CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS?

ONLY
THE STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT
PRESENTS BOTH SIDES OF ALL 
STARK COUNTY POLITICAL/GOVERNMENT ISSUES
NOTWITHSTANDING 
WHAT THE SCPR OPINION MAY BE ON ANY PARTICULAR ISSUE

UPDATE:  11:41 AM

OSBORNE'S RESPONSE TO TODAY'S BLOG 

 My Thoughts On Today's Blog - March 4, 2014

Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 11:34 AM

From:  Chuck Osborne

To:   Martin Olson

Hello Martin,

Time and again, I am amazed why I end up being the story when it is the failures of the process of government and of the people who manage the process of government that should be the point of the discussion.

We all know, by general observation that all levels of government are failing the people they have sworn to represent.

Just as you, I have the time and inclination at this stage of my life to follow government and the people in it very closely. You do it on a much wider scale than I do as I choose to focus my attention in my immediate community.

I do know this: There needs to be a better way to bring the process of government and the conduct of those individuals who manage that process to the attention of the citizens they have sworn to represent.

You and Mr. Ponder state that my efforts to determine whether Mr. Snyder had healthcare available from his employer was more than just a little “over-the-top.”

As you well know, information does not just fall out of the sky. One must search for it. That information comes from attendance at public meetings, from the study of public records, and exhaustive investigation.

I am sure the SCPR does all of that. I am sure that Mr. Ponder does all of this in preparation of his program.

If anyone has a genealogist in the family, he knows that one has to travel great distances and spend many hours over a lifetime to uncover facts and information to learn about his roots.

Some people travel great distances to attend concerts. You get my point.

With regard to the current situation, Council President Jon Snyder has repeatedly stated that healthcare was not available with his employer. This was questioned by me and others. A phone call two months ago to the corporate headquarters revealed that the employer did provide healthcare to employees. I wanted to be more comfortable with that fact before presenting information that contradicted the statements of North Canton’s second highest elected official, thus the trip to Buffalo.

Ascertaining the truth is very important to all of us. Without truth there is no trust. Without trust there can be no faith in government. You and Mr. Ponder should be focusing on the people who violate the trust placed in them. The SCPR has its methods in finding the truth and I have mine.

At the beginning of Mr. Ponder’s show yesterday, he made it clear that Jon Snyder was his “friend.” Clearly, for Mr. Ponder, friendship is more important than the truth. And that is what’s wrong with government today. It is often a collection of cronies who are looking out for themselves and their friends and the public be dammed.


Thank you,

Chuck Osborne

ORIGINAL BLOG

It was quite shocking for the SCPR to hear WHBC's Ron Ponder "on the air" say yesterday "Screw You! Chuck Osborne."

While like the SCPR, Ponder on his daily show "Points to Ponder," WHBC1480 (Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to Noon) is primarily an opinion person; "apparently" there is a MAJOR difference between Ponder and The Report.

The SCPR provides exceptors to the Stark County Political Report "point-of-view" with a pretty much unlimited opportunity to respond to any SCPR opinion piece.

In saying "Screw You! Chuck Osborne" it appears to The Report that Ponder is saying that Osborne is in effect worthless as a credible person on public issues and by implication that he is not going to allow Osborne "on the WHBC airways" to explain his actions.

And guess who was not on Ponder's Points to Ponder yesterday?

Of course!  Chuck Osborne.

And this after Ponder made Osborne conduct a "a major 'bone of contention"' on yesterday's edition of his program.

To the SCPR, for Ponder to have acted in this way was unacceptable by anyone's definition of "fairness" in journalistic fairness.

Ponder's unhappiness - in its most immediate context - with Osborne seemingly involves Osborne's recent effort:

• to delve (by subterfuge, in the opinion of the SCPR) into employment practices of the company that North Canton councilman Jon Snyder has an employment relationship with so as to extract from that "pretend" to want a job process whether not Snyder had the capability (early on in the process; let's say before December 1, 2013, the "supposed effective date of the November, 2012 North Canton voter passed Issue 5 [72% to 28%]) to get alternative health care insurance coverage from his employer,

The SCPR agrees with Ponder that Osborne's "pretense" at applying for a job at Snyder's company to gain information as to what company provided health care benefits might or might not be available to Snyder was more than just a little "over-the-top."

What is particularly ridiculous about Osborne's effort is that it would not  establish conclusively that Snyder was eligible for employer coverage and therefore not eligible for North Canton coverage as precluded by the language of Issue 5.

But for radio journalist Ponder to "stack the deck" for his point of view in the process of vilifying Oborne is something that should disturb journalists everywhere.

Again, the SCPR agrees with Ponder's implication yesterday that Osborne is a chronic complainer who seems not to have the skills needed to show others that he has a sense of balance and perspective.

On rare occasions, The Report has seen Osborne demonstrate "balance" and "perspective," but RARE is the operative word.

The Ron Ponder that the SCPR knows is not the Ron Ponder who uttered "Screw You! Chuck Osborne" as he ended yesterday's segment on the North Canton health care insurance issue after having denied Osborne a full and fair opportunity to defend himself.

Once he thinks it over, the SCPR expects Ponder to reverse himself and invite Osborne onto WHBC's Points to Ponder and provide him with a fair and full opportunity to disagree with Ponder.

While the SCPR takes a more skeptical view of Stark County politicians and office holders than Ponder does (I once said to him:  "Ron, you see a glass as being 'half-full' whereas I see it as being "half-empty'), The Report thinks it is healthy for Stark County based-journalists to have different ways of perceiving Stark County political and government officials.

The Report would not have Ron Ponder be Martin Olson.

