STARK COUNTY RADIO MEN LEAD DISCUSSION ON PROS & CONS OF FRACKING - NOT THE GUV'S DESIGNATED HITTER ON FRACKING: STARK COUNTIAN TODD SNITCHLER?

UPDATED 02/12/2011 AT 10:26 AM


SNITCHLER A MEMBER OF "THE CHAPEL IN NORTH CANTON"


SCREENING IS FOR 1:00 PM TODAY

On Thursday, Republican Governor John Kasich appointed one of Stark County's and Ohio's most devoted Republican officeholder Todd Snitchler (the wicked smart one - according to Kasich) to be his point man on the fracking issue.

It appears that Kasich is worried sick that the likes of Stark Countians Chris Borello (Concerned Citizens of Stark County), Louis Giavasis (Plain Township trustee) and Canton Councilwoman Mary Cirelli could upset his cozy arrangement with the oil and gas industry.  Hence the appointment of Snitchler to a position (chair of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio - PUCO) which is supposed to be looking out for the consumers and their utility rates.  And that may be how Snitchler does his work on the PUCO.  However, that is not his real job.

His real job is to be a political trouble shooter for Kasich in the field of energy production.  Right now that means discrediting and minimalizing Borello, Giavasis, Cirelli and other Ohioans who are avowed anti-fracking advocates.

Kasich has already determined that fracking is safe in the sense that it is a reasonable risk to take and he is seemingly determined to facilitate and expedite hydraulic fracking as a piece of his economic recovery pla1n for Ohio.  Snitchler is to pave the way.

Tonight Pat DeLuca of Q92 (92.5 - FM - DeLuca in the Morning) and Charlotte DiFranco are hosting a showing of the anti-fracking film Gasland at the Palace Theater in Canton beginning at 1:00 PM.

It is interesting that radio personalities Ron Ponder (Points to Ponder - his Plain Township hosted meetings of January 20/27th) and DeLuca are the prime persons moving the discussion of the safety of hydraulic fracking vis-a-vis the purity of our water supply (the main concern).   Public officials Kirk Schuring (Republican - Ohio House - 51st), Giavasis and Cirelli have been somewhat involved while most other Stark County elected officials (including all of Stark's county commissioners) are nowhere to be seen.

For tonight's event, word comes from DeLuca that the response of invited public officials has been disappointing to say the least, to wit:

Charlotte sent out a press release to over 50 elected officials.  She invited them to the screening and afforded EVERYONE (environmental groups, ODNR, even the Ohio Oil and Gas Energy Education Program a/k/a OOGEEP) the opportunity to set up table space at the Palace Theatre and talk to people afterwords.  Only a handful of officials RSVP'd.  Kasich declined outright but promised the press release would be sent to the "appropriate agencies."  Snitchler never replied.  The Ohio Department of Natural Resources declined any involvement - at 6:45 PM last Friday.

One of the most belligerent responses came "from the office of" newly elected state Representative Todd McKenney of New Franklin (Republican - New Franklin [just north of Canal Fulton, but in Summit county]).

Note that The Report says "from the office of" Todd McKenney.  More specifically, from none other than former Stark County Republican Party executive director Michael Cunnington.

Stark Countians will recall that it was Cunnington who called a meeting at Malone College in an effort to pressure Canton City Council to place an initiative on the ballot as an "apparent" non-partisan effort to modernize Canton government.

His effort was a major failure when it became obvious that Cunnington was fronting for the Stark Republican organized party in an effort to make Canton more competitive for Republicans in Canton's municipal elections.

Now he has moved on and is the legislative aide for Representative McKenney.

In a series of e-mails between Cunnington (representing McKenney's views) and DiFranco, McKenney comes across as a "smart aleck."   The Report doubts that McKenney understands how Cunnington portrayed him given his history of being a caring, evangelical Christian, to wit:

Needless to say, McKenney will not be attending.  Apparently, like Kasich and Snitchler, they already have their answers on fracking.

One more note.  It is interesting to see that Todd McKenney is connected with The Chapel in Akron. Why so?  Because Todd Snitchler is a member of a Chapel offshoot (for 15 years now, Snitchler tells The Report) "The Chapel in North Canton."  Hmm?

The SCPR applauds Ponder as well as DeLuca/DiFranco for their efforts to facilitate the public discussion, while not taking a position themselves.

Only if Kasich, Snitchler, McKenney, Borello, Giavasis and Cirelli were as opened-minded as the radio folks are, then perhaps Stark Countians and Ohioans could build a consensus?

SNITCHLER: THE MAN WHO HATES GOVERNMENT REGULATION WANTS TO BECOME A REGULATOR. HMM? "YOU GOTTA DO WHAT YOU GOTTA DO TO TAKE CARE OF 'HEARTH AND HOME,'" NO?

The Stark County Political Report has always taken Republican Todd Snitchler (Ohio House - the 50th) to be "the real deal" when it came to be a political "kool-aid" drinker of the rightest of Republican political positions.

Ending of the state income tax (co-sponsored HB 400 - 128th Ohio General Assembly), ending of the estate tax, and the ending of  most government regulation of business are some of the numerous items of the Republican right agenda that Snitchler is for.

So it was just a little mind-boggling when reports began to surface that Snitchler has applied to be one of two Republican appointees to be made to the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO).

When one is as anti-government as Snitchler is, why would one - first - even want to be a legislator, and, - second - in one of the agencies of government (the PUCO) which is quintessential government in terms of meting out government in spades.

Here is what the PUCO says about itself:

The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) affects just about every household in Ohio. That's because the PUCO regulates providers of all kinds of utility services, including electric and natural gas companies, local and long distance telephone companies, water and wastewater companies, and rail and trucking companies. The PUCO was created to assure Ohioans adequate, safe, and reliable public utility services at a fair price.  (emphasis added)

The SCPR figures there are one of two reasons.

First, it could be that the apparent devotion to partisan political principle is all a charade for Snitchler and that he has chosen to be a Republican rightest kool-aid drinker because he realizes that it plays well in Ohio's 50th House District which in a largely rural/suburban area that rings Stark County (Lake Township [where he lives], as well as Marlboro, Nimishillen, Osnaburg, Pike, Sandy, Sugarcreek, Bethlehem, Perry [part of] and Lawrence Townships and the unincorporated populations,  villages and small cities located in the townships).

