(VIDEO OF FERRRO) PROSECUTOR FERRERO DENIES THAT COMMISSIONERS HAVE APPROACHED HIM ON CITIZEN CONLEY "PROPOSED" BACK TAXES COLLECTION EFFORT. COUNTY GOV'T HAS LITTLE INCENTIVE TO COLLECT, BUT TOWNSHIPS, BOARDS OF EDUCATION, LIBRARIES, ET AL DO!

The Stark County commissioners have brought together the Stark County treasurer (Alex Zumbar), the Stark County auditor (Alan Harold) and Stark County prosecutor (John Ferrero) whereby they have formulated a plan to double the collection of delinquent real property taxes which now stands at about $40 million.

Prosecutor Ferrero has restructured his office to reassign a prosecutor from the juvenile section of the office to devote 40 hours a week to the DTAC (Delinquent Tax Assessment Collection) unit.  It appears that Ferrero will endeavor to fund the reallocation of office resources from the collections themselves, however, the commissioners have promised to add up to $31,000 to Ferrero's 2011 budget (first from DTAC funds) should the need arise.  Ferrero says the arrangement is only good for the rest of 2011 and that a new arrangement will have to be made for 2012 and years beyond.

However, Prosecutor Ferrero did make the point at the county officials' meeting with commissioners at this past Tuesday's work session that there is a limit on the number of new cases that the Stark County Court of Common Pleas (Court) can take on efficiently in light of the budgetary constraints and concomitantly the Court's ability - personnel wise - to handle a volume influx of cases.

The Report did check the Court situation out and learned that the problem would not be so much with the judges ability to handle an influx of cases, but with the Clerk of Courts office.  Clerk Reinbold has had to make cuts due to county budget cuts (16% this year) and therefore likely has limited ability to take on a surge of work. 

Stark County is experiencing a large reduction of tax revenues to county government due the November, 2009 repeal of the commissioner (Bosley, Harmon and Vignos) imposed 0.50 sales/use tax and the decision of the commissioners not to seek a timely renewal of 0.25 sales/use tax which expires next month.

The hope with the new plan is that the county can double or better the delinquent tax collections with the restructuring.

Commissioner Janet Creighton exacted from Treasurer Zumbar a promise to report back to commissioners on a quarterly basis on the progress that county officials are making in reducing the backlog.  Before the announcement of the "new" plan, Stark County was, at best, collecting enough of the tax arrears to stay at the approximate $40 million owed by Stark's delinquent taxpayers.

Watching the process is definitely in order from the standpoint of non-county recipients (township, school boards, park districts, sewer districts and the like) of these revenues inasmuch as Stark County itself receives very little of the collected revenues and therefore has little "to be incentive" for collected the past due taxes.  County Treasury Zumbar tells the SCPR that a recent collection of $10 million netted only $405,000 for the Stark County general fund.  So 95% of the collections go to other Stark County political subdivisions.

One has to wonder why townships, boards of education, police districts, fire districts, parks and the other affected entities do not form a coordinating body of their own to monitor the collections and even, perhaps, fund a position or two (with the prosecutor/clerk of courts) to increase the pace of collection. 

While the commissioners and the county official group of Zumbar, Harold and Ferrero are the focus of stepped up efforts to reduce the property tax arrearage owed, the Stark County Political Report credits local attorney and civic activist Craig Conley for getting this ball rolling.

Recently Conley sent commissioners a letter volunteering to spearhead an operation with volunteer attorneys to make significant inroads into the $40 million due and owing.  However, commissioners have not taken Conley up on his offer (although they have spoken to him)  Prosecutor Ferrero says in the accompanying video to this blog that he has not heard from the commissioners on the Conley letter but that he welcomes Conley's input.

Conley's involvement with the collection process in not likely to happen.  Pressure is being brought to bear by leading Stark County Republicans on him to run against Ferrero next year.  Conley is seriously considering the entreaty. 

Notwithstanding Ferrero's video statement regarding Conley's overature, the SCPR is told by sources in a position to know that the commissioners have, in fact, talked with Ferrero about the Conley offer.

What is in dispute for The Report is not so much whether or not a Ferrero/commissioners (Conley topic) occurred.  It is whether or not Ferrero said to one or more of them (this is a paraphrase:) "What?  You want me to have a man come in and work in my office who is going to run against me?

