upset with the expense borne by  North Canton government in complying with the voluminous Osborne in particular public records requests.

And, on the litigation expenses in fending off Osborne lawsuits, Held says that North Canton has had to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars.

But what about Osborne and his "out-of-pocket-costs" in initiating litigation?

No mention of this by administration officials or council members.  Interesting, no?

How many citizens are willing to spend their own money sticking up for the public interest?

Held suggests that Fox's webpage was a frustration reaction of the law director.

The SCPR can see North Canton's perspective.  And Law Director Fox's too.

But The Report is persuaded by Held's other point he repeatedly made in the conversation referred to above,  to wit:  such is the nature of holding public office, elected and unelected, and therefore being a government official is not for everyone.

As for the government litigation expense matter, that too is a common part and parcel part of being a public entity.

Perhaps if he law director, mayor and members of council had a "come let's reason together," there would be less litigation.

Perhaps, not.

Osborne can and does get dug in and there is only one way, his way.

The SCPR supports discussion and attempts to remedy complaints short of litigation with both sides approaching a controversy with a predisposition to resolving a given matter without resort to the courts.

And the admonition on a conciliatory attitude not only applies to North Canton officials but also to the likes of Chuck Osborne.

It appears that Fox is being currently assessed as to whether or not he can adjust to the realities of being a public official.

However, Fox may have stepped over the line with the webpage faux pas and should an incumbent councilperson or two or three or perhaps even five win in November, it could be that Fox will not get a chance to repent and mend in relationship with the citizen activist community.

One would think that should either McCleaster and/or Osborne and perhaps Holly Pierpont (running against council president and Ward 2 Councilman Daniel "Jeff" Peters) and maybe even Kathy Snyder (running in Ward 4 against councilman appointee Dominic Fonte) might join together to call for the political head of Fox no matter what "born again" conversion he might claim or demonstrate.

Osborne and McCleaster for sure would have to be skeptical of a 180 degree turn around.

Snyder might have motivation too because the reliance on her husband Jon on Fox's opinion as law director on Snyder's eligibility (also councilpersons Kiesling, Werren and Peters) in the legal sense of the word to have the city pay for his/their healthcare insurance benefits.

The Report thinks Snyder resigned first as council president and then as Ward 4 councilman because of the uproar over the healthcare issue.

Was it the Fox healthcare ordinance validity opinion letter the culprit?

Fox's opinion (November 15, 2013; released by Mayor Held on February 27, 2014) came in the aftermath of North Canton voters having voted about 72% in favor of an ordinance initiative referendum by Osborne in the November, 2012 general election which was designed to deny part time elected officials health insurance benefits at taxpayer expense.

For quite a period after issuing the opinion, North Canton officials (including Fox; citing attorney/client privilege) refused to release a copy of the opinion.  Eventually, Mayor Held did yield to public pressure and released the opinion.

Subsequently, North Canton's council directed Fox to file litigation (a declaratory judgment action) with the Stark County Court of Common Pleas Court.   Judge John Haas decided the case.  A source tells yours truly that the source thinks the reason for Haas' favorable to North Canton decision ran deeper than the reason(s) given in the judge's published opinion.

What might that deeper reason be?

Hmmm?

Now there is a new controversy between Fox and Osborne on a public records request.

From: Chuck Osborne <cosborne@neo.rr.com>
To: Martin Olson <tramols@att.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2015 3:40 PM
Subject: FW: North Canton Declines Mediation Request Regarding Recent Public Records Request

Hello Martin,
I apparently overlooked you when I first sent this out.

Now you have it.

Chuck

From: Chuck Osborne [mailto:cosborne@neo.rr.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2015 9:36 PM
To: ...

Hello Guys,

Attached is an email I received today from the offices of the Ohio Attorney General informing me that the City of North Canton has declined to participate in mediation to resolve the City’s refusal to provide Public Records - for addresses of purchasers of pool passes to Dogwood Pool in 2014.

I was attempting to determine what percentage of pool passes were purchased by residents of North Canton versus patrons from outside the City, as the Dogwood Pool is a municipal pool for City residents.