But the SCPR would have Ron Ponder emulate Martin Olson and the Stark County Political Report in affording subjects of his journalistic efforts a "fair and full opportunity" to respond to on-air attacks.

The SCPR thinks that once he thinks it over, WHBC/1480 talk show host Ron Ponder will do the right thing.

We shall see?

ELECTION ANALYSIS: U.S. SENATE CANDIDATE JOSH MANDEL NEEDS TO LEARN TO ANSWER THE QUESTION ASKED. AND SINCE HE WOULD NOT: WHBC'S RON PONDER HUNG UP ON HIM!

Republican United States Senate candidate Josh Mandel should have had a premonition after his October 11th radio interview (LINK - for full interview) with WHBC1480 's Ron Ponder (Points to Ponder) that November 6th was not going to go all that well for him.

Mandel's responses were "political spin" all the way and NOT responsive to Ponder.

While Ponder actually asked a number of questions (e.g. "how's the campaign going," Mandel's auto industry bailout viewpoint, et cetera), the interview from the perspective of the SCPR really boiled down to Mandel avoiding Ponder's pointed questions:

• in talking over Ponder, and 
• in trying to force a redirection of the dialogue from the question asked to Mandel campaign political propaganda points.

But Ponder was having none of it.  He ended up directing his Points to Ponder assistant Stephon King to hang up on Mandel.

The focal point of the redirection effort was on the question of allegations that Mandel has full blown political cronyism going on in his office.

An example.

“[Ponder to Mandel] Joe Aquilino, I believe you pronounce his name, a former campaign aide, was named director of debt management, paid $90,000, had no experience in finance and you sent him to a beginner’s course in the subject. How do you answer those charges?"

This specific Ponder question was one of a line of questions that had to do with Mandel's 2010 (campaign for Ohio treasurer) statement that, if elected he would have qualified financial professionals manning the state treasury.

Other questions had to do with:

• Mandel's 27 year old former campaign manager (the Mandel for Treasurer campaign) getting a $100,000 position; having worked for Mandel as a legislative aide at $13.85 hourly), and
• Seth Metcalf, a Mandel college buddy, being paid $150,000 as a member of Mandel's treasury staff as general legal counsel and chief financial officer.  (Metcalf ran Mandel's campaign at The Ohio State University in his quest to become student government president).

Mandel's response?

Talking points, that's what:

• "we've (the treasurer's office) earned the highest rating on our bonds,"
• "we've earned the highest rating on our investments," et cetera, and
  
• "you talk about someone who has served himself, talk about Sherrod Brown ... ."

Ponder comes back:

• "the question is Josh, it's a pretty simple question, when you were running against Kevin Boyce you accused him of filling the treasurer's office with his friends and cronies,"
• "now the Democrats are accusing you of the same thing, so I am just asking you the question about the salaries and the folks you have hired ... ."

Mandel responded not with specific answers to the Aquilino, Lord and Metcalf and whether or not they represent cronyism in the Ohio Department of the Treasury, but with the political-spin-talking-points answer of guess what?

"We have qualified financial professional in our office."

Here is the reduced version (to the cronyism question) of the Ponder interview of Mandel that went viral on YouTube:



A SCPR "hats off" to Ponder.

Ponder maintained control of the interview and thereby put Mandel on notice that some journalists will ask probing questions and will not allow a spinmeister candidate such as Mandel to twist an exchange into a spewing of political propaganda.

Ohioans and Stark Countians should be pleased that Josh Mandel was not elected U.S. Senator from the great state of Ohio.

Brown is 59, Mandel is 35 and the difference in maturity showed big time in their respective interviews with Ponder.

It is distressing that the "not wet behind the ears" Mandel (as described by Sherrod Brown), who announced mere months after taking office as treasurer that he was running for the Senate, could garner the support of 45% of Ohioans and Stark Countians.

But when you have upwards of $40 million of campaign finance resources (direct and indirect) to wage a campaign with, "you are going to be able to fool some of the people some of the time."

The good news is that there were enough Ohioans savvy enough about what Josh Mandel is really about to turn back the unseemly Ohio treasurer from achieving higher political office.

The bad news is that he is only 35.

Undoubtedly and unfortunately, we have not heard the last of Josh Mandel.

But maybe, just maybe, Ron Ponder's interview (a portion of which went viral on YouTube) went a long way towards wising Ohioans up as what Josh Mandel is all about.

And just what is that?

Josh Mandel and only Josh Mandel many times.

He is a prime example of being an aspiring politician consumed with himself!

The sooner Ohioans catch on to what Mandel is all about, the better of we will all be!

SLIDESHOW: HOOVER RETIREES MEET AT MAYFIELD SR CTR TO ORGANIZE FIGHT AGAINST WHIRLPOOL REDUCTION IN MEDICAL/PRESCRIPTION BENEFITS

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?

VIDEO SERIES: ODNR ANSWERS STARK COUNTIANS' QUESTIONS - "SEVENTH" OF A SERIES FOR SCPR READERS TO VIEW THE Q&A. QUESTION 3 (KOVACEVICH); "CONTINUED ANSWER," ALSO PONDER - HAS ODNR EVER BEEN "DINGED?"

With this blog series, the Stark County Political Report is posting the Q&A session featuring the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) held at Plain Township's Oakwood Middle School on January 27th. The meeting was put together by Plain Township Trustee Louis Giavasis (Democrat), Ohio Representative Kirk Schuring (Republican - 51st) and Ron Ponder.

Ponder is the talkshow host of Points to Ponder which can be heard M-F, 10:00 a.m. to Noon at WHBC-1480AM on your radio dial.