Commissioner Benenabei has denied ever hearing Ferrero make such statement. (Bernabei:  "I don't think I heard John Ferrero say that")

For public consumption (i.e. the video), John Ferrero is not about to say that Conley is persona non grata in the collection effort.

Who would realistically expect such.

Nonetheless, - irrespective of the political factor - the bottom line is that a strong, sustained effort must be made to collect this money.  And the Stark County Political Report will be pushing the process along each step of the way!

Here is the Ferrero video.

CAN PROSECUTOR JOHN FERRERO LOOK MICHELLE SWONGER IN THE EYE? REPOSITORY MUFFLES MOM'S STORY; FOX8 "I TEAM" AND SCPR LETS MOTHER OF SEXUALLY MOLESTED SON SPEAK HER PEACE ON STARK COUNTY PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE!

Today, the SCPR provides a Stark County citizen the space to express her frustration with the functioning of the Stark County prosecutor's office.  Citizen Michelle Swonger, whose family, has had occasion to interact with Stark's prosecutor steps forward to give her account of the experience.

It is interesting to note that Mrs. Swonger's hometown newspaper, The Repository, in its editorial function has been silent on Prosecutor Ferrero's handling of the Swonger matter.  Prosecutor Ferrero seems to get a pass from Jeff Gauger et al.  Readers of Stark County's only countywide newspaper need to be asking themselves:  why does The Rep treat Ferrero with kid gloves?

A few days ago, The Report included a synopsis of the basis of the Swonger family experience, to wit:

There is a citizen living in Stark County that is absolutely furious with Stark County Prosecutor John Ferrero.

She (Michelle Swonger) believes that the prosecutor's office undercharged the now former Canton City Schools official James Irvin for illegal activities in his relationship with her son Nick.  Moreover, she believes - because of the undercharge - that the prosecutor's office is responsible for Irvin serving only 61 days of an 18 month sentence, and only required to register as a sex offender for 15 years rather than for a lifetime which would have been attained if Irvin had been charged with and convicted of  sexual  battery and/or attempted sexual battery in addition to gross sexual imposition, sexual imposition and providing alcohol to an underage person that Irvin was actually charged with.

Swonger's son, Nick, came into contact with Irvin, who was pupil services director for the Canton City Schools at $101,972 annually, when Nick was 15.

CLICK HERE for a look at a FoxNews (Channel 8 - Cleveland) I-Team investigation video of Swonger's allegation and a history of the Irvin/Swonger relationship.

The question the SCPR has about the handling of the Irvin case (note that Curd talks about her "supervisers" in the Channel 8 video which one has to believe included Ferrero) is this:  Prosecutor Ferrero obviously has as a priority going after sexual predators, and it is widely known that prosecutors are prone to overcharge not undercharge (as Swonger alleges).

John Ferrero needs to explain his standard for charging/indicting to the Stark County public!

The SCPR will provide Prosecutor Ferrero with unfettered access to the Stark County public via The Report to explain in more detail (than is contained in the Fox 8 report) why his office handled the Swonger matter the way the office did.

Here is Mrs. Swonger's response (edited to take out material that might be offensive to some SCPR readers and also editing out what The Report considers to be irrelevant or otherwise objectional material):  

I voted for John Ferrero myself,at the time never having a clue my son would be the victim of a high profile sex abuse case of a top level Canton city School official-James Alan Irvin-

initially when my son was intimidated at coming up against such a community icon as Irvin, I went to Ferrero's website and pulled up cases of sex abuse of kids, and I printed many cases off for my son Nick to review,along with sharing with young Nick that Ferrero had allocated nearly 360,000.00 of Federal stimulus strictly to the Prosecutor's sex crimes unit.

As a registered voter, and tax payer myself, who must I remind Ferrero once again, that I helped vote him into office in this county, I am apalled at the fact that his office had this police recorded confession, along with two other police officers hear Irvin out of his own mouth, confess to Canton Baptist Temple outreach pastor, what act he had done on my son.