Second, it could be that "a man has gotta do what a man gotta do" to take care of his family.  If Snitchler gets a PUCO appointment, it means a couple of things.  He won't have to face the rigors of running for office every two years (the fundraising, the door-to-door and attending the many political and public official functions of a state representative) and, moreover, he will have a more stable, ordered life within which to be a family man providing him with the opportunity to spend consistent time with his wife and daughters.  Finally, it will mean a significant pay raise, perhaps, more than doubling his pay.

Third, it could be that Snitchler is beginning to come under heavy political pressure because there appears to be a high likelihood that the Kasich administration will be cutting funding to local governments big-time in a number of ways:  ending the estate tax, restructuring and cutting local government funds (Snitchler serves on the local government committee), stop reimbursing local government for the 12.5% property tax rollback et cetera.

Snitchler is already hearing from some of his local government Republican political pals (e.g. Revoldt of North Canton) to understand what he will be doing to the viability of local government financing, if he joins forces with the Kasich administration to significantly defund local government.

Snitchler, if he remains state representative, faces severe Stark County-based political peer disapproval should he fall in line with the projected huge cuts in local government funding that many local government officials see coming down as the Legislature puts together the FY 2012-13 budget that needs to be in place by July 1, 2011.

Had Snitchler gotten his way last year (Republicans were in the minority in the Ohio House), this is what his "end the estate tax" posture would have cost Stark County communities:

Does Snitchler have the stomach to face up to local governments as they go belly-up at the hand of a Republican administration of which he serves as a handmaiden of?

Finally, it could be none of the above.  Perhaps Snitchler is a supreme political con artist and that he has no political principles at all but merely calculates (as all too many politicians do) what is best for him politically/personally and that's what he is going to do.

The SCPR believes that Snitchler has applied for PUCO for a combination of explanations of two and three above.

If The Report is correct, though better than explanations number one and four, it still bespeaks a guy who is not the "pure - man of political principle" he likes to project himself as being.

In the end, Stark Countians now know that Todd Snitchler is a man who looks out primarily for his selfish interests even if he has to hold his nose as he participates in a government unit doing quintessentially government things (i.e. regulating business).

Whether or not he gets the PUCO job, he can no longer claim that he is a man of political principle seeking to apply that principle for the betterment of the public.

SNITCHLER: (OHIO HOUSE - THE 50TH) NEARLY $130,000 IN CONTRIBUTIONS ($96,605) & IN-KIND ($37,417.52) FOR PRE-GENERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT. OUTDOES BOSLEY IN RASING CASH BY ABOUT $50,000 - IMPRESSIVE, NO?

PARTIAL LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

COMMISSIONER TODD BOSLEY (ERR THE OHIO DEMOCRATIC PARTY) CALLED REPUBLICAN STATE REPRESENTATIVE TODD SNITCHLER A RAT. THAT AIN'T NICE, NO?

UPDATE AT 03:45 PM


Representative Snitchler has contacted the SCPR with a response to the anecdotal story that comes from Stark County Commissioner Pete Ferguson (Democrat) about a conversation he overheard from several supporters of Snitchler at an area event to the effect that the incumbent Republican is down in the polls and that he needs to get cracking.


Snitchler tells The Report that the anecdotal piece does not square up with reality.  He says that in fact his recent poll (within the past week) done by a professional Columbus-based polling organization shows him up "north of 10 percentage points."

A distinguishing mark of the Stark County Political Report is to provide space to candidates for public office to respond to points made in SCPR blogs.

ORIGINAL  POST

Last evening 50th Ohio House District candidate Commissioner Todd Bosley (Democrat - Marlboro) called the SCPR to give The Report a heads up on a flyer sent out by the Ohio Democratic Party (ODP) headed up by Chris Redfern.

The Report took the Bosley phone call as an effort to distance himself from the highly derogatory piece.  To call someone a rat is an ultimate dissing. Bosley says that he has no control over what the ODP does and that he has made it clear to the Columbus operatives not to be putting out pieces like the one pictured above.

While Bosley denies thinking Representative Snitchler is a rat, he does outright call him an obstructionist.  Bosley says that Snitchler has infuriated many House Democrats and that consequently the ODP/Ohio House Democratic Caucus combo is targeting Snitchler.

According to the flyer, Snitchler is a rat because (according to Commissioner Bosley err - The Report keeps forgetting - the ODP) he is:

• a job killer
• stretches the truth
• is not a friend to our [the 50th District] community

Where does Bosley err - there The Report goes again - the ODP get that from?

Well, Snitchler is a co-sponsor of House Bill 400 which is Republican gubernatorial candidate John Kasich's plan to do away with Ohio's income tax over a number of years.

And if there were a realistic chance of the bill passing,  the ODP might be on to something.  But as the SCPR sees it, the chances are between slim and none that the measure passes during the 128th Ohio General Assembly and Slim just left town.

Snitchler like most Republican candidates are fervent opponents of government taxation at all levels.  Though the SCPR buys Snitchler's argument that HB 400 has virtually no chance of passage,  the ODP is right in its suggesting a re-visitation to HB 400 in the upcoming 129 General Assembly?

How so?

The Republicans have a stranglehold on the Ohio Senate and there is no chance for the Democrats to gain control this election.  Moreover, it is looking more and more like Republican Kasich might defeat Democrat Governor Ted Strickland come November 2nd.  Kasich is currently holding about a 10% lead in a number of major polls.

So if Kasich wins, then the only domino left to fall is the Ohio House.  With Republicans in control of the executive and legislative branches of government, then the Kasich idea as put in legislative form by Representative John Adams and a whole host of Republicans is as least (in the words of Representative Snitchler) "on the table for discussion."

Snitchler goes on to point out that while the topic of jettisoning the income tax will be on the table in the 129th, Minority Leader Billy Batchelder (who will become Speaker of the House if Republicans take control of the Ohio House) has said that the current depressed Ohio economy will not tolerate abandoning the income tax a la House Bill 400.

The real point of "the rat flyer" is whether or not the Snitchler/Bosley campaign is headed for ugliness.