This SEVENTH video features ODNR Mineral Division (ODNR-MD) Chief Deputy Thomas Tugend continuing an answer Citizen Tony Kovacevich on his "peer review" question.  Also, he responds to moderator Ponder's question on whether or not ODNR has been "dinged" by a peer review.

WHO IS MORE DETERMINED? CHRIS BORELLO OF "CONCERNED CITIZENS OF STARK COUNTY" OR RON PONDER OF "POINTS TO PONDER?"

 

Christine "Chris" Borello of Plain Township is Stark County's most determined civic activist, bar none! She doesn't always prevail, but she seemingly never quits.

If you are  skeptical of yours truly's assessment of Borello, just ask present or former public officials:  U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown,  Congressman John Boccieri (former),  Congressman Ralph Regula (former),  Commissioner Todd Bosley (former), North Canton Council president and Regula chief of staff (former) Daryl Revoldt,  director (former) of the Canton Health Department Bob Pattison or Plain Township trustee Louis Giavasis.  And this is the short list.

As president of the Concerned Citizens of Lake Township (CCLT), she fought tirelessly for the citizens of Uniontown and western and southern Lake Township (she formerly resided in Lake) since the early 1980s to get a cleanup of the Uniontown Industrial Excess Landfill (IEL) as a superfund site.  IEL is an abandoned quarry that was used by the Akron-based rubber companies, among others, to dump toxic industrial wastes into.

It has been a roller-coaster ride for Borello with quite a number of highs and lows.  But she has been steadfast and faithful to the cause.  While the SCPR hasn't always agreed with her take on the IEL related issues or her processes, there is no doubt that she is a committed and, in the sense of her determination, a highly admirable person.  Even public officials for whom she has been "a royal pain in the __ __ __ to," admit that her persistence is impressive.

If more of Stark County citizens took their citizenship and the obligation to contribute the the good of the whole as seriously as Borello, we would see far more effective government at the national, state and local level than we do. 

Borello's most immediate issue seems to have shifted from a focus on the IEL to a pursuit of the natural gas hydraulic fracturing issue.  Of late, the oil and gas industry has been filing hundreds upon hundreds of leases at the Stark County recorder's office (as well as over a good deal of Ohio) and many locals think that sooner or later the likes of the Chesapeake Energy Company (out of Oklahoma) will be moving into Stark County to begin drilling for rock encased natural gas located several thousand feet below the surface.

Borello is convinced that hydraulic fracturing (see the graphic below) represents a danger to Stark County's fresh water supply because of the use of various toxic chemicals in the fracturing being high pressured into the rock together with sand and, of course, water.  Accordingly, she has joined forces with local government officials Louis Giavasis (Plain Township trustee) and Mary Cirelli (Canton councilwoman) in their efforts to ban hydraulic fracturing in Plaint and Canton, respectively.

Giavasis has encountered strong opposition in Plain.  From whom?  The SCPR believes - at the hand of fellow trustee Scott Haws - who is  working in concert with Representative Kirk Schuring.  While each deny to The Report that they are biased in favor of allowing the fracturing, The Report is highly skeptical.  The Republican Party in general is well known to be favor of, remember - "drill, baby, drill" - and neither Haws nor Schuring has set themselves apart from the general party position.

And, that they moved to derail the original meeting (December 14th) set up by Giavasis to have an "inform the public" session (inviting Stark's Ohio General Assembly delegation, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), oil and gas industry representatives and anti-fracturing activists), further fuels The Report's skepticism about their insistence that they are open minded on the issue.

This is where WHBC1480's Ron Ponder (Points to Ponder, M-F from 10:00 a.m to Noon) enters the picture.

Without getting into whom contacted whom, suffice it to say as one of Stark County's most accomplished interviewers and framers of local issues, it is no surprise that Ponder surfaced as a neutral mediator/moderator for the Giavasis planned public forum with the added wrinkle (by Ponder) of having two meetings (now set for January 20th and 27th at Oakwood Middle School - 7:00 p.m.); one for ODNR (on the 27th) and the other on the 20th for other stakeholders.

By the way, the SCPR applauds Ponder for his interest and involvement.

However, Chris Borello is not all that pleased with the two meeting setup and in a series of e-mails between herself and Ponder (copied to many third parties, including yours truly) has insisted that Ponder revert to the one meeting format envisioned by Giavasis.

Readers of the SCPR also need to be reminded that Giavasis claimed he was going to force a vote (at the Plain trustee meeting of December 28th) on his offered resolution to ban hydraulic fracturing in Plain.

Yours truly never believed that Giavasis had the political gumption to proceed.

So it was no surprise whatsoever to the SCPR that Giavasis capitulated to a letter written (but sent on an expedited basis via e-mail in the evening of the 27th) to the Plain trustees (Giavasis, Leno and Haws) by oil and gas attorney William G. Williams (himself a Plain Township resident) demanding that the trustees reject the Giavasis initiative.  Williams and a Chesapeake Energy Company representative showed up at Plain Township December 28th meeting to register opposition in person.

Back to Borello and Ponder.

What follows is an edited version of the exchanges between Borello and Ponder on what the format of the meeting or meetings (depending on who got her/his way) is going to be.  As readers can see, Ponder held his ground with Borello notwithstanding her coming back again, and again and again after her initial e-mail.

One cannot fault Borello from trying, but Ponder is no shrinking violet himself.  The back and forth e-mails transpired from 1:17 p.m. Sunday through 10:25 p.m.

Interesting exchanges, no?

From: crborello
Sent: Sun 1/2/2011 1:17 PM
To: Ron Ponder

...