And how Irvin cried I quote " Neal my life is over, you dont understand  I sucked the kid's ...". (...) however two Summit County-Penninsula, OH police officers heard this on an open call from the pastor's cell phone to their precinct, police station-plus a 58 minute recorded confession by Stark County sheriff's dept investigators-encouraged my son Ferrero's office would fairly prosecute the case despite Irvin having such community influence-now my son Nick claims he would never turn in a sex offender again, he says all it did was make his life worst, public ridicule and humiliation, folks getting on the radio stations calling him horrible names and STATING IRVIN HAD TO PLEAD guilty because the kid set him up so bad,thus that is why he had such a short term sentence and the fact Irvin was allowed early judicial release.

...  This county has an agenda and they have key players and they all stick together to protect whomever till they can keep to their political agenda. ...

needless to say Ferrero wont be getting my vote again, if he wants to rectify anything he needs to fire Asst Prosecutor Curd, or perhaps she should have been included in last  weeks layoff announcement for his office.

I guess since either one are happening this speaks loud and clear this decision was HIS!!! What disillusionment of the justice system for such a young impressionable young man. 

How does a prosecutors office that allotted 360,000.00 specifically to their sex crimes unit allow a top school official of one of the top 8 school districts in OHIO walk free in just 61 days???  

Michelle Swonger

Canton, OH

Mother of Victim

YOUR TAXPAYER FUNDS AT WORK? BUT FOR WHOM?

DISCLAIMER:  THIS BLOG (SPECIFICALLY & SCPR BLOGS, IN GENERAL) ARE WRITTEN BY YOURS TRULY AS AN OPINION-JOURNALIST EXERCISING RIGHTS ACCORDED BY THE FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION; NOT AS AN ATTORNEY AT LAW

Periodically, yours truly has to publish a disclaimer like the foregoing (as a reminder to those in the legal community) because back in January of this year, Stark County Prosecutor John Ferrero filed a disciplinary complaint over the SCPR's criticism of his/his office's handling of the Ron/Kyle Devies case in 2009.

The complaint was dismissed out-of-hand by Disciplinary Counsel.

Yours truly views Ferrero's attempt as an effort to shut down the SCPR's  inquiry, as a journalistic endeavor, of how he handles his office

As readers of the SCPR know, yours truly critiques many Stark County office holders (countywide as well as the county's political subdivisions) and none are immune.  The Repository does appear to have "hands off" posture to some Stark County officeholders.

Apparently, Mr. Ferrero thinks his office is.

To the story at hand.

All one has to do is go fill up with gasoline and the point of this blog becomes obvious.  Public officials, when given the opportunity to do so, use the official functions of their office to publicize their individual identity

Of course, the principal Stark County officer who does this is the county auditor.  Stark County Auditor Kim Perez's name is plastered all over the gas pumps of Stark County's gasoline stations.  We all know it and we all know the reason why.  In the officeholder's mind, the reason for doing so is give him/her a political advantage when the office comes up for re-election.

Perez's (a Democrat) action is not unique to his being auditor.  Brant Luther (a Republican) did it before him.  Janet Creighton  (a Republican) did it before him.  And on and on and on, ad nauseum.

This practice needs to stop; notwithstanding its long standing use!

Practically no one who calls to inquire or complain about the accuracy of gas metering gets to talk to Kim Perez.  A citizen is relegated to some functionary in the office to take the complaint and to launch an investigation.  And this is as it should be.  The auditor him/herself has big picture matters to attend to.

Accordingly, the label on the pumps should show the auditor's office contact information including the specific street/e-mail address and particular telephone number to contact if a customer has a complaint or inquiry.

And that rule should apply to all public officials who label work published to the taxpaying public.  And perhaps Stark County's legislators ought to be introducing legislation to make such a rule the law of Ohio.  After all, taxpayers are not interested in funding the political aggrandizement of public officials.

To Ferrero.

In early June, yours truly received a brochure from Ferrero's office entitled "The Voice of Victims."

It seems to be a worthy publication in and of itself.  Here are some of the topics covered, to wit:

But Ferrero, in the opinion of the SCPR,  uses far too much personally identifying information on the brochure.

All Ferrero needs to do is to accord this publication's worthy messages/information the prominence they deserve.  Obviously, Ferrero, Perez and others who use taxpayer supported publications  are going to deny that they are using the opportunity to enhance voter i.d. when the next election comes up.  But most of us in the public are not buying this line.

