WHAT IS THE CURE FOR THE NORTH CANTON TO ALLIANCE "ANTI-DEMOCRATIC" SPREADING INFECTION?

UPDATED:  7:33 AM

OKEY FOR CLIENT LESLIE YOUNG
ON APRIL 6, 2017 FILED
 "PROPERLY" MOTIVATED LAWSUIT AGAINST ALLIANCE GOV'T!

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

2017 ELECTIONS TO SOLVE NORTH CANTON PROBLEM?

In this day and age, it is not unusual for city governments to compete with one another especially on economic development matters.

A few years ago, North Canton lured a Massillon company to what used to be officially known as "The Dogwood Tree" city by advancing $400,000 (more or less) of upfront money to buy a crane for the company.

Insofar as the SCPR knows, there is no such history between North Canton and Alliance.

However, it does appear that Alliance and North Canton are vying with one another in a race to the bottom in disrespecting its citizenry's right to know, to be heard and to participate fully as a critically important factor in how we Americans govern ourselves.

At least since September, 2012 and the hiring (by North Canton City Council) of Tim Fox as law director, North Canton appears to The Stark County Political Report (SCPR) to surge to the lead among Stark County's political subdivisions in a dubious category:  a marked decline in respect for and implementation of fundamental democratic-republican values.

Under Fox's reign, North Canton has had problems"

• being transparent, 
• providing requested public records, 
• complying with its own charter requirements, 
• councilmembers' attendance (Stephanie Werren, a primary offender) at public meetings, and 
• respecting the will of North Canton voters as expressed at the ballot box.

And there are a number of  other things concerning the undermining of core democratic values that one could cite North Canton government for.

Some think that the Alliance parallel to North Canton's Fox is Safety-Service Director Mike Dreger.

Dreger was appointed by current Alliance mayor Alan Andreani in September, 2014.

A number of Carnation City residents think that Alliance has not been the same in terms of basic democratic-republican values (e.g. first and foremost, administrative transparency).

A big brouhaha broke out into the open at the Alliance City Council on August 7 when Councilwoman Julie Jakmides took it on herself to walk out of council when she was worked over by council president Arthur Garnes for discharging a prime legislative function of questioning Andreani's safety-service director (Dreger) and the independently elected law director (Jennifer Arnold) and various and sundry questions on policing, administrative oversight issues and spending volume for legal services.

Nobody should be surprised by the anti-democratic actions of Alliance government which took place on August 7th.

In April of this year, at the request of Alliance citizen Leslie Young,  Attorney Steve Okey (a former Alliance councilman, a former council president and a past candidate [against Andreani] for mayor of Alliance) filed a lawsuit against Alliance government alleging that the Andreani administration violated Ohio's open meetings law in not complying with Ohio law (on legal advice provided by Arnold) with regard to a proper "in accordance with law" motion to go into executive session as presented to council which ultimately passed:  4 votes to 3.

Here is a copy the suit:



Kudos to the citizen and Okey for standing front and center for Ohio's open records law.

Here is Alliance's answer:



Trial is set for February 12, 2018.



Back in 2014, Okey filed in his own name a lawsuit against certain members of Alliance City Council with Larry Dordea as the lead-named and pleading referenced defendant which the SCPR said at the time appeared motivated to embarrass Dordea, who, at the time was in the midst of Stark County sheriff campaign seeking to unseat Okey political ally George T. Maier.

Okey said that it was unconnected with the Dordea/Maier matchup and the litigation was filed because of Okey's devotion to Ohio's Sunshine Laws.

This Stark County Political Report was not buying Okey's protestation that the 2014 litigation was all about Ohio's Sunshine Laws.

The SCPR wrote a number of blogs castigating Okey for having filed the case on account of what appeared to be obvious political implications of Councilman Dordea running against Okey political friend George T. Maier.

So it is a touch more than ironic that Dordea was among three councilpersons (Jakmides and Edwards also voting NO)  on presented motion for council and certain Andreani administration officials and Law Director Arnold to go into executive session which prompted the Leslie Young lawsuit.

What should disturb the citizens of Alliance is that under the Andreani administration lead, seemingly based, in large part, upon the legal counsel of Jennifer Arnold (Alliance's independently elected law director); it appears that Alliance is heading in the same direction as North Canton in curtailing compliance with core democratic-republican values and perhaps in the process violating Ohio law.

However, as the SCPR sees the matter, it is likely that Okey/Citizen Young will, if the lawsuit goes to trial, prevail.

Of course, it is possible that the Andreani administration on counsel by Arnold will drop defending the suit and implement the asked for remedies.

Either way, there might be these Alliance taxpayer costs, either agreed to or ordered by the court:

• up to $1,000 in damages,
• court costs and plaintiff's attorney fees, and 
• legal fees paid by Alliance government for outside legal counsel

Shouldn't there be a "moral obligation" for those who participated in the manner in which the executive session was presented for an up or down vote to reimburse the city treasury?

Perhaps the Young lawsuit will prove to be curative of the Andreani administration's flirtation with its seeming unlawful manner of going into executive session.

One more thing.