 Residents have also expressed concern about there being two meetings, just a few days apart, on the 20th and 27th, and are asking why all parties, including the State Agency. ODNR, put in charge of drilling via SB 278 6 years ago,, can't be present in the same room at the same time at the first meeting? 

....

Therefore, we are requesting, as the designated meeting facilitator, that you please go back to Kirk Schuring and ask that ODNR be responsive to the public, by showing up at the first meeting.   If they still feel the need to still have a second one, that is their choice., but ODNR clearly needs to be present at the first one.

...

We therefore propose the following:

ODNR presentation to open up the meeting in first 15 minutes
Panel discussion an hour and then open up for
Audience comments/questions last hour, limited to 5 minutes each....with some flexibility to allow the meeting to run over a little past 9:00 , if there are folks who signed up that have not gotten a chance to speak yet. 

 ...

Also, Please clarify:  When you say "questions" will be allowed  - you certainly will permit people to express "comments" as well, correct?  You won't censor them, by saying only questions can be asked, will you?

Please respond as soon as possible via e-mail, so all interested parties can be informed and educated up front to what is agreed upon.   

From: Ron Ponder
To: crborello
Sent: Sun, Jan 2, 2011 4:17 pm

...

.i will allow comments, not just questions, but as you said, this will not devolve into a shouting match where nobody can hear nor understand what they need...i want facts, not political sound bites nor emotionally-wrought decisions....right now i feel that two hours is not nearly enough time for everyone to say their say nor hear the facts, so i am not inclined to change the format from two meetings...based on the original provisions that i agreed to, that is my decision and not sen schuring's nor anybody elses...i have not heard any convincing arguments yet to convince me to do otherwise.

...

From: crborello
Sent: Sun 1/2/2011 4:36 PM
To: Ron Ponder 

...

It is unreasonable to expect families with children, work schedules, baby sitter issues, elderly who don't like to go out on a winter night etc. to attend back to back meetings ...If the goal is to have a good airing of the issues, it is all the more important that all stakeholders are in the room at the same time, to hear the relevant discussions.

...  

From: Ron Ponder
To: crborello
Sent: Sun, Jan 2, 2011 4:40 pm

...  my intention is to provide a forum whereby information can be exchanged in a civil manner...by having odnr at another meeting does not negate nor diminish their responsibilities to tax payers  ... .

From: crborello
Sent: Sun 1/2/2011 7:26 PM
To: Ron Ponder

Your response earlier this afternoon today  - the part about having a "forum in a civil manner" and our request that the State agency, ODNR, be in attendance at the first meeting, really seems to be implying that you ( or others?) believe that ODNR's presence on the 20th would somehow mean the meeting could not be civil !? This is pretty incredible, if infact, this is what you are suggesting here.

...

So, we really need to know:  Are you telling us that ODNR has told you flat out that it is refusing to attend the first meeting? If so, please ask them why is our Stark community is being singled out, since  we have been informed that ODNR has in fact attended many public meetings where folks were emotional, such as in nearby Bainbridge, where a gas well reportedly caused problems with residents' wells, and we heard folks were plenty angry. ... Or, are you saying you just simply refuse to ask them?  Again, if so, please tell us specifically why, because our citizens and elected officials seriously deserve to hear the rationale behind this in either instance. 

From: Ron Ponder <RPonder@whbc.com>
To: crborello@aol.com

Sent: Sun, Jan 2, 2011 8:19 pm

... and one more time, this is my decision to continue to have two separate meetings, and if i should change my mind i will inform you and the public. also, i really don't care if some think odnr is being shielded. that is not my concern. my concern, one more time, is to provide an objective two meetings where citizens can be presented with information and whereby they can ask questions and get answers. ...

From: crborello
Sent: Sun 1/2/2011 9:30 PM
To: Ron Ponder   

But who said this "schedule"/ format,  is written in stone?

Citizens really do hope that you decide  to ask ODNR to be present on the 20th, because this should be a two way street, not simply ODNR "presenting"/ lecturing  people, but, rather, just perhaps, ODNR  might also be open to the idea of learning from our citizens as well ... - ie., government for and by the people, ya know?   If this agency is not present, than this exchange cannot occur.  By separating the meetings, the flow of information will be diluted/controlled, by making it harder for people to attend both dates, for reasons previously stated. ( And , we still have yet to  ascertain your rationale for not inviting ODNR to the meeting on the 20th in the first place,  after all these e-mails throughout today, which is truly perplexing...).

.

Sunday, January 2, 2011 10:25 PM

From:

"Ron Ponder"

crborello

... the meeting dates are set and i will waste no more time debating them. you, along with the public are welcome to attend. you are also welcome to not attend. the decision is yours.  ...

..  

DID PLAIN TOWNSHIP TRUSTEE LOU GIAVASIS "BAMBOOZLE" RON PONDER OF WHBC-AM1480 "POINTS TO PONDER?"

UPDATE:  12/15/2010 AT 7:20 PM

Plain trustee Louis Giavasis, Points to Ponder's Ron Ponder and Senator Schuring will be meeting on Friday to determine the times of the two meetings referred in the original blog which are to be held in January.

Originally, Ponder reported that the meetings are to be held at Stark State College, but that is not the case. 

The meetings will be held in Plain Township at Oakwood Middle School, 2300 Schneider St NE.

ORIGINAL BLOG

To his credit, Ron Ponder host of WHBC-AM1480 Points to Ponder worked hard over the weekend brokering a deal among state Senator Kirk Schuring, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) and Plain Township trustees (Lou  Giavasis and Scott Haws) to solve the conflict (in terms of timing) to do away with competing meetings on the issue of fracking (the removal of natural gas embedded in rock).