I include a second email, dated November 19, 2014, also from the offices of the Ohio Attorney General informing me that the City of North Canton has declined to participate in mediation to resolve the City’s refusal to provide Public Records – a copy of an agreement for outside legal services.

In that request I was trying to determine the scope of legal services to be performed by an outside attorney and the hourly rate of pay for those services.

Once again, City Officials close out the “Public” from the public’s business.

Maybe City Hall should just hang out a sign that reads, “DO NOT DISTURB, WE ONLY WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU AT ELECTION TIME.”

Such is Life in the Dogwood City.

SAD times for the citizens of North Canton!!!
(note:  larger text emphasis added)

Awful, just awful!

"[T]he City of North Canton has declined to participate in meidation to resolve the City's refusal to provide public records ... . "

As the SCPR understands the Ohio attorney general's (OAG) mediation offer, the process is that:  an offer.  No obligation to accept the attorney general's recommendation.  Why wouldn't somebody (in this case Law Director Fox) be willing to sit down and talk about reaching a mutually agreeable solution?

Held tells the SCPR the refusal to do OAG's conciliation service is because Fox is convinced that he is correct on the law of the matter and therefore what is there to talk about?

Recently, Ohio's auditor David Yost started up a program to help citizens like Osborne carry a public records matter further.

The SCPR then suggested that Osborne try on the State of Ohio Sunshine Audit for size:

And Osborne followed up on the suggestion, to wit:

From: Melissa J. Crocker [mailto:MJCrocker@ohioauditor.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2015 3:40 PM
To: Chuck Osborne
Subject: Sunshine Audit

 

Dear Mr. Osborne:

 

Per our telephone conversation, the Auditor of State’s Office is reviewing your Sunshine Audit complaint and will be sending out a letter with our findings in the near future.

 

Thank you,

Melissa Crocker

  

The SCPR applauds Auditor Yost for devising the program.

Hopefully, Osborne's effort will pay dividends.

North Canton's interaction with Yost's office will be an indication of whether or not Held's "adjust or else" admonition to Law Director Tim Fox has been heard by him.

As Ms. Crocker promises:  we should know in the near future.

Fox is now on notice that like or not North Canton's government is no longer will to abide his anti-democratic republican attitudes vis a vis the North Canton public no matter who the citizen might be.

The next move is Fox's.

Will he "adjust" or will it be "or else?"

NORTH CANTON COUNCIL ALLOWS FOX TO HOUND democracy EXERCISING CITIZENS?????

UPDATED AT 11:39 AM

The Stark County Political Report takes a break today from it first quarterly update of the SCPR Stark County Political Subdivision "Top 10" Elected Officials to focus on the political carnage being allowed if not fostered by North Canton City Council on The Dogwood City's core activist citizens at the hand of the city's law director Tim Fox.

The graphic for today's blog is made up in part of excerpts from a web page The Report is told was put up by Law Director Tim Fox within the last week or so and then quickly taken down when a furor erupted from among certain persons from within the North Canton citizenry.

Undoubtedly, Fox has some disingenuous reason for having put the page up, if, in fact, he did so.

The SCPR thinks the page was published in order to make the likes of McCleaster, Baughman and Osborne appear to be trouble makers just for the sake of being trouble makers and therefore not productive of the public good.

Moreover, the reference to Fox's success rate in winning litigation (will outside legal help in some instances) initiated by Chuck Osborne appears to the SCPR to be a public relations-esque effort to make Fox to seem to be some kind of legal juggernaut that somehow establishes that Osborne is out there somewhere in la-la land with his legal challenges.

Osborne has been the butt of such discrediting and disparagement by various North Canton officials efforts ever since he served on council himself in the early 2000s but failed to win reelection.

While the SCPR does not think Osborne has developed the skills to deal effectively with the "let's smear Chuck Osborne" crowd of detractors (many of whom The Report are supposedly politically mature sitting councilpersons), he certainly is the most expert and knowledgeable person on the ins and outs, the ups and downs of North Canton government except perhaps for former mayor and councilperson Daryl Revoldt.