An important point that Okey raises in the lawsuit is that governments MAY but is not required to go into executive session for reasons enumerated in the underlying Ohio statute cited in the Young lawsuit.

The SCPR's take on executive session use among Stark County local governments is that elected officials are all too quick and prone to invoke the permissive right to go into private session without considering adequately the necessity of doing so.

The taxpaying public has a right to know to the greatest degree as is practical and feasible to have discussions which serve as the basis for decisions made in public, be "public" themselves.

Government propensity to overuse is to deny, via out-of-view executive sessions, public access to the deliberations constitute the foundation upon which decisions are made in public session.

Such is a key ingredient among a number of others as why citizen trust of government grows by the day.

 In terms of the taxpaying public having confidence in the integrity of government, the processes of governing can be more important than the substantive decisions themselves.

Alliance council members Dordea, Jakmides and Edwards as well as Leslie Young and his attorney have courageously stepped forward to bolster democratic-republican values.

In North Canton, it appears there is no elected official on the inside at city hall (except perhaps a fleeting moment here and there by Councilman Foltz) who has the moxie to stand up for core government democratic enhancing process values.

All the city's councilpersons and the mayor seem to be good at is patting one another on the back in self-congratulation while they foster North Canton's democratic processes decline.

Accordingly, it  appears that the only North Canton cure is that its voters will take matters in hand in the November general election and place in office council members and a mayor who respect citizens' fundamental democratic-republican values.

NORTH CANTON SERIES: REVOLDT INSPIRES A REVOLT TO GOVERNMENT POST-REVOLDT NORTH CANTON ON COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AREAS ORDINANCE PROPOSAL?

THIRD IN A SERIES:  DEMOCRACY TAKES A HIT IN NORTH CANTON

WILL NORTH CANTON'S POOL OPEN ON WEDNESDAY?

VIDEO

Former North Canton Elected Official

(Mayor, president of council and member of council)

Daryl Revoldt

on

Implementation of Community Reinvestment Area Ordinance

As Stark County Political Report readers know, North Canton City Council (NCCS) has the distinction, in The Report's view, of being Stark County's worst legislative body.

Two of its members, President Daniel Jeff" Peters and the longest serving council person Marcia Kiesling, occupy two of ten spots on the SCPR's "Worst 10 Stark County Political Subdivision Elected Officials.

Were it not just a bit over-the-top, it seems that Councilwoman Stephanie Werren deserves to be on the list too.

Werren is the director of the Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce's (CRCC) Leadership Stark County which has the mission to develop quality leadership for the county.

Leadership Stark County has a unit devoted to enhancing the leadership qualities of those who already serve in Stark County political subdivision government or who have aspirations to be a part of Stark County government.

From what the SCPR has seen in her work as a councilperson and The Report's opinion of that work, it is hard to believe that the folks at the CRCC thinks she is a good example to lead Leadership Stark County.

The Report sees the CRCC as the political counterweight to organized labor.  Yours truly sees the CRCC as basically being a Republican Party support group whereas unions appear to be the captive of Democratic Party candidates and officials.

Werren is the wife of Canton Municipal Court judge Curtis Werren and both she and Curtis (both Republicans) have been the beneficiaries of political appointments.  Judge Werren received two Governor John Kasich appointments because he was unable to retain office when appointed a judge to the Stark County Court of Common Pleas in the face of a challenge by political neophyte Chryssa Hartnett.

The Report's singling out of Peters and Kiesling on being among Stark County's worst political/governmental leaders is based on a determination that they in a representative sort of way demonstrate hostility to "democratic/republican" values of:

• accountability, 
• accessibility, 
• communicativeness, 
• openness, 
• transparency, and the like 

in the conduct of council proceedings and the manner in which they appear to direct the likes of Law Director Tim Fox to interact with any North Cantonian who wants information from North Canton government or who questions the quality of services offered by North Canton government.

And last Monday night's council meeting provides more evidence that the assessment is well-founded.

Former "elected" North Canton official (councilman, president of council and mayor) Daryl Revoldt made an appearance at the meeting  and during the "public speaks" portion of the meeting castigated council for its handling of the Community Reinvestment Areas legislation in what he alleges has been in an illegal fashion.

The Report is told (not by Revoldt) that after meeting Councilwoman Kiesling upbraided Revoldt for his comments.

Kiesling who admits to having received campaign contributions from two of the commercial beneficiaries of North Canton CRA "years ago" but nonetheless sees no "conflict in interest" in pressing hard, along with Ward 3 councilwoman Stephanie Werren, for an expansion of the CRA to include properties eligible for property tax abatement city wide (including properties planned by the commercial developers) which of course likely would mean a major revenue loss to North Canton City Schools and may force the schools to ask North Cantonians for a property tax increase sooner than later.

On Monday, after Revoldt spoke, council tabled the CRA expansion legislation.

In theory, the legislation promoting councilpersons (Peters, Kiesling, Griffith and Werren) say that the expansion will encourage owners of housing in North Canton neighborhoods built in the World War II era to make substantial capital improvement which on Stark County auditor periodic reassessments cause the taxable value to increase and therefore on the expiration of the abatement term (for whatever number of years council decides on, which term is not yet been agreed upon) will, long term, benefit the the NCCS.