Right now both Bosley and Snitchler are saying that if the campaign does devolve into a morass of political mudslinging, it will be the fault of the other.

Bosley can disassociate from "the rat flyer" all he wants, but the public perception is going to be that he is part of what comes out in his name.  He can argue that he cannot control what comes out of Columbus.  But it does not wash with the public.

Same can be said for Snitchler for when the Ohio Republican Party/House Caucus inevitably sends out a nasty piece in his name.

Snitchler tells the SCPR that he is going to try to keep the campaign on the high road but that he does have Plan B at the ready.  The focal point of his attack?  You've got it, Bosley's (as a commissioner ) "spearheading" (to use Snitchler's word) the imposition of the 0.50 of one percent sales tax increase on Stark Countians in December, 2008.

Snitchler knows how unpopular the tax was as evidenced by the voters rejection of retaining the tax by a 2 to 1 margin in November, 2009.  He also noted that it is questionable that Bosley will be able to keep his promise to Stark County voters to maintain a 50/50 split on the imposed tax revenues between the Stark 9-1-1 rehab project and the county's general revenue fund.

About $2.75 million remains segregated in the Stark budget for 9-1-1.  The Stark County Political Report believes that the new set of commissioners who will take over on January 1, 2011 will be under enormous pressure to take some of the $2.75 million and put it into the general fund.  The county faces an average of 16.1% in Stark County departmental cuts over Fiscal Year 2011.

On another Snitchler/Bosley front, Commissioner Pete Ferguson tells the SCPR that he recently was at a public event at which he heard some Stark Republicans talking about a poll that the Snitchler camp has showing Snitchler (who is an incumbent Republican running in what appears to be a favorable Republican year) behind Bosley, and the quipping further that he had better ratchet up the campaign.

Early on in this campaign season, The Report tabbed Bosley/Snitchler as one of the leading closely contested races in all of Stark County.  The control of the Ohio House of Representatives could depend on who wins between Bosley and Snitchler in the 50th located right here in Stark County.  The 50th is indexed as being a dependable Republican district and a Bosley win would have to be taken as a "political upset."

Stay tuned to the Stark County Political Report for indepth analysis of how each of the highly contested Stark County races are playing out with the Stark County voting public.

VIDEO (PART 8) BATTLE OF THE TODDS - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & SUMMARY OF WHY EACH SHOULD BE ELECTED

Today's segment if the final of the videotape taken of the July 28th Ron Ponder "Points to Ponder" radio show on WHBC-AM1480 entitled "The Battle of the Todds."

The participants, of course, were Todd Bosley (Democrat and Stark County commissioner) and Todd Snitchler (Republican and state representative for the 50th Ohio House District).

Bosley is challenging Snitchler for the House seat.

The SCPR, again, thank Ron Ponder for allowing The Report to videotape this WHBC public service.

Here is the video.

VIDEO: "ANNEXATION" - BIG IN CICCHINELLI'S RE-ELECTION BID; BIG ISSUE IN THE 50TH OHIO HOUSE RACE, "THE PROXY EFFECT?" WILL CICCHINELLI "PRIVATELY" SUPPORT CREIGHTON OVER MEEKS?

One of, if not the prime reason, major reason that Francis H. Cicchinelli is running for re-election for a seventh term as mayor of Massillon is "unfinished business" in bringing Massillon back to full economic viability by the use of what he says is the economic tool of annexation.

Annexation Director Sam Sliman of Canton (the self-described "Darth Vatder to the Townships) has the same quest for Canton.

Though one is a Democrat (Cicchinelli) and the other is a Republican (Sliman) they couldn't agree more on the importance of annexation used to the hilt to help rehabilitate city economies.

On the other hand, there are township-oriented folks like Stark County Commissioner Todd Bosley and state Representative Todd Snitchler that see the matter as more a "preserving the townships" principle that they agree that the annexation law needs to be modified to enhance township preservation.

These annexation differences could factor into the political campaigns underway this year (Bosley v. Snitchler, 50th Ohio House District) and next year for Cicchinelli in his bid for a seventh straight term as mayor.  Also, it could factor into the Creighton (Republican) versus Meeks (Democrat) county commissioner race this year.

Readers will see on the accompanying video that Mayor Cicchinelli is very displeased that former Jackson Township trustee and now Commissioner Steven Meeks voted with Commissioner Todd Bosley to deny the Poets Glen annexation.

While he denies that he will support Creighton,  he qualifies the denial by saying: "in a public way."  Hmm.  Privately?

The Report does not view Meeks as a out and out supporter of the "township" view of annexation as Commissioner Bosley seems to be, even with his Poets Glen vote.  Remember, his close political ally Randy Gonzalez (Jackson Township fiscal officer among a number of other public roles) brokered the annexation agreement between Canton and Jackson Township.

So why did he vote to deny Poets Glen?  The SCPR believes he got caught up in the passion of the moment and got steamrollered by Bosley.

Back to the annexation issue in and of itself.

The SCPR's view?

Annexation is not an "enduring" economic tool.  It is quick fix at best.  And, it by its operation - within Stark County and Ohio - it is designed to take from one entity to add to another.

However, townships should not be content to be as townships have always been.  We are in the 21st century and townships need to be just as much economically engaged as are Ohio's villages and cities.

The Report gets the take that all too many township officials have a idyllic sense of the township form of existence and are not fully engaging nearby cities for the mutual benefits of both types of government.

There probably does not need to be any change in annexation law.

What is needed is township, village, and city officials working in a corroborative and sensitive fashion that is a win-win for both the townships and corporate entities.

The Report has taken videos in the SCPR library and edited into this single video a representation of the importance and significance that Cicchinelli, Sliman, Bosley and Snitchler attach to the annexation issue.

PART TWO - DEALING WITH THE $8 BILLION DEFICIENT OHIO BUDGET - BOSLEY V. SNITCHLER DEBATE 07/28/2010 ("POINTS TO PONDER" WHBC-1480AM)

Ron Ponder who is a talk show host on WHBC-1480 with his program "Points to Ponder" very effectively managed a debate between incumbent Republican state Representative Todd Snitchler and challenger and Stark County Commissioner Todd Bosley and thereby provided Stark Countians who live in the 50th Ohio House District (Marlboro, Nimishillen, Pike, Sandy, Sugarcreek, Perry [part], Tuscarawas, Lawrence and Lake Townships) with a good look at the varying views of the two Todds.