The competing meetings were set for tonight. One (sponsored by state Senator Kirk Schuring at the Plain Community Branch of the Stark County District Library and to be moderated by Ponder) was to feature ODNR officials who were to answer questions of the inquiring public.  And, the other (sponsored by Plain Township's trustees - mainly Lou Giavasis) was to feature so-called fracking experts from inside and outside Ohio, ODNR officials and, of course, the inquiring public.

Being the mediator he is, Ponder (who was set to moderate Tuesday's library sited meeting) worked over the weekend to end the competition and to set up complementary meetings for after the 1st of the year.  One meeting was to be with the pro and anti-fracking people answering the public's questions.  The other with ODNR officials answering the public's questions.  This plan was announced on today's edition of Points to Ponder.  Both are to be moderated by Ponder and are to be held at the Stark State College of Technology.

Obviously, Ponder thought he had everybody on board with his mediation effort.  But he did not.  At the tail end of Ponder's show (the last five minutes), Giavasis let it be known that Plain Township would be holding its regular bi-weekly meeting (2nd & 4th weeks of each month) at 5:30 p.m. (usually held at 6:00 p.m.) and that ODNR officials would be there to answer the trustees' questions.  While the public would not be allowed to question the ODNR officials during the meeting itself, they were to be afforded an opportunity to express an opinion on fracking.

Listening to Ponder, yours truly got the definite impression that he felt he had been hoodwinked by Giavasis.

Being the classy guy he is, Ponder did not outright accuse Giavasis of welshing on the agreement he had brokered, but to the SCPR, the disappointment in Ponder's voice was unmistakable.

Giavasis couched the going ahead with today's meeting as being his having no choice.  He said it was a regular township meeting and he could not unilaterally (there are two other trustees) make it anything other than what it was originally set to be. But political/government knowledgeable persons know that all it will take at tonight's meeting is for a motion to amend the agenda to be offered (by Giavasis' Democratic ally Al Leno) and the ODNR appearance and fracking issue discussion come flying off.  In fact, if an Akron Beacon Journal report published early this morning is accurate, the township is going forward with today's work session meeting and the fracking issue is not on the agenda.
 
In their radio conversation, Ponder made a trump point insofar, as the SCPR is concerned, in his telling Giavasis that he should not have agreed to the post-January 1 set up at all if today's township meeting was going to go forward nonetheless with the fracking issue and ODNR still on tap.

Ponder had dealt with him in good faith, but it appears to the SCPR that Giavasis was always playing politics with the meeting structure.  Giavasis stood by and let Ponder announce "the breakthrough" early in Points to Ponder yesterday, knowing full-well that ODNR official(s) were still scheduled to be at the Plain Township trustees' regular meeting this evening.

The expression "best laid plans of mice and men often go awry" seems to apply to Giavasis' handling of this situation.  The Report hears via e-mail from Giavasis supporter Chris Borello that the township meeting will go forward with out-of-town expert(s) appearing, but no ODNR. 

The Report is told that Giavasis talked with ODNR official Tugend before getting on the air with Ponder and received assurances that ODNR would be showing up at the Tuesday Plain Township meeting.  But those assurance did not last long. Senator Schuring tells yours truly that ODNR has  e-mailed Ponder confirming that they will not be appearing tonight in Plain Township.

The Report doubts that Ponder will reflect negatively on Trustee Louis Giavasis in public on Giavasis' conduct in dealing with him on the setting up of the fracking meetings.

As to Trustee Haws' and state Senator Schuring's involvement, the SCPR is somewhat skeptical of what Haws and Schuring say their position on fracking is, given that officeholding Republicans, in general, favor business and industry and seemingly whatever they want to do.  Moreover,  The Report is skeptical in Schuring's case, in particular,  because of his prior published strong support of ANWAR drilling and off-shore drilling.  He tells yours truly that "fracking" is an altogether different matter because it involves a potential harm to the drinking water supply.

Both Scott Haws and Kirk Schuring tell The Report that they are neutral on the fracking issue.  It could be that both will eventually join with Giavasis and oppose fracking in Plain Township and Stark County and, of course, in Schuring's case - all of Ohio.

The Ponder initiative appears designed to provide the space for such a possibility to eventuate. 

The SCPR believes it was very unwise for Giavasis to do what he did to Ron Ponder.  Clearly, Ponder felt he could trust Giavasis to back off today's meeting insofar as it was constructed to touch on the fracking issue in light of the agreement referred to above.  Who could blame Ponder if he refused to engage Giavasis in the future?  However, again, The Report does not believe this is how Ponder operates.

Fracking and whether or not it jeopardizes the safety of the public's drinking water supply is a top issue for localities these days.   Developments since the end of October emanating from Plain Township and Canton government defines "localities" to apply to Stark County in a big way.

It is commendable that Stark local governments such as the Plain trustees (and now, we hear, the Canton City Council because of the work of Councilwoman Mary Cirelli and Allen Schulman - president of council) are looking into the matter of protecting the safety of drinking water.

Fracking is not a matter to be playing politics over.  The health, safety, and welfare of Stark Countians could be at stake.  So shame on anyone who has political motives at play in the back and forth as to what meetings on fracking are to be held, and when and where they are to be held, and who the players are to be.

While there is no doubt that Ron Ponder has something to gain from entering the Haws/Schuring-Giavasis fray (i.e. the notoriety of hosting the controversy on air and moderating the events), the SCPR believes that in trying to broker a resolution of the stalemate that had developed between Haws and Schuring, on the one hand, and Giavasis on other, Ponder was bringing his considerable and valuable mediation experience to bear on the matter.

Points to Ponder is one of Stark County's most valuable assets in terms of getting controversies such as fracking before Stark Countians in an orderly manner.