As a practical matter, the parts of North Canton's housing stock that needs improvement and upgrade are such the ownership most likely lacks the capital resources to do things like add garages, bathrooms and other basic amenities that prospective buyers would require to consider purchasing for use as owner-occupied housing.

Moreover, many of these units are rental properties. What motive would landlords of these properties inspire them to make such improvements?

Most of us see landlords as folks who want to put minimal upkeep into their properties so as to keep the units rentable and income producing.

Are they going to make major capital improvements in the tens of thousands of dollars for perhaps a thousand dollars a year for 12 years of tax abatements?

Financially savvy people see such thinking, as the SCPR thinks is apparently being what's going on with many of North Canton's councilpersons, as being unadulterated fantasy.

Now, getting back to Revoldt.

Its been about six years since Revoldt was on council as council president and in the assessment of the SCPR NCCS has been in a downward spiral ever since.

Since August 2014, Revoldt has been a top official at Stark State College, to wit:

And look at the rest of this Stark County leader's resume.

The SCPR cannot not resist "a play on words," hence the blog headline:  Revoldt inspires a Revolt in Government "Post-Revoldt" North Canton.

It is obvious that Daryl Revoldt is no political revolutionary.

He is about as establishment as one can get.

An outside of North Canton former Stark County education official tells the SCPR that he holds Revoldt in high esteem and predicts that the tabled legislation will never see the light of day again.

Revoldt apparently he cannot abide the deterioration of North Canton government and council processes since he left in 2010.

There have been a number of council actions since Revoldt departed that boggle the mind.

For those readers who regularly take in SCPR blogs, the litany is well known.

And they continue to accumulate.

The Report thinks that Law Director Tim Fox in one fashion or another may well be "the man behind the curtain" calling the shots as legal guidance for Kiesling, Warren to March on in their quest.  While they appear to be the primary proponents of the CRA expansion, President Peters and Councilman Dan Griffith talk as if they are pretty much in concord with them.

If Revoldt is correct in asserting that NCCC has acted illegally in administering the CRA program, it is hard to imagine that Fox has not had a look at the legislation and the manner in which it is administered and made it be known internally that he thinks the legislation is legal in substance and as implemented.

Revoldt says that for council to leave to one unelected administrative person (Housing Director and Economical Development Eric Bowles) the right to decide which property owners get abatements and which do not is unbelievable.  He says that hundreds of thousands of dollars in abatements are granted without North City Council having a say in the matter.

Take a look at the following video of his comments at last Monday's meeting on the CRA (the video is an excerpt from the video of the entire meeting taken by North Canton civic activist Chuck Osborne which can be seen in its entire it at this LINK)



Osborne, of course, an out and out nemesis to most if not all North Canton's councilpersons, has sent a letter to Stark County prosecutor John Ferrero challenging the implementation of North Canton's CRA legislation, to wit:



Recently, the SCPR reported on a Ward 2 (Peters) and Ward 3 (Warren) sponsored at Dogwood Shelter community meeting (LINK).

The Report thinks that there were about 90 folks (including North Canton "public" officials) at the meeting.

Citizen Osborne asked Director Fox (who himself was at the meeting in sort of a background mode) for a copy of the "sign-in" sheet of those who attended the meeting.

Here is Fox's response:



Fox may or may not be correct in his interpretation of the law.

Even if Fox were to be validated court ruling(s), it is downright silly for him to refuse to authorize the release the list.

For Mayor David Held to abide such silliness is inexcusable and he and council should direct Fox to send Osborne and any other citizen who want a copy of the listing to send it yesterday!

This is exactly the kind of ticky tacky administration of government that turns citizens off.

North Canton elected officials (mostly city council and the council enabled law director) should collectively hold their heads down in shame for the manner (i.e. anti-democratic-republican consistent principles of conduct)in which they do the peoples' business!

Here we are at the end of the blog and no mention has been made of the debacle that is underway in the rehabbing prof city's pool (built in 1973) located at Dogwood Park.

Last week the SCPR stopped by the pool and snapped this picture.

Yes, indeed the pool was empty. Earlier in the week last week the pool had developed a leak and had to be drained.

The Report is told that it takes a full day to refill the pool.

In addition to electrical problems that has being instrumental in the pool rehab not passing Stark County and State of Ohio inspection.o

The Report is told that North Canton did not get required city permits nor have inspections conducted over the months of the rebuild of the pool at a cost of upwards of $1 million (in the total sense of costs; not just the pool liner itself which cost $850,000) which, if true, is an outrage in terms of government setting the example for citizens who are required to comply with legal requirements for their construction projects.

In addition to the liner costs, there will be welding costs, electrical system repair costs and who knows what else.  When asked last night what the final bill might be, Mayor David Held refused to speculate.

A source does tell the SCPR that the pool has been (about 500,000 gallons per filling) refilled "sort of."

Sort of?

Yes, sort of!

The source says that after refilling the pool it has to be lowered a foot or so to create space for some welding that needs to be done.

The Report also has information to the effect that the Stark County and State of Ohio inspections are to take place either today or Tuesday.