Ponder and his producer and  protege at WHBC, Stephon King, dubbed the debate as "The Battle of the Todds."

Ponder and WHBC are doing a tremendous public service for the Stark County public in doing this debate as well as arranging for a number of debates between Stark County candidates in other races.   Moreover, Ponder is working on putting together appearances by the likes of Governor Strickland and his Republican opponent John Kasich, Republican U.S. Senate candidate Rob Portman and Democrat Lee Fisher among others.

In today's debate Ponder drew the candidates out on what each would do to solve the projected $8 billion shortfall in the Fiscal Year 2012 - 2013 Ohio budget that is to be balanced by June 1, 2011.

Neither candidate seemed to have much of an answer. 

To sum the offerings up, the SCPR took Snitchler's view to, in essence, be to "cost cut into balance" whereas Bosley's view boiled down to create jobs and "grow the economy into balance."

For readers who want to get a more realistic and complete grasp of what needs to be done, go to the Center for Community Solutions at read Thinking the Unthinkable:  Finding Common Ground for Resolving Ohio's Fiscal Crisis.

FIRST DEBATE OF 2010 POLITICAL SEASON: BOSLEY V. SNITCHLER - 10:00 AM TODAY - WHBC1480 AM "POINTS TO PONDER"

UPDATE:  07/28/2010 AT 8:47 AM

COMMENT FROM SCPR READER

Truth has left a new comment on your post "FIRST DEBATE OF 2010 POLITICAL SEASON: BOSLEY V. ...":

Martin I believe your analysis of this situation is rather elementary. I find the polling information referenced laughable as I am sure you and your readers are quite familiar with how "independent" polls are administered. If it was anything like the phone call I received from the Bosley campaign a month or so ago where several leading and quite frankly underhanded questions were asked, such as "If you knew Todd Snitchler was still stealing from a charity would you vote for him?" Not an exact question but I think you get the picture.

As for Snitchler only agreeing to debate Bosley because he's running from behind; I find that line of reasoning highly suspect at best! For anyone who has ever listened to the two candidates speak it is very evident who the more intelligent, engaged, informed, and interested person is. I believe that Snitchler has the chance to deal Bosley the death blow before we even get to August with a strong performance in today's debate!

Also, breifly (sic) looking at the respective records of the two candidates; Bosley has done nothing besides raise taxes, play the blame game, and be largely inactive and ineffective even though he controls an all Democrat board of commissioners! Snitchler, on the other hand, has been hampered by the hyperpartisan, and apparently misguided Democrat leadership of the Ohio House. Snitchler has, however, managed to introduce some worthwhile, much needed legislation, despite the cahrged (sic) political atmosphere in Columbus.

I urge all of your readers to tune into the debate today as I believe one candidate will clearly distance themself (sic) from the other and show who is the only logical, deserving, worthwhile candidate for Stark County's 50th House District.

ORIGINAL POST

The first debate between Republican incumbent Todd Snitchler and Democrat challenger Todd Bosley (currently Stark County commissioner) was to take place last month at a Stark County Townships Association meeting in Nimishillen Township (where Bosley served four years as a trustee).  However, the Nimishillen Township trustee proposed hosting was squelched at the Association's May meeting when outside-the-50th members objected on the basis that the 50th includes only part of Stark County's townships.  Also, some members did not want the Association to fray off into political presentations.

Bosley and Snitchler have done a mini-blog-debate on the Stark County Political Report.

Today on "Points to Ponder," WHBC's Ron Ponder will guide the two through a "discussion" of the difference between the two on the important issues facing Ohio over the next two years (Ohio representative are elected for two year terms).

Bosley, being the challenger, has been particularly excited about a one-on-one with Snitchler.

In SCPR contacts with Bosley, he seems to see confrontations everywhere with Snitchler.

The Report was somewhat surprised to learn that Bosley is drawing lines over whom supports which application to the Ohio Department of Development Job Ready Sites (ODOD-JRS) statewide competition.

Bosley says he is pre-eminently supporting the Beck Industrial Park project centered in Louisville.  He claims that perforce of the support that members of Louisville City Council (as individuals; not as a formal body) are supporting his candidacy. 

A Louisville city councilman denies to The Report that Louisville Council as a formal body is supporting Bosley while expressing Council's appreciation for any support that it gets from anybody.

While Bosley (as commissioner) supports all the applications for ODOD-JRSs, in conversation it is apparent he is squaring off against Snitchler on whom support what project as some sort of competition.  Bosley tells The Report Snitchler is primarily supporting the Prospect Industrial Park project on the former Stark County Farm site headed up by local McDonalds franchise magnate Guy Cuchini.  The Report is skeptical of the Bosley take on this matter.

Perhaps the matter will come up for discussion today.

Snitchler does show signs (e.g. the exchanges on the SCPR,  a letter to the editor yesterday in The Rep and today's WHBC appearance) that he thinks he is running behind Bosley in the polls.  The SCPR has learned that a poll taken by a Columbus-based polling firm shows Bosley up by about 10 points with only 10% undecided.

If the poll accurately gauges 50th District voter sentiment, it is truly amazing.

Why amazing?

The Report thinks that the numbers ought to be reflecting tinges of the overwhelming Stark County voter reaction to the Stark County commissioners (Bosley, Harmon and Vignos in December, 2008) having imposed a 0.50 of one percent sales tax.  In November, 2009, Stark Countians rejected the retention of the tax by a two to one margin.

Moreover, the 50th is a gerrymandered Republican district designed to keep a Republican representing the district to say nothing of an "incumbent" Republican.

The SCPR sees little reason why Snitchler would want to engage Bosley other than on the basis of his and his Columbus handlers having assessed that he is in trouble in terms of holding the 50th for the GOP.

SERIES: HOW ARE THE MEMBERS OF THE STARK COUNTY DELEGATION TO THE OHIO GENERAL ASSEMBLY DOING? TODAY: SNITCHLER #2

As readers will note, very little of what is introduced in the Ohio House of Representatives gets passed by the House much less passed by the Senate and signed into law by Governor Strickland.