He works far harder than any of the sitting councilpersons to ensure that North Canton government is transparent so that North Cantonians can know the truth of what goes on in the city's local government entrails and thereby be in a position to assess whether or not it is a government that can be trusted to provide for the general welfare of the city's residents.

Fox's alleged city of North Canton webpage effort smacks of as being, perhaps, a case of using taxpayer money to support the candidacies of councilpersons who supported his initial appointment and who continue to support him to be retained as law director.

Ohio's campaign finance officials should conduct an investigation as to whether or not there is a promotion of political candidates in the 2015 councilperson elections and the also the converse of it being directed towards detracting from the filed candidacies of McCleaster and Osborne and perhaps the potential candidacies of others.

Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted and perhaps Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine should be taking a look at the  whys and the wherefores of how the page came into being and concomitantly whether or not any campaign finance laws may have been broken as a consequence of the page being published which of course would necessitate of a finding that taxpayer monies where used inappropriately.

Husted and DeWine need to clear the air on this matter.

Even it is borne out that no campaign finance laws have been violated, the SCPR thinks it is shameful that North Canton government financed by citizens of North Canton (included in part, of course, McCleaster and Osborne) should have countenanced the use of the city's website for obvious to the SCPR dissing of McCleaster, Baughman and Osborne.

Here is a copy of the entire webpage said to contain material developed by Fox and/or his office which appears to have vanished.



Let's turn to the smiling mayor David Held pictured in the pdf file and below as annotated by the SCPR.
 
As far as the SCPR is concerned there is nothing to smile about in terms of Mayor Held's protecting of Law Director Tim Fox and his obvious antagonism to North Canton citizens and their desire for "a transparent government" so they can get to "the truth of matters governmental" in North Canton a know whether or not North Canton "is worthy of being trusted" by its people.

Let's take another look at the smiling David Held:

 Now to get behind the smile.

Focus on the highlights of his message as added by the SCPR.

"[A] local government that offers a climate of:

• cooperation,
• teamwork, and
• OPENNESS (emphasis added)

to all residents."

Really!

Yours truly has talked with Held literally for hours upon hours over the seven plus years of publishing The Stark County Political Report.

In the course of recent conversations, The Report has asked Held point blank the question of when North Canton is going to get a handle on Law Director Tim Fox and rein him in in his obvious hostility towards any North Cantonian who is not cheerleading for the administration he is part of and for the city council members who hired him from its midst after he served only a few months as Ward 3 councilperson after being elected in November, 2011.

The answer?

A song and a dance!

Held is a one smooth communicator who says very little if anything of substance about solving the lack of trust that a number of North Cantonians have in North Canton government.

There is no doubt to The Report that Held knows better than what he is promoting and producing in terms of transparency in North Canton government as North Canton's chief executive.

It is clear to the SCPR that for whatever reason Held is completely in sync with at least a majority of North Canton city council members who The Report has believed from the inception of Fox's hiring hired him with the understanding that he would play hardball with the likes of North Canton citizens Jamie McCleaster, Miriam Baughman, Chuck Osborne and others.

And "others" would pretty much including anybody including yours truly who has the audacity to expect transparency in government.

It is only through transparency that we citizens get to the truth of any given matter. It is a constant battle with government at all levels to get the truth out.  For citizens to trust government, we must be convinced that transparency is the default standard of government.

Held presents the appearance of transparency but in reality he is a "smoke and mirrors" guy.

Council itself rather flagrantly its majority support (four members or more) of Fox does an "in your face" to any North Cantonian who merely suggests a critical demeanor vis-a-vis North Canton government.

And, of course, Stark County's only countywide newspaper (The Repository) lets Held, council and Fox get away with the trashing of transparency.

For Fox to have included The Repository on his list was a deceptive maneuver, The Report thinks, designed to make it appear that he was not singling out McCleaster, Baughman and Osborne.

Every year the newspaper industry promotes "Sunshine Week."

And The Repository does pro forma, obligatory support of that week.