Mayor Held says that he has high hopes that the pool originally scheduled to open on Memorial Day (May 30th) will open this coming Wednesday, June 15, 2016.

A silver lining is the delay in the pool opening, Held says, is that the pool is much safer than it has ever been that the liner and other equipment is "state of the art."

Held was candid with the SCPR is saying that he is dissatisfied with the management of the pool project by North Canton city employee Jim Davis who has been North Canton's Utilities and Service Director since May/June, 2012.  (LINK)

 Held in his conversation last evening with The Report also was highly critical of the pool rehab contractor performance.

However, he praised Don Walker (North Canton electrical inspector, LINK) and the city's chief building official (Rito Alvarez) for holding their ground and not allowing the pool to open until they deemed it to be safe.

At the Ward 2 and 3 Community Meeting,  Peters, Warren and Kiesling were defensive and combative with many of the citizens asking provocative, probing questions.

Clearly, North Canton's council is increasingly a council under siege at the hand of its constituency.

Council members have nobody to blame but themselves.

They have fostered the development of North Canton government culture which communicates a "us versus them" for any citizen who dares question the actions of  themselves and leading city administrators.

NORTH CANTON WARD 2 & 3 COMMUNITY MEETING: NOT AN EXAMPLE OF "DEMOCRACY IN ACTION" FOR OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO FOLLOW

SECOND IN A SERIES:  DEMOCRACY TAKES A HIT IN NORTH CANTON

VIDEO

NORTH CANTON COUNCIL PRESIDENT
DAN "JEFF" PETERS
DALE CARNEGIE STYLE
OF
CITIZEN INTERACTION

It looks as if North Canton may be looking at a repeat of  the November, 2012 vote on Issue 5 which pertained to the fundamental rights of North Cantonians to determine the jots and tittles of government in what once The Dogwood City.

One of the "hot button issues" 'at last Wednesday evening's meeting (the brainchild of Ward 3 councilwoman Stephanie Werren was —pending in North Canton City Council presently—legislation of the expansion of Community Reinvestment Areas (CRA) in the city.

In 2012, more than seven of ten North Canton voters in a presidential election year voted to curtail the right of part-time elected officials (referendum aimed at councilmembers) to have North Canton taxpayers pay for their healthcare.

As we all know, all too often in the United States of America, presidents  (e.g. Obama's prolific use of "executive orders," down through city council members and even to the most local of American government—boards of education—"all power in our democratic-republican form of government residing 'in the people' through elections" is nullified by the actions by elected officials.

In Stark County, a prime example of—in your face votes—is North Canton City Council (in a majority sense) led by council president Daniel "Jeff" Peters.

At Wednesday's meeting, this video clip tells it all—in his own words—about Peters' attitude towards the  people having a say in what is and what is not part of the mix of the programs, policies and practices of North Canton government.



As seen, Peters appears to be combative with his questioner and his "I still like you" seems more than a bit disingenuous.  A comment is used a number of times in the session in the testy back and forth with Ward 2 and Ward 3 residents.

On the ethics point, Peters cites the Ohio Ethics Commission (OEC) and the "be all" of ethical determinations on campaign finance contribution.  The Report believes that OEC rulings are "minimum" standards and not anywhere near the highest "avoid the appearance of impropriety" standard that many of us would like to see in the conduct of public officials.

On the vote, Peters, interesting enough, presumes that council will pass the CRA pending legislation and that there will be a repeat of the 2012 Health Care vote which indicates a "closed" Peters and majority of council mind on the CRA matter.

And he never gets around to addressing the citizen's concerned about be burdened by greater taxes because of the impending implementation of the CRA.

Does anybody think that North Canton schools are going to forego new levy initiatives within the next few years  in the light of lost revenues at the hand of North Canton City Council.

While officials at the meeting made "it something to crow about" that North Canton has the lowest income tax rate of all municipalities/villages located in Stark County (1.5%),  the SCPR predicts that sooner than later this council will be acting the hike that rate.

As Mayor Held pointed out, North Canton is landlocked by other communities and therefore cannot attract large new business and commercial interests.

That's why it probably a mistake for North Canton (David Held led) to have rejected a cooperative economical development agreement about a year or Canton, Jackson Township and Plain Township.

Moreover, this Peters' led council is clearly in a beseiged mentality notwithstanding Wednesday's "informal" give and take, "come let of reason together"session.

It appears to the SCPR it was mostly a "give form on High" and very little take the people seriously and reconsider the wisdom of continuing down the CRA track that Councilwomen Werren and Marcia Kiesling are bound and determined to push through on.

Accordingly, Peters' and most of council (with Doug Foltz [Democrat-Ward 1] and Mark Cerreta [Non-partisan-at large] perhaps being exceptions because they are asking questions and advocating modifications of the CRA legislation) should be viewed as unsympathetic to the people weighing in on the substance of North Canton government as exemplied by the CRA legislative processes.

As one North Cantonian said at a February, 2014 meeting:

Such conduct is part and parcel—grain by grain—of the phenomenon where less and less Americans participate in the forums of U.S. government.

"We have met the enemy of people having a choice/voice and it is us!"  Elected officials throughout the land should be saying to themselves.