Here is what Ferrero spokesperson (Civil Prosecuting Attorney Deborah A. Dawson has to say in response to a SCPR inquiry:

The Voice for Victims biannual brochure was begun by Prosecutor Robert D. Horowitz, and distributed then, as now, by the Victim Witness Division of this office.  The format has not changed, but, of course, Prosecutor Ferrero’s name and picture replaced Prosecutor Horowitz’s, when Prosecutor Ferrero took office.

What Dawson's response amounts to is a "Ferrero is only doing what was done by those before him" argument.

A typical government response, no?

Hey, how about some rethinking?

And while we are thinking about this matter, let's pose a question to Republican candidate for county auditor Alan Harold.  Will he pledge to end the practice of "personal aggrandizement" on auditor labeling of Stark County business weight and measure devices, if he is elected?

Back to Ferrero.

An interesting disclaimer-esque phrase on the brochure is this:

Funding for this brochure is provided from assets seized and forfeited from criminals convicted of crimes in Stark County

The SCPR takes this phrase to be a subtle attempt to suggest that the brochure is not being printed at taxpayer expense.

If such is the case, The Report does not accept the apparent suggestion.

These moneys are public funds.  They are administered and accounted for just like moneys received as direct revenues from the Stark County taxpaying public.

Ferrero, in the next brochure, in addition to toning down his individual presence, should make it clear that these dollars are taxpayer dollars.

What does this brochure cost taxpayers?

Again, we turn to Dawson.  This is what she had to say on cost:

The acquisition of names, compilation of the brochure, printing and mailing (at bulk rate) are handled by, respectively: CCS Business Solutions; Canton Data; Dansizen Printing.  This issue’s cost was approximately $8,889.90.

Whatever the cost, public officials who use this “common” practice undermine their ability to convince taxpayers to support renewals or new levy requests.  Among other factors considered, that the voter thinks about when determining whether or not they are going support a “more finances request,” would be the aggrandizing tendency of public officials. 

As the liaison for the “Citizen’s Review Committee” (whatever happened to that group?) vis-a-vis Stark County officeholders, one would think that Ferrero would be particularly sensitive to the public perspective.

The “this is the way its always been done” as well as possible suggestions of "at no cost to the taxpayer" (when, in reality there is a cost) response by public officials no longer works.

We taxpayers expect officeholders to don the public perspective.

Unless and until they do so in a convincing fashion, the passage of renewals/new levy requests will be rare indeed!

The SCPR's analysis on aggrandizing may seem to be a small matter.  However, when added to all the other disenchantments that voters and taxpayers have with public officials these days, the aggrandizing takes on a cumulative effect and thereby becomes a much larger factor in the erosion of the public's confidence in public officials.

CONLEY AT WORK ON RECOVERY FROM ZEIGLER: SEE HIS RESEARCH. WILL PROSECUTOR FERRERO LET HIM PROCEED?

The SCPR is thoroughly impressed with the work of civic minded attorney Craig T. Conley (working on a pro bono basis) in formulating a plan to pursue Stark County Treasurer Gary Zeigler to compensate the Stark County public for funds missing from the county treasury on account of the Frustaci matter and for other unexplained missing funds (approximately $500,000 worth).

His plan seems solidly ensconced in Ohio statutory law and designed to put Stark County taxpayers at the head of the line (as much as possible under the law) to satisfy any judgment he may obtain in a court of law.  If delay persists, the SCPR fears that the taxpayers may be left with no Zeigler assets to go after if there is further delay in pursuing a court adjudication of Zeigler liability for the missing funds.

Prosecutor Ferrero has not refused to proceed.  However, he favors delay.  To say it again, The Report is concerned (as is Conley) that further delay may jeopardize the ability to collect on Zeigler assets should a court grant a judgment as the outcome of a lawsuit.

There is a conference scheduled between Ferrero, Conley and Judge John Haas at 10:00 AM this morning.  What is the subject of the conference?  Conley says he does not know.

The Report believes the conference could be either on who between Ferrero and Conley will be allowed to proceed against Zeigler, or the possibility that Judge Haas will recuse himself and perhaps speak for the entire Stark County Common Pleas bench on recusal because of the official relationships that exist between the Court, Ferrero and Zeigler.

If it is the former rather than the latter, then Ferrero could make it an easy matter by deferring to Conley.   But will he?  If it is the latter, then so be it.

Obviously, the conference could be about neither.  So it will be interesting to see.