However, where "the rubber meets the road," the SCPR thinks that The Rep has a incestuous relationship with "the powers that be" in Stark County government and therefore cannot be counted upon to smoke out and condemn anti-citizen attitudes/actions that develop at various political subdivison levels of Stark County government.

The Stark County Political Report salutes the likes of McCleaster, Baughman, Osborne and other community activists sprinkled across Stark County for:

• the time and effort they give their respective communities to keep government sunshine filtering through, and 
• the disparagement they sustain at hands of the likes of Tim Fox and certain members of North Canton council

If there is to be an improvement in transparency in North Canton government, it will be because of their effort and as a consequence of one or more of them being elected to office in November.

To their extra credit, McCleaster has filed to run for North Canton councilperson-at-large and Osborne has filed to run in Ward 3 (against Stehanie Werren, wife of Canton Municipal Court Stark County Republican Party appointed Judge Curtis Werren).

McCleaster in particular has the skills to insist that Fox be relegated to what the SCPR thinks is a more appropriate role as law director.

Moreover, the wife of former Ward 4 councilman Jon Snyder has filed to run in Ward 4.

The Report does not know where sitting councilman, appointed (by the rest of council), Dominic Fonte stands on reining Fox in, but it is not encouraging that he seemingly just sits by and watches the pillaging of basic democratic-republican values.

Can we expect Kathy Snyder to make an issue of Fonte's silence and inaction?

Let's hope!

But so far there are only three council seats under challenge.

It will take four committed to restructuring Fox's role to get the job done (see LINK).

There needs to be candidates in Ward 1 (Foltz) and Ward 2 (Peters).

Peters (currently council president) along with Councilperson Marcia Kiesling, The Report believes, are the strongest proponents of letting the unelected Fox pretty much run North Canton government unchecked

There is still time for others to file for council and PLEASE SOMEBODY FILE TO RUN AGAINST DAVID HELD!

Nobody should get a free ride in our system of government.

Held goes to great lengths to distance himself from what appears to yours truly to be politically inspired shenanigans from some in North Canton government directed at McCleaster, Baughman and Osborne.

But are his protestations believable?

In a couple of recent conversations with Held, he made to borrow from Vice President Joe Biden "a really fu**ing big deal" out of Fox having not been on the losing side of any of Citizen Osborne's litigation against North Canton.

That's why the SCPR questions Held's sincerity in appreciating the activism of McCleaster, Baughman, Osborne et al though he disagrees with much of what they are trying to do (The Report's take).

The Report can see it in the mind's eye.

Fox, Held, Peters, Werren, Kiesling and Griffith high-fiving one another when the 5th District Court of Appeals came down with a decision on the health care insurance coverage case affirming Judge Haas of the Stark Court of Common Pleas declaratory judgment to the effect that the overwhelming vote of North Cantonians was not recognizable under the Constitution of Ohio.

To reiterate, here is what North Canton government (purportedly Law Director Fox) posted recently.

And here is the cause for celebration.



And here is Osborne's rebuttal:

I would like to point out that my purpose in the litigation over the healthcare litigation was to get the court to uphold Ohio's constitutional right of initiative.

I had already won on this issue before the City started the litigation. North Canton's part-time elected officials no longer have taxpayer subsidized cadillac healthcare coverage.

In the two-year cycle of this term of City Council, this has saved taxpayers by my estimate, $500,000. Until this point, it is disappointing to realize that our court care so little about democracy, the Ohio Constitution and the will of the voters.

Further, they totally fail at understanding the meaning and definition of words in the English language. The word "shall" does not convey exclusivity.

I was fighting for principle in court. Sorry the court cannot uphold the principles of democracy.
I accomplished my goals despite Law Director Tim Fox and a City Council members whose priority was to serve themselves above the electorate.

A half-million dollars and counting for taxpayers.

NORTH CANTON COUNCIL SHOWS ITS ANTI-CITIZEN STRIPES - ONCE AGAIN

Does the sun ever shine in North Canton?

Of course!  How else could the city be dubbed "The Dogwood City?