Some months ago Ponder tried to bring Canton, Jackson and North Canton officials together on their annexation dispute, but was unsuccessful.  But he is to be applauded for trying.

While the SCPR and Points to Ponder have different styles, as yours truly sees it, the objective is the same:  prodding government officials to get their acts together to get Stark County moving forward in a constructive way!

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.

A JANUARY THAW IN THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CANTON, JACKSON TOWNSHIP & NORTH CANTON?

As previously reported by the SCPR, WHBC's Ron Ponder ("Points to Ponder") did bring together officials from Canton, Jackson Township and North Canton to begin a healing process among some of Stark County's most important political entities.

Readers will recall that Canton and Jackson have teamed up in what can be best described in everyday human existence is known as a "lovers triangle" leaving North Canton on the outside looking in.

North Canton and Jackson had been discussing an annexation, but according to powerful North Canton City Council president Darryl Revoldt, broke up because of Jackson's demand that it be protected from "unwanted" annexation for 99 years and because the financial numbers did not make sense.

Spurned by North Canton, another Stark County political powerhouse, Randy Gonzalez (Jackson Township fiscal officer), turned to Canton and its political leadership (Mayor Healy and Councilman Smuckler - de facto leader of Canton Council) as a replacement suitor.

The Canton/Jackson "romance" took, but did generate "jilted-esque" hard feelings between former suitors Jackson and North Canton.  So much so that when Canton and Jackson "married," North Canton went to court to force an annulment.

So far the courts have said "no" to the North Canton effort to force Canton and Jackson apart.

But enter Ponder.  Being the wise man he is, Ponder knew that Canton, Jackson and North Canton weren't going anywhere.  They are going to be a part of Stark County for as long as there is a Stark County.

So it is best for themselves and, indeed, all of Stark County that they reconcile.

Ponder who, for years, has been a leading Stark County politics and government commentator and who knows Healy, Smuckler, Gonzalez, Held and Snyder (North Canton Councilman) well, did the right thing and a good thing.

Yesterday, he had the five over to WHBC for a little "let's make up" chit-chat.

And here are the results as reported to the SCPR by Ron:

First, he says:  "the bottom line is that they [Canton/Jackson on the one side; North Canton on the other] could not make definite agreements but agreed in general terms to some substantial items."

Second, the items:

1. North Canton has a water issue that Canton promised to resolve to North Canton's satisfaction;
2. Canton, Jackson and North Canton will work together on various future regional matters;
3. Working together on 9-1-1 dispatch; and
   
4. North Canton using Jackson's EMS collection service.

The SCPR reiterates that Ponder is to be appreciated by all Stark Countians for his effort at mediation.

He along with The Report will be monitoring how well Canton, Jackson and North Canton are doing at their "making-up" efforts.

One fly in the ointment, according to Ponder, could be North Canton council President Daryl Revoldt.

Ponder could be right.  The SCPR has talked with Revoldt at length about the Canton/Jackson and North Canton economic development love/hate triangle.  He is fully invested in terms of being a primary even if "in the background player."

The SCPR will continue to discuss the triad relationship with Revoldt in hopes in some small way The Report can help Ponder bring these Stark County communities together.

After all, "making up is fun to do!"  And and cooperative Canton, Jackson Township and North Canton benefits Stark County as a whole largely.

A renewed SCPR "tip of the hat" to Ron Ponder - "Points to Ponder" - WHBC-AM (1480 on your radio dial on Monday thru Friday 10:00 AM to noon).

SCPR "ELECTION 2009 SERIES" (VOL 18 - Issue 1): WHBC 1480 "POINTS TO PONDER" ON ISSUE 5 - COUNTY SALES/USE TAX INCREASE

The SCPR was invited by WHBC's Ron Ponder to sit in on (and videotape) his Thursday program (October 22, 2009) in which he had spokesmen for the proponents of retaining the county commissioner imposed 0.5 of a percent sales/use tax  increase (which will net out at 0.25 of a percent) as well as opponents of retention to speak to the issue appearing on the November ballot as Issue #5.

Yours truly thanks Ponder and WHBC-AM for the invite and the permission to videotape for presentation on the SCPR.

The Stark County Political Report is in the process of breaking down the film into digestible units of no more than 5 minutes each for readers' viewing experience.

The first will appear tomorrow, Friday, the 23rd.

The entire audio version is to be available online at the WHBC website.  Click here to get to the WHBC website.

RON PONDER THROWING SOFTBALLS TO JOHNNIE A. MAIER,JR ? JESTS GALORE IN THIS POWDER PUFF PIECE BUT PONDER TAKES MAIER SERIOUSLY

Ron Ponder of "Points to Ponder" of WHBC-AM radio (1480 on your radio dial) ends his recent interview with the now former Stark County Democratic Party chair telling Maier that he is the best Stark Democratic Party chairman ever.

Well, yours truly posits that it depends on your criteria of evaluation.

One way to look at the Ponder assessment is that Maier has succeeded by default.

How's that?

In the interview Ponder and Maier refer to a telephone call that Maier received from Stark County Republican Party chair Jeff Matthews when it became known that Maier was retiring (effective: June 1st) "jesting" with Maier that he was retiring because Maier was fearful of appearing head-to-head with Matthews on Ponder's show.

Really?

Here's a guy, who in cahoots with his predecessor Curt Braden, has wrecked the Stark County Republican Party. Consequently, in many parts of Stark, there is no meaningful Republican competition.

A second way is to evaluate of how Maier is the SCPR's belief that he has used his leadership to the benefit of himself, some of his relatives, his political friends and loyalists.