And President Peters' performance last Wednesday has him selected  today by the SCPR as deserving of a SCPR Person of the Year designation for negation of the power of the people to decide the sum and substance of "We the People" government.

Congratulations President Peters!

OSBORNE SPOILS WERREN'S PARTY? NORTH CANTON GOV'T FAILS TO PROVIDE ANSWERS IN CITIZENS FORUM?

FIRST IN A SERIES:  NORTH CANTON'S FAILED COMMUNITY CONNECTION

VIDEOS

COUNCILWOMAN STEPHANIE WERREN

REPUBLICAN-WARD 3

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

PRESIDENT DAN "JEFF" PETERS

REMOVES

CIVIC ACTIVIST CHUCK OSBORNE

FROM MEETING

PETERS ENGAGES CITIZEN

SPEAKING UP ON

OSBORNE EJECTION

If the above collage from Wednesday night's North Canton government sponsored meeting with Ward 2 and Ward 3 residents suggests a "raucous" meeting to readers of The Stark County Political Report, such would be an accurate take on the tone of the meeting.

Republican Ward 3 Councilwoman Stephanie Werren told those assembled that the idea to hold such a meeting was hers.



After the turmoil she experienced in the course of the meeting, it will be interesting to see whether or not she has the stomach for encore meetings.

The meeting was held at North Canton's prized Dogwood Park located on 7th Street NE close by North Canton Hoover High School.

Recently and ironically in the context of the meeting, North Canton Council passed legislation decommissioning North Canton being The Dogwood City.

However, Council has designated the Dogwood tree as the "official" tree of North Canton.

Stephanie Werren (also director of Leadership Stark County [a project of the Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce] which includes a course of study designed to train Stark Countians to be effective local government leaders), at the outset said to the 90 or so assembled that she got the idea of having a Ward meeting while campaigning last year in her successful bid to retain her post as councilwoman.

Werren's tone was that she and Ward 2 Republican councilman and council president Dan "Jeff" Peters coming together to host the meeting was an effort to connect better to the North Canton citizenry.

By the end of the meeting, it was arguable whether the meeting created more connection or sewn seeds of greater discord going forward.

As readers of this blog know, the SCPR has tabbed North Canton City Council as Stark's absolutely worst in terms of demonstrating in the councilpersons' collective relationship with North Cantonians on democratic-republican values of accessibility, accountability, transparency, communicativeness and trust.

The Report's assessment is that Wednesday's meeting was pretty much a failure in terms of creating greater cohesiveness between North Canton officialdom and everyday North Cantonians.

And a big reason for the failure is the inability of President Peters to deal effectively with North Canton's foremost community activist:  Chuck Osborne.

Peters was way to quick to have the police called on Wednesday night.  Osborne in his conduct got nowhere near needing police intervention.  

To The Report, Peters asking for the police to be called was exercise in "political theater" pure and simple and moreover conduct unbecoming of a democratic-republican system of government leader.

Osborne is a former councilperson (one two year term at the beginning of the 21st century has run for mayor and a seat on council several times including a 2015 unsuccessful run against Werren in November, 2015 as graphically shown above.

But mind you Osborne did get 470 votes out of Ward 3 less than a year ago.  And the total of 711 "no confidence" votes on incumbent Werren.

Nobody is as knowledgeable about North Canton government as is Osborne.

Nobody is as dogged in pursuing North Canton governance issues that he takes an interest in as is Osborne.

However, he is not the Dale Carnegie of civic activism.

His wife Rita Palmer pretty much is.

And Chuck could be far more effective than he is if he were to take lessons in a balance a fashion as Rita.

For instance, with a large crowd gathered to hear and to engage North Canton officials, Osborne, who is in almost daily contact with one North Canton elected or appointed official or another, should have pretty much stood down and let the those who do not have the inclination to dog government officials have a maximum space to dialogue with North Canton officialdom.

That he didn't, to the SCPR, indicates that his mission was not so much to get answers to his questions but rather to gain a perceived political advantage in holding them in a bad light before the large crowd, many of whom do not attend regular North Canton City Council meetings.

For those of us who appreciate civic activism, Osborne presents a problem.

We treasure the energy, spunk, drive, persistence, thoroughness with which he hounds public officials into serving their constituencies authentically and with results for the public good.

We lament that he seems to be his own worst enemy in his approach to public officials and thereby dramatically lessens his ability to convince them of the merit of his cause, whatever it may be.

There was another incident in which Osborne was ordered to leave the meeting by President Peters.

Here is the video of the incident.

The SCPR has written before that Peters is not an ideal personality to serve as council president in that he appears to have a very thin skin and quick to land on any citizen, not just Osborne, who questions his or his fellow council persons actions.

The Report's impression of President Peters' in relation to Osborne is that he looks for opportunities to land on Chuck.

Take a look as this video exchange between Peters and a citizen discussing Osborne's public modus operandi.

Case made?

There were quite a few issues discussed at the June 1st meeting.

It was advertised as focusing on pending North Canton Council Community Reinvestment legislation and troubles on rehabbing the city's Dogwood Park swimming facility which is managed by the North Canton YMCA.

Subsequent blogs in this series will deal with those issues and others that were discussed in detail and in some instances with pointed if not vitriolic exchanges.