Just not in the chambers of North Canton City Council nor within the law director's office in city hall located at 145 North Main Street in the heart of the city at Maple Street and North Main.

Undoubtedly, North Canton was in full bloom with American flags at its recently held Memorial Day activities.

Properly and fittingly honoring those who gave "their last full measure" preserving and protecting the unparalleled freedoms we Americans enjoy in our cherished democratic-republican system of government better than 225 years ago.

Tragically, it does not seem that the spirit of Memorial Day seeps into the confines located at 145 North Main.

A week past Memorial Day, 2015; North Canton City Council passed an ordinance described by The Repository's Robert Wang (North Canton City Council, meeting of June 1) thusly:

Approved a new Personal Information Policy that Councilman Dan Griffith, at-large, said would allow for the discipline of city employees who release private, personal information contrary to state law. 

Law Director Tim Fox said former Councilman Chuck Osborne has made a public-records request for the names and addresses of everyone who has purchased a Dogwood Pool pass [last] year. 

He said the policy is necessary to help prevent a city employee from releasing information about minors with pool passes, which state law allows a city to decline to release.  (restructured for ease of readability)

Hmm?

Seems to the SCPR that the law as yet another move by unelected Law Director Tim Fox endorsed by elected council members to blot the sun of transparency from the skyline of North Canton.

Osborne, who is a candidate for the Ward 3 seat of council,

• currently held by Republican Stephanie Werren,
• wife of appointed Canton Municipal Court judge Curtis Werren, and also 
• recently appointed as director of the Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce Leadership Stark County) 
• one of seven councilpersons voting for the Councilman Dan Griffith (Republican-at-Large)  initiative

says he is willing to have the names redacted as he only wants to know how many non-North Cantonians are using the city's Dogwood Pool paid for by North Canton taxpayers.

If North Canton Council members and Director Fox had one "come let's reason together" bone in their respective bodies, then they would extend government processes to accommodate  Osborne's request and still protect that which needs to be protected.

Fox, Griffith and the rest of council can talk about preventing/disciplining the release of:

• private, personal information contrary to state law,
• information about minors

until they are "blue in the face," but the SCPR for one is not buying that such is the true reason for
the legislation and the denial of Osborne's request.

The Report has written numerous blogs about North Canton City Council as being Stark County's most antagonistic deliberative body vis-a-vis its constituent public.

Recently yours truly designated members Dan "Jeff" Peters (as seventh worst):

•  a Ward 2 Republican and president of council

and Marcia Kiesling (as the second worst):

• a council-at-large Republican
• long term since the early 2000s
• except for the 2005-2007 term

being among Stark County's worst elected public officials principally because of their role individually and representationally in leading the way in developing a culture of adversarialness as part of the sinew of council in relation to citizen activists.

As The Report sees the situation, Fox is doing what is expected of him by at least a majority of council member (that being four members) and that his dominance in North Canton government is a consequence of an abrogation by council of their responsibility in North Canton "strong council" form of local government to control the unelected administrative processes of the city's government so as to ensure that those processes are:

• open, 
• accessible, 
• accountable, 
• communicative, 
• transparent, and 
• responsive 

to the citizens of North Canton.

Last night's action is additional evidence of North Canton Council's hostility towards any citizen of the city that wants a full measure of democratic-republican enhancing government made available.

Only when some (preferably four) of the seven are replaced, can North Cantonians expect a re-emergence of democratic-republican values in North Canton government.

THE "POLITICALLY" DISGRACEFUL NORTH CANTON CITY COUNCIL CONTINUES TO SHIELD LAW DIRECTOR TIM FOX?

UPDATE:  07:45 AM

VIDEOS

"ENCORE" SCPR VIDEO

FEATURING

NORTH CANTON LAW DIRECTOR

"TIM FOX"

A refrain that The Stark County Political Report keeps hearing from various councilpersons across Stark County is that pretty much "law directors are to be seen and not heard."

Especially this is the case in localities where a law director is appointed by city council as is done in North Canton.