Along the way, legislators such as Todd Snitchler (Republican - Lake) attach their names as sponsors and co-sponsors of bill which have no chance of passage and many of which are a waste of legislative resources.

From the graphic above, only four of the ten covered in this Part 2 of Representative Snitchler's work in the Ohio General Assembly have seen the light of day in any way, shape or form.

Here is a report of the six bills co-sponsored by Snitchler which languish in committee:

HB 120

Primary Sponsor(s):  Batchelder 

Subject:  Legislative Budget Committee/Legislative Budget Office of LSC-establish

HB 123 Primary Sponsor(s):  Goyal & Mandel Subject:  Income tax credit-degrees in science/ technology/engineering/math-based

HB 129

Primary Sponsor(s):  Adams J 

Subject:  Concealed carry handgun law-revise

HB 144

Primary Sponsor(s):  Grossman 

Subject:  Income tax credit-100%-have baccalaureate degree and reside in Ohio

HB 157

Primary Sponsor(s):  Sayre 

Subject:  Special Olympics license plates-create

HB 160

Primary Sponsor(s):  Koziura 

Subject:  Education appropriations-enact separately from and before other appropriations

Two of Snitchler's co-sponsored bills merit special mention.

HB 129 (Concealed Carry)

A sister piece of legislation being voted upon in committee in the Ohio Senate tomorrow (May 26) is described this way by the Ohio Concealed Carry website:

... [W]ould eliminate the current confusing standards of carrying a firearm in a motor vehicle.  In addition, the proposal would also allow permit holders to carry a firearm for self-defense in a restaurant that serves alcohol, provided they are not consuming, thus eliminating another “victim zone” in Ohio.
 

...

Current law specifies that a firearm must be either be: 

1.) In a holster secured on the person.

2.) In a closed case, bag, box, or other container that is in plain sight and that has a lid, a cover, or a closing mechanism with a zipper, snap, or buckle, which must be opened for a person to gain access to the handgun. 

3.) The loaded handgun is securely encased by being stored in a closed glove compartment or center console, or in a case that is locked. A locked case does not need to be in plain sight (an unlocked case does).

HB 160 (Educational Appropriations)

This bill appears to be a rework of the perennial effort by Kirk Schuiring (Republican - 29th - Senate) to give public education first funding status.

WILL BOSLEY & SNITCHLER DEBATE ON JUNE 17, 2010 AT THE NIMISHILLEN TWP HOSTED "STARK COUNTY TOWNSHIP TRUSTEES ASSOCIATION" MEETING?

Today is primary day in Ohio and Stark County.  However, there are no primary contests in the Ohio House 50th District races (Republican & Democrat). 

Notwithstanding the absence of primaries,  the SCPR projects the 50th District face off in November between Republican incumbent Todd Snitchler and Democrat Todd Bosley to be the most important Ohio House race in all of Ohio.

Why is that?

Because the Republicans have a real chance to capture control of the House this fall and the Ohio Democratic Caucus knows it. 

The Report believes the Democrats have known about the real possibility that they could be headed for minority status in the lower chamber for some time now and have been scouring all 99 districts to find opportunities to offset expected Democratic seat loses in November with take-aways from Republicans in order to maintain their majority.

That's why Ohio Speaker of the House Armond Budish showed up on the doorstep of Stark County commissioner Todd Bosley in January, 2010.

Democratic caucus polling had shown that Bosley was a strong candidate to unseat Republican Snitchler.  So Bosley was going to be the Democratic candidate.

But wait a minute.  The slot was already spoken for.  Realtor Jeffrey Ury of Lake Township (also Snitchler's home) had already taken out petitions.  And he was not of a mind to step aside.

Well, the Caucus (believing Bosley to be a much formidable candidate) was not about to let this inconvenience to get in its way.  The Report believes that the Caucus induced Ury to step aside. 

Ury is now set to be a a Caucus-employed regional director for Democratic candidates.  His region includes the Bosley/Snitchler race. The Report has also been told that Ury was being heavily considered to be Bosley's campaign manager until such was squelched by House Caucus director Liz Brown (daughter of U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown).

Ury did confirm the former but denied the latter.

Nevertheless The Report continues to believe that Ury being Bosley's campaign manager was Bosley's carrot to Ury to get him out of the primary only to have the idea vetoed by Brown.

Moreover, Ury made it clear to the SCPR that he had not approached the Caucus for the regional directorship.  Rather, he says, it was the Caucus had approached him.  He also denied that it had anything whatsoever to do with his getting out of the primary.

This Bosley/Ury chain of events is reminiscent the Snitchler/Tina Hagan tiff (daughter of term limited out - the 50th - Republican state Representative John Hagan) pre-primary 2008.  Hagan claimed she was approached by the Ohio Republican Party with an inducement to bow out of the primary against Snitchler.  However, she refused to do so.

Snitchler handily defeated her, but sources tell the SCPR that former Rep. Hagan supported Snitchler opponent Democrat Celeste Dehoff in the November general election whom Snitchler defeated by nearly 20 percentage points.

Ury, of course, given the directorship will be supporting Bosley.  And there is Ury's direct statement of Bosley support given to The Report.

Signs that others in Stark County sense The Report's take on the crucial importance of the Bosley/Snitchler match up is evident in an invitation issued the duo by the Nimishillen Townhship trustees who are hosting the Stark County Trustee Association's monthly meeting on June 17th. 

Invitation to do what?

Debate, that is what!

Here is a copy of the invitation:

Isn't June a little early?

It is.  But in this race with its statewide ramifications, campaign normalcy and tradition (campaigns debates usually do not occur until - at the very earliest - until September) will not apply.

Both candidates are working at a fever pitch already.  Snitchler has quite a few signs out for the primary and is making quite a few appearances throughout the 50th.  Bosley is doing heavy door-to-door and fundraising and being a very visible commissioner.

So buckle up Stark Countians, the Bosley/Snitchler political fireworks are about to burst onto the local political scene.

Though the 50th only includes about one-third of Stark County, the outcome is of enormous importance to all of Stark County and, indeed, the state of Ohio!