Here is a reproduction of the memo sent to the SCPR by Attorney Conley last evening outlining his research findings on Zeigler transactions on formerly (currently - in the case of the mortgaged property) Zeigler-held  (as delineated in the Conley generated document) real property which Conley apparently thinks may be relevant to efforts to collect on a judgment which might be obtained by either Ferrero's office or Conley in a suit against Zeigler on account of the missing funds at the Stark treasury.

MARLBORO CAN NOW SETTLE DOWN. MARLBORO VOTERS "WISELY" REMOVE THAT "WISE GUY" FROM TOWNSHIP HALL. WILL THE MARLBORO DEBACLE SPILL OVER TO SWANSON, PEREZ & FERRERO?

It is obvious that soon to be "former" Trustee Tim Wise is a very bright guy.

Perhaps too smart for his own political good.

In the opinion of the SCPR, he got it in for the Devies family (Police Chief Ron Devies and his son Kyle),  and seized on a politically "unwise" course of events that resulted in his coming in 4th out 4 candidates for Marlboro Township trustee in the election held yesterday.

Yours truly is still astounded by Wise's taking what appears to be have been a communications problem between Ron and Kyle Devies and township officials (Trustee Wolf, in the main) and invoking the insertion of the Stark County's sheriff/prosecutor's office which resulted in criminal charges being filed against the Devies.

Not only was the Wise/Wolf/sheriff/prosecutor venture  politically unwise for Trustees Wise and Wolf (the Devies family is sort of an institution in Marlboro), but it was legal disaster from the get-go.

Sheriff Tim Swanson (via Chief Deputy Rick Perez) and Prosecutor John Ferrero (via his chief criminal prosecutor Dennis Barr) failed Marlboro residents and all of Stark County in allowing this "misunderstanding" to escalate into a criminal prosecution.

Swanson, Perez, Ferrero and Barr owe Marlboro and Stark Citizens an apology for not stopping this "runaway freight train."  But do not hold your breath.  These folks have egos that will not quit and therefore there will be no apology.

Judge Lee Sinclair put them back on their heels in dismissing the case right after the prosecution had finished its side of the case.  The defense did not have to put on a case at all.  This, folks, was a "legal slam dunk."  And yours truly (an attorney - but not criminal defense) knew it was a non-starter from the beginning was the the first and only media type to say so.

Can you imagine all the public tax dollars and resources that went into this "never should have been prosecuted" case?

Beyond Marlboro, that a highly respected police chief and son experience communication problems could end up being criminally prosecuted should not be lost on Stark County voters the next time Swanson (it will likely be Perez for Sheriff in 2012) and Ferrero run again.

The SCPR will be periodically reminding voters between now and November, 2010 of the failure of the sheriff's department and the prosecutor's office in the Devies matter.

Stark Countians are reminded that Perez, when he investigated this "minor" matter, thought he had to wear a "hidden" wire because he did not trust a fellow police officer to tell the truth.

The "wire wearing" was not lost on police officers throughout Stark County and the SCPR believes that Perez - in donning the wire - did enormous damages to Stark County law enforcement confidence and trust in the Stark County sheriff's office.

If Perez does run to succeed Swanson (the SCPR does not believe that Swanson will serve a full four year term), he has an awful lot of "explainin" to do and appologies to issue in order to have any chance whatsoever of being elected.

Larry Dordea is soon to become police chief in Hartville.  He was just elected to city council in Alliance.  And, he plans to run for for Stark County sheriff in 2012.

Dordea learned a lot from his 2008 try against Swanson.

What Dordea could have planned on is Perez getting stupid and doing what he did in the Devies matter.

If the line up stays as anticipated and Dordea doesn't play the blunderbuss like Perez somewhere along the way; he has to be the favorite in a Dordea/Perez match up.

In the end, the "unwise" and "unwarranted" (in the opinion of the SCPR) actions that we have witnessed in Marlboro Township - January through November, 2009 - could result not only in Trustee Tim Wise becoming - as he has as of last night - a "former" trustee come January, 2010 but also in the eventual political demise of Sheriff Tim Swanson and his cohort Rick Perez and, indeed, Prosecutor John Ferrero!

Oh, by-the-way:

Congratulations Trustee-elect Eddleman, and - must I say it - Hagan.