Being "elected" officials which Tim Fox is not, the likes of Alliance's Jennifer Arnold, Canton's Joe Martuccio and Massillon's Perry Sergios are going to make sure they are heard inasmuch as they have to justify their reelection.

But even they "take-a-back-seat" to council during council's public meetings.

One North Canton activists notes that on reviewing North Canton council's meeting transcripts, it is apparent that Fox is a lead vocal participant in North Canton City Council meetings.

The Stark County Political Report suspects that when North Canton City Council hired Tim Fox as law director (September, 2012) thus plucking from his place on council his having defeated the-then incumbent and Republican councilman Jeff Davies (Ward 3) in the November, 2011 general election that there was an understanding (perhaps of the "wink and nod" variety) that Fox would be "the heavy" for council in whipping a very active community activist corps into line.

One of if not the lead proponent for hiring Fox, it appears to the SCPR, was Ward 2 councilman Jeff Peters who has succeeded to presidency of council with pre-the-resignation of long time Councilman Jon Snyder in June, 2014 over a flap about health care coverage.   His resignation was preceded weeks earlier by his stepping down as council president.

An irony in Snyder's resignation was his reliance on a Fox interpretation of law that a health care coverage ordinance (passed at over 70% voter approval rating in November, 2012) prohibiting family coverage of part-time city employees (which, of course, includes councilpersons) at North Canton government expense.

If Snyder was "bullish for the Fox hire," then the civic activists would likely think that it was a case of "poetic justice" that he got "hoisted by the petard" of being for Fox's appointment as law director.

Also benefiting from the Fox interpretation of law on the validity of the health care ordinance were Councilpersons Peters, Kiesling and Werren.

They like Snyder retreated quickly in the face of public heat on the issue and took themselves off North Canton government provided health care and returned any monetary benefits they received as a consequence receiving such benefit.

If anything, the public flap over the health care benefits cemented what the SCPR thinks is "an unholy alliance" between at least of majority of North Canton City Council and Fox from the date council decided to hire him as law director.

From then on, it appears that no matter what advice Fox gave was, for at least the controlling majority on council, as if Fox was "the oracle of God Almighty!"

Moreover, from the get-go of his ascension to the law directorship, it is the SCPR's take that Fox embraced and fostered "the tough guy" image vis-a-vis the citizen activists with the seemingly admiring approval from most if not all of North Canton's councilpersons.

And to its political disgrace, council has done little if anything to rein Fox in and thus the graphic in today's blog depicting Fox as hiding behind the figurative skirt of North Canton City Council.

As written earlier this week, there was an eruption of a new furor by a group of citizens (mainly  a group that goes by the name of Concerned Citizens of North Canton - PAC).

The issues?

• Council being poised to eliminate an appeal to council of Zoning Board of Appeals decisions which North Canton citizens may wish to challenge, and
• A rewrite  of the city's public records policy,
• (deficiently, in the opinion of the CCNC insofar as Fox would be the sole decider of whether or not a citizen allowed access to a requested public record)

Council did table both ordinances in the face of activist heat brought to bear on Monday just passed.

But the SCPR thinks that council's move may well have been "a mere strategic retreat" to regroup forces under Fox's apparent "one-man-control" North Canton government in order "to live to fight - with its citizens - another day."

North Canton's council is by far the most belligerent of all of Stark County's major cities' councils vis-a-vis its citizenry.

Except, that is, when someone appears at the Public Speaks lectern to fawn over a councilperson or a council action.

So "the beat goes on" with Fox battling the activists (thereby protecting his patrons on council) who merely desire to have the fullest extent of democratic-republican values instituted in North Canton.

The Report has written quite a few blogs chronicling and detailing the adverse relationship that North Canton Council has empowered in unfurling a full-skirt of the largest dimension to shield Fox from citizen accountability.

 LINK

Video from November 27, 2012 Meeting.

LINK

Also from the November 27, 2012 blog:

June 24, 2014 blog LINK

 LINK

LINK

 

LINK

Shame on North Canton Council, each and every one of them who support the antagonistic relationship between North Canton government and the citizenry.