In the audio tape of part of the Ponder/Maier interview, Maier says that he "believes in government."

Holy Hannah, why wouldn't he!

Look at a previous SCPR blog pointing out some of the Maier benefits from his connection to Ohio/Stark government and the clout he had as Stark County Democratic Party chair (CLICK HERE).

A third way is the Strickland/Maier connection. It was political genius on Maier's part to be the first county Democratic party chair to endorse Strickland when he ran in 2006. Strickland will never forget him for "the first" and has and will continue to reward Maier and friends handsomely.

Even though Strickland faces a difficult re-election bid next year, Maier will continue to fall on a sword for the politically weakened governor. If Srickland survives to serve another terms, even more political riches await Maier at the hand of the "aw shucks" governor from Duck Run.

Fourthly, there is Randy Gonzalez as the vehicle to Maier's success. In the opinion of yours truly, Gonzalez is a ton smarter than Maier. The SCPR has named Gonzalez the de facto Stark Dems chairman for some time now. Maier did nothing as chairman without clearing matters with Gonzalez.

The big laugh of the interview is how Maier pretends that there is competition for leadership among the Stark Dems.

To make the point, yours truly has the following illustration.

Early on in Maier's tenure, at a party made an obligatory call (now realized to be highly qualified) to "fill all those vacant precinct committee slots. Being from Lake Township, yours truly set out to help (naively) to fill those slots. On submitting a name, the question was: "How do I know this person will support me." Me? How about the programs and activities of the party?

This incident was a clear tip-off that Maier viewed the party as his personal fiefdom.

The message is that precinct committee persons are clearly expected to be personally loyal to the party chairman and support his recommendations. So all the Maier talk about "Randy needs to be elected" and "any Democrat can run" are total jokes in terms of the reality of how the internals of the Stark County Democrat Party are set up. Ponder gives him a pass. Great, Ron, great.

Maier also has relied on his "hand-on-for-dear-life appendage" Shane Jackson (political director of the Stark Dems - Heaven only knows why) for sycophantish reaffirmation. To repeat, it is not Jackson, but Gonzalez who provides the brain power for Stark Dems.

It is reported that Gonzalez is saying that he is going to be his own man as party chair. No doubt about it. The curtain is now ripped away and Stark's political version of the Wizard of Oz is outed and - yes, yes, yes - the real man appears.

Ron Ponder is a nice man who has a handle on public relations-esque "talk radio," but he very rarely asks his guests hard questions. And even when he gets adventuresome he back down quicker than "lager turns to _ _ _ _."

All the local politicians like to talk with Ron Ponder on his "Points to Ponder" because they have pondered Ponder and realize he is a "slow-pitch" pitcher who lets the interviewees hit the ball out of the park with regularity.

Listen to the selected portion of the interview for yourself below.

DISCUSSION: TAX DAY CANTON FAST TURNING INTO REPUBLICAN RIGHT WING POLITICAL EVENT?

A quote from "Tax Day Tea Party - Canton, OH" organizer Jason Wise: "Ok...I hate to tell you guys but this is on City property and I'm getting non-stop emails and phone calls about this issue and people are now canceling on me."

This quote is in response to some posters on "the Wall" on the organizing group's Facebook page who were suggesting that perhaps Concealed Carry Weapons were in order for the Canton event to be held Wednesday at Central Plaza which is located immediately in front of the Stark County Courthouse (which houses the general division Common Pleas Courts) and in front of the Stark County Office Building which is home to many countywide departments of government.

The STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report/SCPR) has previously written about this event as being a test case as to whether on not the Stark Republican Party will be fielding a significant candidate against Democratic Commissioner Todd Bosley in November, 2010.

Officially, this is being billed as a national event. But The Report believes that the event is being turned to an "anti-Bosley/imposed sales-use tax day."

Supposedly, Bosley is to debate Jason Wise on WHBC's (14180 on your AM dial out of Canton) "Points to Ponder" show (Ron Ponder, host). There may also be a radio event on WHLO (640 on your AM dial out of Akron - "a Religious right" radio station) featuring Bosley and Wise.

The Report understands that Ron Ponder (who The Report understands acknowledges he is close to the Stark Republican Party) is predicting that Jason Wise himself contemplates being Bosley's opponent in 2010.

Stark Republicans may want to rethink this one. The Report has been told that Wise carries a lot of political baggage some of which was revealed in a Repository report in coverage of Wise's failed campaign against Democrat Nancy Reinbold for Stark County clerk of courts.

All Wise and the Republicans have to do is to ask Richard Regula (an incumbent Republican commissioner that Bosley defeated in November, 2006) what kind of campaign Bosley runs.

Let's just say that "the gloves definitely come off."

The Report believes that Stark organized Republicans hate and fear Bosley above any other Stark Democrat.

All in all tomorrow could be an interesting Stark County political event.

DISCUSSION: RON PONDER OF WHBC'S "POINTS TO PONDER" & AS REP COLUMNISTNEEDS TO RETHINK HIS TAKE ON THE STATE OF THE STARK COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTY

Ron Ponder of "Points to Ponder" (WHBC-AM 1480) and the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report) are agreed on one thing: the Stark County Republican Party is in dire need of rehabilitation.

Okay. If The Report agrees with Ponder, why is agreement worthy of a blog.

Because there is a point of disagreement.

Ponder wrote a column for The Rep yesterday on the need for the Republican Party, in general, to get its act together. He went on to provide the same prescription for the Stark County Republican Party. But he went awry in suggesting that Stark County Republican Party chair Jeff Matthews and state Senator Kirk Schuring have a "rehab" underway.

Ponder has to be kidding.