JEFFREY URY IS "STUNG" BY BOSLEY'S IMMINENT ENTRY INTO 50TH OHIO HOUSE DISTRICT RACE? REFUSES TO TALK WITH SCPR UNLESS ONE CONSIDERS A "PRESS RELEASE-ESQUE" EMAIL THE EQUIVALENT OF A "BACK AND FORTH" CONVERSATION

 UPDATE:

It's not a return phone call and it is a response to points that Ury selected, but Jeffrey Ury has "sort of" responded THE SCPR's Monday  bog reporting that Stark County commissioner Todd Bosley is on the brink of announcing a run for the Ohio House - 50th district.

Ury has issued what the SCPR deems to be a "press release," which the SCPR does not normally publish with out parsing.  Just ask Congressman John Boccieri.  The congressman has cut the SCPR off from his press releases because they get critically sliced and diced.

Since the SCPR has written the piece below on Ury/s being incommunicado  in terms of responding to The Report's telephone call, yours truly has chosen to make an exception and publsh Ury's email.

However, The Report expects Ury to return the phone call so there can be a back and forth on points The Report wants to explore.

Martin,

Thank you for contacting me regarding Todd Bosley as a possible candidate for the 50th District house seat.   As you mentioned, Todd and I had spoken about it on Sunday afternoon.   I respect Todd being upfront with me about his intentions and his meeting with Speaker Budish.  As Todd has said, he is still weighing his options.   I am confident that he will make his decision based on what’s best for him and his family. 

Regarding your comment that I will “Step Aside” if Todd runs, nothing could be further from the truth.   I began this campaign because the constituents of the 50th district deserve representation focused on job creation, economic recovery, and alternative school funding.   I do not believe Mr. Snitchler has supported any job creation legislation since being elected.   And, as you featured in one of your blogs, Todd Snitchler suggested at a tea party rally that Stark County should decline economic stimulus money targeted towards job creation.  As Mr. Bosley implied, he has been ineffective as a legislator.   By declaring as a candidate, I made a commitment to myself, my family, my supporters, and the constituents of the 50th district.  I fully intend to honor that commitment.   Todd and I are friends and have a great deal of respect for each other.    If he chooses to campaign for the 50th District, then we will look forward to a spirited primary process.   I believe the voters will benefit from two qualified candidates who share the same goals for the people of the 50th District.

Regardless of the outcome of a possible primary, the Democratic party will be united as we focus our efforts on gaining 50th District House seat and helping House Democrats continue their work fostering job creation and helping to move Ohio ’s economy forward.”

Thank You

Jeffrey Ury

ORIGINAL POST

Should Stark County commissioner Todd Bosley decide not to run for the Ohio House - 50th, petition pulling Jeffrey Ury (Democrat - Lake) is showing that he may not be suited to be a formidable candidate against Republican Todd Snitchler.

The SCPR broke the Bosley story on Monday and as part of doing the story endeavored to contact Ury.

 The Report has reason to believe that Ury got the message for a callback, but has not heard a word from him.

Apparently, Ury only talks with the media when it suits him.  Let something sour or controversial come up, and he is nowhere to be heard or seen.  A number of Stark County elected officials  have an arrogance about them that instructs them that they need not be accountable to the public.

While Ury is not yet an elected official, he has taken out petitions to run for a public office. Having done so, he has put himself under public scrutiny as to whether or not he has the qualities that recommend him for election.  His refusal to talk is "an early warning" that he blows off public inquiry when it does not suit him.

It seems to the SCPR that Ury doesn't want to take questions about how much weaker he is running in polling done by the Ohio House Democratic Caucus that shows him running fairly even with Sntichler but way behind Bosley.

It seems to the SCPR that Ury doesn't want to take questions about his difficulties in raising campaign funds in the face of the Caucus promising Bosley loads of money.

Well, if Bosley chooses not to run and Ury becomes the Democratic nominee; what questions will he choose not to answer then.

Well, if Bosely chooses not to run and Ury becomes the Democratic nominee and goes onto being elected, what questions will he choose not to answer then.

Despite the polling numbers, there are a number of folks in Stark County and in the 50th Ohio House district who do not like Todd Bosley for the positions he takes and his confident "can do" attitude.

But no one can say he won't take the hard questions.

Bosley may decide not to run for the 50th.  And, if he doesn't, Ury is likely the odds on favorite to be the Nominee.

But what kind of nominee will he be.

The SCPR has asked Todd Snitchler hard questions and has written unflattering blogs on him. 

Does this cause Snitchler to not take the SCPR's calls.

Indeed not.

Like Bosley, he does it right.  Snitchler faces up and takes on all comers.

Last month, the SCPR had a short conversation with Ury at the Marlboro candidates night.  He told yours truly how much  he enjoyed The Report's probing blogs on Snitchler.

So what's the message?

Snitchler is accountable, but Ury is not?

Ury, if he is to become the Democratic nominee, has a lot to learn about being a public figure and much, much more about being a candidate for public office!

TRACKING OUR LEGISLATORS SERIES: JUST HOW "REPUBLICAN" IS TODD SNITCHLER, ANYWAY?

Back on August 13th, the SCPR did a piece what accomplishments Representative Todd Snitchler (R-50th) has had in his nearly one year in the Ohio Legislature.

The answer:  none, in terms of legislative achievements.  But the SCPR does know of at least one instance where a 50th district constituent is pleased with Snitchler for his efforts to solve a family SERB (State Employment Relations Board) problem.  And undoubtedly, there are others within the 50th who will say that Snitchler has helped with problems they have/are experiencing with state government.

He is likely a vast improvement over his predecessor in office on this count.

Over the eight years that Hagan (R-Marlboro) held the office, the SCPR heard seemingly countless stories how Hagan blew off 50th District constituents.  Maybe that is why he lost countywide in his commissioner race to neophyte Democrat Pete Ferguson in 2008?

But on legislation, Hagan - a limited as he was, beats Snitchler hands down.

How's that?

Big difference.

Hagan was part of a "majority" and sometimes "supermajority" Republican caucus in the Ohio House. 

Whereas Snitchler is in the minority.

Ordinarily, the SCPR would be emphathetic with the Snitchler situation.