The only solution the SCPR sees as remedying the seeming "unholy alliance" between council and the law director is for challengers to surface before the August 8th deadline to challenge each and every councilperson.

The Report is projecting that CCNC leader Jamie McCleaster will win a council-at-large seat in November likely putting Dan Griffith on the sidelines.  Griffith is friends with Stark County auditor and leading Stark County Republican Alan Harold who now and then defends Griffith to the SCPR.

The Report has more respect for Harold's candor than many Stark County elected officials, but his "hanging on for Griffith" is a puzzlement.

There is a report out there that North Canton Chamber of Commerce director Doug Lane is considering a run for Ward 3 councilman and one time councilman Chuck Osborne has taken out petitions for Ward 3.

The Report is told that Lane has given some consideration to running for mayor against David Held.

For the SCPR's part if Lane runs for anything it should be against Held.

On the surface Held seems like a hip politician.

But on close examination, it is the SCPR's analysis that Held is a "spit and polish" variety politician that does very well with the rhetoric but is largely ineffective as a mayor.  Moreover, if you gain favor with him (e.g. former administrator E.E. Wise, Jr. and now Tim Fox) he, the SCPR thinks, will "go to the wall" to protect.

Lane has the attention of and respect of North Cantonians and therefore would be a realistic threat to Held's continuation as mayor.

Wholesale changes need to be made in North Canton government by the Dogwood tree city's voters if North Cantonians are to enjoy fundamental democratic-republican values.

Each and every North Canton voter needs to project herself/himself into the role of taking exception to the likes of Fox and wanting an civic environment in which he/she is respected and heard and not cast aside as a troublemaker.

Council's protective skirt needs to be ripped asunder and thereby put Director Fox out there in the line of political fire when he tramples on the honoring of core democratic-republican values.

At the beginning of his tenure as law director, Fox made a big gratuitous production out of telling yours truly how tough he is.

Undoubtedly, he has read the blogs of the SCPR going back seven years plus now and knows that yours truly is a non-nonsense "ask the tough questions" journalist who is not "a respecter of 'politically powerful' persons just because they hold political power.

Interesting the self-described tough guy is a coward when it comes to answering The Report's questions.

In:

• a former life (the military) he had rank (being a top non-commissioned officer ranking) to order that this or that thing be done,
• professional life he has the power of a legal education with which to "cow down" non-lawyers with, and
• North Canton government he has had "the skirt of council" to hide behind,

And, on his decidedly anti-citizen-having-full-and-complete-access-to-public-records he may have allies in the form of support from fellow Republicans on Stark County's delegation (Schuring, the 48th; Hagan, the 50th and Oelslager, the Senate's 29th) to the Ohio General Assembly.

Back in mid-March, State of Ohio Republican auditor Dave Yost announced his office was adding to the arsenal of Ohio citizens seeking public records from Ohio government folks with attitudes like Fox by providing his office's services in brokering a resolution of stand offs on whether or not records are public and therefore obtainable by Ohio's public.

Yost's initiative had to be discomforting to Fox and members of North Canton City Council and may account for the tabling of the move by council to pass an ordinance to make Fox the final North Canton authority on whether or not a record is a public record.

Now there is a new "fly in the ointment."

Within the past few days, news has broken that the Ohio House of Representatives has in its proposed amendment of Ohio's budget bill (which the SCPR thinks is a violation of Ohio's Constitution mandating that legislation be limited to "as single subject) inserted language to take away Yost authority to assist citizens to obtain what is ours, that is to say:  public records.

If this attempt is successful, one would think that a guy like Fox and probably the antagonistic to the public council members would see such as being a validation of his being a tough guy vis-a-vis the North Canton public.

How is having all these protective walls being tough?

Pure and simple, it isn't!

Like the "Wizard of Oz," the SCPR thinks he  stands behind a political and governmental curtain (err skirt).

It is high time the curtain (err skirt) be ripped away and for North Canton council make the unelected Fox be directly accountable to the public for the decisions he makes in his obvious dominant role in setting public policy.

Failing that, there needs to be wholesale changes on North Canton City Council come November!