ARE NORTH CANTON GOV'T OFFICIALS JEOPARDIZING THE SAFETY OF NORTH CANTON CHILDREN IN ITS DISPENSING OF INFORMATION?

UPDATED:  3:40 PM

12 & 13 YEAR OLD
SENSITIVE PERSONAL INFO
ON
NORTH CANTON PD TRAFFIC CRASH REPORT
OCCURRED:  01/05/2016  (SEE BELOW)

TIM FOX IS NORTH CANTON'S GOVERNMENT?

UPDATE INFO

When this blog was published this morning, the SCPR did not have a copy of another NCPD Traffic Crash Report generated of a consequence of a traffic mishap wherein two children ages 12 and 13 were struck by a vehicle at the intersection of East Maple with the motorist turning south onto South Main Street.

North Canton citizen Melanie Roll took to the lectern at Monday evening's public speaks to ask the administration/council to consider remedial measures to cut down on the likelihood of future motor vehicle/pedestrian accidents in the future.

See her presentation at this video LINK at the 4:05 mark.

Here is an "extracted copy" (i.e. not all pages provided) the NCPD  generated which again, like the report published below in the original part of today's blog, provides sensitive personal information (redacted by the SCPR; not the NCPD) on a 12 and 13 year old.



ORIGINAL BLOG

Two time unsuccessful candidate for North Canton City Council (for an at-large position) Jamie McCleaster did what any due diligent parent would do this past Monday when he appeared at council's regular meeting to complain about the manner in which the city reports and makes available to the general public information regarding children (in this case ages ranging from 3 to 8) one of whom is McCleaster's daughter.

(See McCleaster at the 7:15 minute mark of a video taken of the meeting by Chuck Osborne: the LINK)

•  SCPR Note:  The Report references McCleaster's unsuccessful runs for council in order to "cut off at the pass" certain Held administration officials, Fox (a council appointed official) and others (e.g. perhaps Councilwoman Marcia Kiesling)  from trying to tarnish McCleaster's complaint as being politically motivated with an "Why didn't the SCPR make mention of McCleaster's political activities vis-a-vis council and the administration?
• Such is really irrelevant but The Report believes that those mentioned or alluded to above are wont to bring in the irrelevant as kind of a knee-jerk, hostile reaction to any citizen who do not come to the councils of government "to praise Caesar."

On December 11, 2015 a North Canton City Schools (NCCS) student transporting bus/automobile accident occurred in North Canton, to wit:

As required to do, the North Canton Police Department (NCPD) dispatched an officer to the scene to investigate.

Part of the investigation is to collect information about the accident in terms of the drivers of the vehicles, injuries sustained and statements/contact information from witnesses and other relevant information.

The collecting of information in this incident included the name, address, date of birth and phone numbers 30 students ranging from age 3 to 8.

Here is the SCPR "redacted" Traffic Crash Report:

McCleaster was understandably upset that sensitive personal information of the students (i.e. address, date of birth and telephone number) was collected and made available to the general public apparently without a second thought about the advisability doing so on the part of the police chief (Stephan Wilder, LINK to background as part of NCPD).

Tim Fox, North Canton's law director, who normally seems to have his fingerprints on everything North Canton government and particularly on things "public records" availability to the general public appears to have been and surprisingly and mysteriously left out-of-the-loop on the release of the above-record.

The SCPR's focus in this blog is on Wilder and Fox.

First,  their failure (in the opinion of yours truly) in advance of December 11 to have asked (Wilder) and to have found a supportable-in-law basis (Fox) to have redacted the personal information of the 3 to 8 year olds so as to protect them from being subject to unwanted contacts if not "unsafe for them" attempted contacts.

Second, Fox's attempt to stymie certain North Canton "elected" officials  (Mayor Held and council President Daniel "Jeff" Peters (Ward 2) in responding to points made by North Canton citizens in the public speaks segment of Monday's council meeting.

ON PUBLIC RECORDS

The Report thinks that Fox throughout his tenure (3-1/2 years now) as law director has demonstrated that it is like pulling teeth to get a public records request timely, transparently and responsively (that is to say, made available) responded to.

But let the SCPR make it perfectly clear.  The Report believes that the combination of Fox and his appointive employer North Canton City Council are "made for each other" in terms of the mutual disdain for anybody who questions the actions, programs and policies of North Canton government.

In short, Fox appears to be the public face of council antagonism towards those who would hold North Canton government accountable be the issue availability of North Canton government records or any other matter.

But being the public face is not to absolve Fox as some sort of public relations person.

He, the SCPR thinks, is knee-deep in substantive city official determinations of:

• who gets requested records (it appears to The Report that he has targeted certain North Cantonians for denial of the requests for just who they are), and 
• what they get which The Report believes has more to do with political sensitivity of the records (e.g. his opinion on the legal efficacy of an overwhelming North Canton voters no vote on city paid for healthcare benefits for part-time employees)

It is astounding that Chief Wilder apparently did not consider consulting with Fox on the school bus/automobile accident report.

On more occasions than should be the case,  Fox seems to find a way in his interpretation of the law of Ohio to deny access to requested North Canton government information.