He offers nothing more than a mere assertion that a rebuild plan is in the offing.

The evidence is to the contrary.

For instance, a source has told The Report that Travis Secrest in putting a campaign team together to make a run against Stark County Commissioner Todd Bosley. If such is the case, a huge mistake is being made.

Probably the thinking is that since Bosley pushed imposing a 1/4% sales/use tax to come up with funding for a countywide 9-1-1 and solving the immediate needs of balancing the Stark County budget, he is vulnerable.

And that is not bad thinking running against most candidates even if incumbent ones.

But Todd Bosley is no ordinary candidate. Just ask Richard Regula.

The Report is a big fan of Travis Secrest. Stark County would be much better off today if he had been elected county commissioner over 2008 opponent Tom Harmon.

Secrest is full of vim, vigor, vitality and, more importantly, ideas and The Report is convinced he would work hard to actuate his ideas.

Were he to pull a monumental upset and defeat Bosley, how would that help Stark County? He would be manhandled by "the taking Stark County nowhere" Harmon and Harmon's good friend Pete Ferguson. The best duo for getting Stark headed in the right direction would be Secrest and Bosley.

The only realistic case that can be made for Secrest running against Bosley is for the experience of running. Didn't he get that in running against Harmon? The next time should be with a good chance of winning. Secrest, in the opinion of The Report, has a lot to offer as a local Republican leader. The wise one (i.e. Judge Charles) of the Stark Republican Party should council Secrest very carefully in his next political move.

What is the Stark GOP plan for running someone against Stark County Auditor Kim Perez? One name bounced around is Trustee Anna Capaldi of Perry Township. Now this would be an interesting contest.

The Report likes listening to and reading Ponder. But he does need to have a tad more gravitas in his musings.

DISCUSSION: THE REPOSITORY CONTINUES ITS MISERABLE JOB IN REPORTING & EDITORIALIZING ON "THE HEALY FIASCO!"

One consistent thing about The Repository on the what the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report) now dubs for the first time "the Healy fiasco," is how tardy The Rep has been in reporting on or editorializing on with respect each issue surfacing in "the Healy fiasco."

Only one year into 15 months into his administration, The Report is now ready to say that the Healy administration is a complete failure in terms of losing the confidence of most Cantonians in pulling Canton out of its economic and political stupor.

What is amazing is the degree to which TeamHealy has bamboozled The Canton Repository "powers that be."

Why is this so?

The Report believes that Executive Editor Jeff Gauger and his fellows at The Rep are unsure as to whether or not the Healy administration is going to survive. Moreover, The Rep folks know full-well how punitive Healy is of those who do not do his bidding. So, if he does limp through his remaining 33 months, they likely surmise that getting news out of city hall will be worse that pulling teeth.

Another issue The Report has with The Rep is summed up in the next two sentences.

The Report uses material of The Repository frequently. And which yours truly does, proper attribution is accorded The Rep.

The reverse does not appear to be true.

Ed Balint's article, dated at about midnight yesterday, miserably fails to credit the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT for being an agent of the "stirring." The only journalistic effort to tie campaign contributions to Mayor Healy awarding contracts has been from The Report and WHBC's "Points to Ponder" (Ron Ponder - talk show host). But curiously miss from Balint's piece is a reference to either The Report or "Points to Ponder."

The Report has had several confirmations that the folks at The Rep follow what The Report's blog. A person from its editorial department e-mailed The Report to correct an incorrect (The Rep having made the initial error) attribution to a Repository editorial The Report was commenting on. And reporter Malcolm Hall of The Rep called The Rep about material The Report has published on the current Marlboro Township turmoil about efforts of township trustees to fire its police chief.

As The Report told Hall, he and The Rep is free to use The Report's material as long as The Rep attributes the source.

The Report has learned that Canton City Council leader Bill Smuckler has commented that the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT is the only Stark County journalistic effort that has gotten it right on the Healy administration machinations.

Now the Balint story itself.

Notice that Canton Law Director Martuccio couches his analysis in the expression "legally speaking." What this means to The Report is that Martuccio believes that the Healy administration has "the spirit of the law"l problems in the quid pro quo appearing arrangement on Healy's award of the Johnson contract. What's more, Martuccio skillfully qualifies his "legally speaking" with "this is the first time I have looked at the law." The qualification leaves Martuccio with wiggle room for later on. Perhaps, as the Healy administration is on its way out the door?

Healy (in The Rep's article): 'wanted to avoid even the appearance of impropriety in this situation.' What is this Mayor, a joke?

The mere utterance of the expression is that the Mayor understands that the impression is clearly out there in the public square. This tactic is what lawyers call a "confession and avoidance."

Every rhetorical device that Jamey Healy uses bespeaks a man who thinks he can outsmart the whole world with his glib tongue.

And it is working with at least one Stark County entity: THE CANTON REPOSITORY!

It should tell readers volumes that Healy is willing to talk with The Rep's people WHEREAS he will not nor permit his Communications Direct Adam Herman to talk to the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT.

The Report trusts that the highly respected Canton Law Director Joe Martuccio will not let Healy hoodwink him. He needs to remember that Healy has undermined the public's confidence in his law department by saying, in effect, that his labor negotiating assistant law directors and staff are not ethical enough or expert enough to negotiate an "arms-length" contract with the Canton police unions.

Healy underscored his lack of confidence in the Canton Law Department by reiterating in the Balint piece: "Johnson’s 'experience ... was something that was critical in this process.'

The Report knows Healy well. The Report, at one time, held out hope that Healy could turnaround Canton.

The Report no longer believes Healy can be effective for Canton. Healy needs to move on!!!