However, it is difficult to be so with Snitchler because The Report believes that he is just a kinder, gentler and more personally responsive John Hagan.

In terms of partisanship and "toeing the party line."  It's hard to see any difference.

So, his expressed frustration (CLICK sentence to read the details) on the Ohio House Dems shutting him out on getting any legislation through (even, apparently non-partisan bills) seems to be more than a tad hypocritical.  

Snitchler could change the SCPR thinking on this, if he were to take the "pledge" set out in the referenced blog and e-mail it to yours truly.  But he hasn't to date.  Nor did he communicate it in an encounter at the Stark County Fair just a week ago.

To show readers just how partisan Sntichler is, look at the pdf based graphic (presented below) which shows his top 20 contributors for the period he announced in the Republican primary (2007) through to the latest campaign finance report.

Of the $662,085 he has raised to date, of the top 20 contributors - a whopping 86% came from Ohio Republican Party sources.  Contributions viewed overall show that 90% of political donations came from both the party and individual/Polltical Action Committee contributors who gave ONLY to Republicans. 

Moreover, of the "less that 100%" contributions to Republicans group, the average contribution rate to Republicans has been 80%.

Hardly, sounds like a guy who is trying to be bi-partisan, non-partisan, does it?

A note:  companies cannot contribute to candidates by law and therefore attribution to "Timken Company" means that individual contributors worked for a Timken company or political action group.

Here is the pdf graphic on the top 20 Snitchler contributors redacted by the SCPR from material as published by National Institute of Money in State Politics.Gop to Snitchler    

DON'T YOU JUST LOVE IT WHEN PRIVATE ENTERPRISE ADVOCATES FOR THE RIGHT "NOT TO COMPETE?"

DISCLAIMER (something The Repository doesn't do). Yours truly's spouse is an elected member of the Stark County Educational Service Center (SCESC). The following story/opinion has, in part, to do with Larry Morgan who is the superintendent of the SCESC. The opinions expressed in this blog are the sole opinion of yours truly and the SCPR does not speak for nor reflect the views of the spouse. Readers who are interested in the wife's views, need to contact her.

The Blog:

Representative Todd Snitchler (Republican - Lake, the 50th Ohio House district) has nothing on yours truly in terms of free enterprise and the highly beneficial qualities of competition to Stark County, Ohio and America.

Why bring Snitchler up?

Because he is the quintessential local politician in terms of his devotion to area, state and national chambers of commerce, the Ohio (and National) Manufacturers Association, the Ohio Roundtable and the like. He truly believes that "privatizing" in and of itself is the panecea for all that ails the nation.

Where Snitchler and the SCPR part company is his "bromide effect" of private enterprise.

Let's take a look at the "private enterprise" flap that surfaced in The Repository today, Pharmacists say schools' mail-order policy will hurt business, as a case-in-point.

Here you have a bunch of "independent" businesses (pharmacies - one of the most remunerative businesses in all of America) in effect wanting a subsidy from the Stark County taxpaying public by requiring thousands of Stark County teachers to buy locally.

This is competition?

And who is the boogeyman in all this?

None other than SCESC superintendent Larry Morgan.

In the opinion of yours truly, Morgan is an imperial-style superintendent.

Morgan is a very bright and determined individual. He knows how to organize, negotiate and is probably the most efficient school administrator in Stark County and perhaps in all of Ohio.

If one comes unprepared in dealings with Morgan; he will have you for lunch.

Recently, yours truly and Morgan crossed paths on an education multi-institutional issue. The SCPR is convinced that Morgan engineered (which he denied in a person-to-person telephone conversation) a "behind the scenes" move with most if not all the superintendents of Stark County's school districts to dramatically change the structure and operations of the delivery of higher education-esque program originating, for the most part, in local school districtis.

The SCPR sketched out the foregoing just to give readers an idea (other examples exist) of why the SCPR ascribes Morgan as being a imperial-style superintendent.

The SCPR believes that Morgan hurts himself with his "take-it-or-leave-it" public persona and his propensity to work things out "behind closed doors," only then to spring it on unwitting subjects.

This is why you have an iconoclast like Ralph Jentes (VP of the Louisville Education Association) coming out of the woodwork to attack Morgan in The Rep's piece. Jentes, who lives in Lake, seemed to make former Lake superintendent Bill Stetler (now Northwest) a target by attending Lake board meetings to criticize Stetler and writing letters to the editor of the Hartville News as an additional tool to get at Stetler.

Isn't Jentes out-of-step with the OEA? Who is Jentes representing anyway? Local pharmacies?

Note the Ohio Educational Association's Diana Miller quote printed in The Rep's story:

“It seems disingenuous to me that someone is criticizing the schools for sending jobs out of the area and to attempt to bring political pressure on the schools to say we’re sending jobs elsewhere, Our response would be, what we have done saves jobs. We haven’t sent jobs outside Stark County. We’re saving teachers’ jobs. Their (the independent pharmacists’) bottom line is the bottom line.”

Generally, what Morgan does, will stand up "to the light of day." So why is he so secretive?

Beats yours truly.

Morgan needs to reconsider his administrative ways.

Having said the foregoing, it is the opinion of the SCPR that Morgan has done an excellent job with the Stark County Schools Council on Governments (SCSCOG) health care plan.

Morgan has saved Stark County taxpayers untold amounts of money and what we have here with "The Medicine Shoppe" types being non-competitive and in the style of the financial moguls on Wall Street demanding a public institution (Stark schools) "bailout."

Let's see Representative Snitchler and his chamber of commerce friends comment on this.

It wasn't long ago that the Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce was combing through the records of the Stark County Educational Service Center's records looking for more ways for the Stark County education to be delivered more efficiently.


The question now for the Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce is this. Will the likes of Saunier, Katz and Kaminski step forward and applaud Morgan's efficiency or will they be for the public subsidation of some of its members?

Most likely not.

For the chamber like many unfettered private enterprisers like Representative Snitchler do have hypocrisy in them.

It depends on whose ox is being gored, no?

Indeed the SCPR does stand for "nonselective" competition. Something we do not have, for the most part, in Stark County politics. And when we don't, every Stark County taxpaying citizen gets hurt!