For example, there is a case somewhat relevant to the school bus/car accident report of December 11, 2015.

That case is in regard to obtaining as a public record the membership list of those using the North Canton government owned/maintained swimming pool for information about membership numbers.

Originally, the request, like the accident report, was broad enough that compliance seemed to entail providing sensitive personal information on the pool members.

Osborne has embarked on a project to analyze whether or not the membership data supports on a cost/benefit analysis basis the expense to North Canton taxpayers in the city continuing to own and maintain the pool.

 He has scaled back his request to seeking numbers only relevant to his analysis.

McCleaster used the pool public records denial by Fox as the cornerstone of his complaint that North Canton government has a double standard on what information that is obtainable in providing public records.

And the SCPR agrees with him.

The Report has no problem whatsoever with the sensitive personal information having been withheld from the public on North Canton's pool membership list.  Nor did McCleaster.

Application of a consistent standard should have resulted in the traffic accident report being redacted to eliminate the revelation of the 3 to 8 year olds' home address, telephone numbers and dates of birth.

Is Chief Wilder out-there-somewhere in not tuning into Fox's deny first North Canton government records when there is an plausible legal basis available?

Yours truly can think of a number of reasons why a financial ne'er-do-well or worse would want that information to try to team up with a social security number secured perhaps obtained from another source.

McCleaster mentioned on Monday that the family has already been the target of a law firm solicitation, to wit:

 Focus on the first three words of the letter:  "From police records ... ."

And, of course, unfortunately we have as an element of our population a number of folks who cannot properly channel their sexuality.  (LINK)

It appears to the SCPR that North Canton officials are trying the justify the outrageous dispensing of sensitive personal information of 3 to 8 year olds primarily on the lame excuse that Ohio's exceptions to the public records law does not allow for redacting the information of persons appearing on traffic accident reports.

To boot, another ridiculous line of North Canton officialdom is:   who is going to be scanning police reports for someone's personal information?

Acting as an investigative journalist (disclaimer:  yours truly is an "inactive" lawyer), The Report found the following, to wit:

149.43 Availability of public records for inspection and copying.

(A) As used in this section:

(1) "Public record" means records kept by any public office, including, but not limited to, state, county, city, village, township, and school district units, and records pertaining to the delivery of educational services by an alternative school in this state kept by the nonprofit or for-profit entity operating the alternative school pursuant to section 3313.533 of the Revised Code. "Public record" does not mean any of the following: (emphasis added)

(2) "Confidential law enforcement investigatory record" means any record that pertains to a law enforcement matter of a criminal, quasi-criminal, civil, or administrative nature, but only to the extent that the release of the record would create a high probability of disclosure of any of the following:

(d) Information that would endanger the life or physical safety of law enforcement personnel, a crime victim, a witness, or a confidential information source.

(f)  The name, the residential address, the name of the employer, the address of the employer, the social security number, the residential telephone number, any bank account, debit card, charge card, or credit card number, or the emergency telephone number of the spouse, a former spouse, or any child of a peace officer, parole officer, probation officer, bailiff, prosecuting attorney, assistant prosecuting attorney, correctional employee, community-based correctional facility employee, youth services employee, firefighter, EMT, or investigator of the bureau of criminal identification and investigation.

The children on the bus were witnesses, weren't they?

Entitled to have their safety protected, no?

Might that include having their birth dates, home addresses and telephone numbers redacted from the report?

Did the North Canton Police Department determine whether or not there were any children of the list of protected classes of employees?

The foregoing is only a cursory look at Ohio's statutes on what can and cannot be included in public records.

Anybody who knows anything about Tim Fox, knows that he goes absolutely bonkers when it comes to legal research.

Think he couldn't find an even firmer basis for redacting the sensitive personal information on 3 to 8 year olds?

What citizen thinks he or she could contact the North Canton City Schools' administration with a request for the sensitive personal information like that the North Canton Police Department made available to the public and have the request honored?

Moreover, does Chief Wilder and/or Law Director Fox really think that any court in Ohio, if North Canton was to be challenged for having  redacted the dates of birth, home address and telephone number, would hold that protecting the safety of children is not provided for somewhere in Ohio law?

There are many references in Ohio law directed towards the protection of information in minors, any information whatsoever, let alone sensitive personal information of 3 to 8 year olds.

One administration official had the temerity to lump the December 11th accident report into:  "Well, Martin we have a huge number of accident reports and imply therefore that it would not have been feasible for Chief Wilder to have checked with the law director before the fact of dissemination as to whether or not such information should be redacted in the case of minors."

Of course, the SCPR did his homework before talking with that official.

An area police chief told The Report that school bus accidents are so rare and exceptional that it is ridiculous to think that an occurrence would not raise a red flag about putting out reports with sensitive personal information of students.

So that argument does not work in population 17,000 more or less in North Canton, no?

The SCPR thinks that Chief Wilder blew it in not filtering out the December 11th report for Tim Fox assessment on the issue of redactability.

The Report is told that Fox's emphasis now - after the fact - is to build an argument that the pool denial of public records publication and the easily obtained accident report of 3 to 8 year olds sensitive information is justifiable as a matter of law.

The SCPR commends McCleaster for taking North Canton government to task.

One would think that the parents of the other 29 children would be all over the backs of North Canton officials, no?

McCleaster asked for a apology from North Canton government to him and the other 29 parents of children who may now be less safe than they were on December 10, 2015.

That will not likely happen.

But McCleaster is a difference maker and North Canton Council would be much improved had he been elected over either Griffith or Kiesling.

FOX'S ATTEMPT TO STYMIE

At least three times during Monday's meeting, Law Director Fox tried to stop the interaction between:

• Mayor David Held, council President Daniel "Jeff" Peters and others

and

•  North Canton citizens

Fox's intervention is best understood by looking at a video taken by Chuck Osborne and placed on YouTube:  (The video LINK)

This narrative will take SCPR to specific points within the first 30 minutes of the hour long video.

At the 10:15 mark:  (the LINK, once again) Mayor David Held on the public records issue raised by McCleaster addressing McCleaster and others.

At the 13:32 mark:  Fox turns to President Peters and complains about his allowing the back and forth between Held and others.

At the 20:10 mark:  Fox raises "a point of Order" in an obvious attempt to stop the dialogue between Held several council members (Peters, Ceretta and Griffith) and citizens Melanie Roll and Jamie McCleaster.

At the 21:21 mark:  Chuck Osborne explains his position on the pool public records request and manages to take a rhetorical shot at Law Director Fox at the 22:20 marks as to how Held and participating council members had been reprimanded (re:  point of Order matter) by council's employee, meaning, of course, Law Director Fox.

To their credit, neither Held, Peters nor any of the other public official participants were deterred Fox's admonitions.

At the 27:00 mark:  Fox once again takes Mayor Held to task for his back and forth with Osborne.

At the 27:20 mark:  Ironically, Fox starts talking to Held about what Osborne did or did not do with regard to his pool membership records request.

Hmm?

Didn't Fox just get done saying that there should be no sparing on matters raised in the public speaks part of the council meeting?

He must have meant everybody but Tim Fox.

Go figure, no?

AN INCREDIBLE DANIEL "JEFF" PETERS?

At the 29:00 mark:  Peters after ignoring Fox's admonitions, he backtracks and endorses the law director's attempt to stifle mayor/council/citizen interaction which of course substantiates the SCPR's assessment that Tim Fox is North Canton government.

Immediately afterwards, Peters beats the dead horse issue of whether or not council treats Osborne fairly.

There is no doubt that Osborne is a proverbial "pain in the butt" to nearly all of North Canton government.  Peters has never figured out that being uncomfortable with citizen scrutiny is part of the territory of being a public official.

Not only does the SCPR think Peters is disingenuous in his self-serving and North Canton government serving assertion that the city treats Osborne fairly.  He really gets absurd in declaring that North Canton is more than fair with Osborne.

No doubt about it.

Osborne's:

• lack of interactive finesse,
• his yelling out from the audience from time-to-time,
• his intemperate emotion-based attacks on various North Canton officials

which has gotten him removed from a number of North Canton council meetings is inappropriate behavior.

But who is going to believe that Peters, Fox, Held and most of the rest of North Canton government have demonstrated that they treat him like any other North Canton citizen?

Or, as Peters would have one believe:  better than any everyday citizen.

A more credible comment by Peters could have been something like:  "We, in light of your repeated ad hominem personal attacks, as officials in North Canton government, find it very difficult to treat you as if you were a day-in, day-out citizen, but we are trying."

It is obvious that a good part of this blog is reliant on Osborne having videotaped Monday night's meeting.

Notwithstanding the SCPR referring to certain part of the video he took, The Report has no qualms whatsoever in critiquing Osborne.
 
On a personal basis, yours truly gets along with Osborne.

However, unlike many in government, whether or not a subject of a SCPR blog is personally liked or disliked, yours truly rises above the personal sentiment either way and tells it like The Report sees it.

Subjects are provided with an unfettered opportunity to respond.

Not to blame them for Osborne's from time-to-time over-the-top conduct, but the SCPR thinks some of them, especially Fox, waive a red flag in Osborne's face.

Like them or not, politically sophisticated and articulate persons like Osborne are absolutely essential to our having accountable, responsive governments.

Undoubtedly, it gnaws at some of North Canton's governors that Osborne in much more knowledgeable in the last 15 year history of The Dogwood City and its procedural nuances than they are.

Peters is no Jon Snyder and he certainly is no Daryl Revoldt in terms of having the skills to deal with the likes of a Chuck Osborne.

To the SCPR, Jamie McCleaster is a model of citizen decorum in holding North Canton officials accountable.

Yet he gets worked over by various members of North Canton government on occasion.

Here the factor is not an abrasive personality.

It is that he has the temerity to complain about this or that aspect of North Canton government.

Too many leadership types in North Canton government lack the ability to gracefully entertain the notion that they can improve the quality of the respective performances starting with receptiveness to citizen critiques with Fox being the foremost example on this SCPR point.

Consequently, North Canton City Council will continue to be the laughing stock of political and government observers across Stark County.

And, perhaps, consequently unhelpful in protecting North Canton's children!

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.