TRACKING OUR LEGISLATORS SERIES - SNITCHLER: COMPLAINS ABOUT THE DEMS PLAYING POLITICS WITH ONE OF HIS SPONSORED "NONPARTISAN" BILLS. REALLY?

How surprising? Heh?

The SCPR would be more sympathetic had Sntichler stepped forward in - let's say a "letter to the editor" in his pre-state-rep days and decried when the majority, supermajority Republicans did the very same thing to Democrats.

But he didn't.

Moreover, the SCPR (Stark County Political Report/The Report) suspects that Snitchler is only expects non--partisanship when he is faced with a situation like his HB 77.

Here is what the Snitchler sponsored HB 77 purports to do.
Seems benign (non-partisan) enough, right?

Snitchler's complaint:
The SCPR joins Snitchler (being the convert he is when his ox is being gored) and decries what the Dems are doing on this "no-brainer" bill.

But the SCPR suspects that Snitchler's bi-partisanship is skin-deep at best.

Here are a couple of his resolutions:

Both of these are efforts by the Republican caucus of the Ohio House to advance a Republican Party position.

So what?

Yours truly agrees, but to rap the Democrats for being partisan is a bit much when one considers the resolutions and things like Snitchler being a prime speaker at Tax Day - Tea Day, April 15, 2009 which in the view of the SCPR was nothing but a National Republican Party program picked up by the Stark County Republican Party.

Snitchler can be partisan. But the SCPR won't allow him the assume the persona of bi/non partisanship in the face of his consistently demonstrated partisanship.

Back to the legislative thing.

Apparently, Snitchler hasn't learned that "what goes around, comes around."

But it doesn't have to be that way. Here is a link to a column in a Seattle, Washington blog that gives the Washington state legislature high marks on bi-partisanship.

Could Todd Snitchler be interested being a leading force in bring a "for the citizens" approach to the Ohio General Assembly?

Maybe so and perhaps, as a first step, Representative Snitchler wants to take the SCPR pledge? Here it is:

"I, Todd Snitchler, a Republican legislator in the Ohio General Assembly, pledge that should the Republicans regain control of the Ohio House in the elections of 2010 for the 129th Ohio General Assembly (2011-2012), I will publicly and vigorously oppose any and all efforts by the House Republican leadership to stop Democratic sponsored legislation when it is apparent that the primary reason is that the proposed legislation is advanced by a Democrat."

If Snitchler takes the pledge, then the SCPR and Stark Countians can take his protest seriously.

Otherwise, he just like any other "double standard" politician.

How about it Todd?

Copy the pledge, put it in an e-mail addressed to tramols@att.net and under it say: "I make this pledge" and send it off!

The SCPR anxiously waits.

IS OHIO'S GOVERNMENT LOOKING TO GET ITS HAND ON PUBLIC PENSION FUNDS? WILL THE STARK COUNTY DELEGATION FIGHT TO PROTECT PUBLIC PENSIONS?

The Stark County Political Report remembers when ENRON went belly up (2000/2001) and cost members of the Ohio State Teachers Retirement System $56.6 million. PERS lost $58.8 million.

One of the guardians of STRS and PERS was supposed to be state Senator Kirk Schuring (R - Jackson). At least that's what the SCPR thinks. Schuring gets very angry (which is rare for him), when yours truly makes this allegation.

Why does the SCPR assign Schuring the guardian role during the time the ENRON fiasco unfolded?

Because Senator Schuring was president of the Ohio Retirement Study Council (ORSC) at the time. And the SCPR believes the ORC failed many of Ohio's retired public employees in neglecting to uphold its obligations spelled out in Ohio Revised Code Chapter 717.

Now Schuring is vice chairman of the ORSC.

One has to wonder whether or not a repeat of ENRON is in the offing for Ohio's public employee retirees? If not, what has been done to prevent a repeat?

It would be reassuring for Ohio's public to hear from Senator Schuring that ORSC security is improved.

In 2009, it is not the private sector that bears watching. Now it is Ohio's government.

Governor Ted Strickland is desperate to have the money to keep Ohio going. Until the state budget god tight, Strickland was against expanding gambling in Ohio. But just days ago he signed an executive order command the Ohio Lottery Commission to begin installing slots at Ohio's racetracks.

Now comes word that he and the Ohio General Assembly took at look at "borrowing" money from PERS (Ohio's Public Employess Retirement System).

Although STRS (the State Teachers Retirement System) was not being eyed by the governor, his look at PERS was not lost on STRS:

Here is a few excepts from an e-mail that STRS sent out:

OPERS CONTRIBUTION REDUCTION PROPOSED TO HELP STATE BUDGET
On June 19, 2009, Gov. Ted Strickland proposed that the state's contribution to public employees' pensions be reduced from 14 percent to 8 percent for two years, with a payback to the Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS) to occur over the subsequent 10 years. This proposal was made as a way to help balance the state's budget.

...

While STRS Ohio and the other public pension systems in the state were not included in the proposal, the executive directors of STRS Ohio, School Employees Retirement System (SERS) and the Highway Patrol Retirement System sent a joint letter to the governor and the members of the Ohio General Assembly also voicing their opposition.

...

The proposal was eventually rejected by lawmakers and was not part of the state's final budget. Going forward, all the systems will need to be vigilant to ensure such proposals do not surface again.

How much would the proposed raid on PERS brought the governor in his frantic search for dollars?

Here is what Akron Beacon Journal Statehouse reporter Dennis Williard has to say (Scrutiny missing in state budget, July 19):

... Strickland's proposal to reduce the state's contribution to the Ohio Public Employees Retirement System ... would have been a $250 million raid on the pension plan.

The SCPR believes Stark's public employees should heed STRS's warning. The questions that Stark County's public employees should be asking themselves should include:

"Do I want my pension fund to be making a ten year loan to the state of Ohio?

And, if not: "Can I trust my legislator to stop this from happening?"

Now that we know he uses The Repository opinion pages to explain his votes; perhaps, the good Senator Schuring would explain why public employment retirees have no worries about the security of their pension. Seeing as he is an expert of sorts on protecting public employees pension dollars.

And for good measure, maybe Oelslager, Slesnick, Okey, Snitchler and Schiavoni will chime in?