SCPR'S 3RD ANNUAL "SUGGESTED" NEW YEAR'S RESOUTION FOR A VERY SPECIAL GROUP OF STARK COUNTY PUBLIC OFFICIALS

SHERIFF SWANSON AT HIS BEST: ISSUING EDICTS? SOME OF STARK COUNTY'S FIRE DEPARTMENTS TO BE MAKING A PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION AS TO CAUSE OF DEATH?

A couple of weeks ago, residents from Nimishillen Township appeared at a Stark County commissioners meeting to complain about noise emanating from a bar as a relevant factor on whether or not commissioners should vacate a street that intersected the bar property.

In the course of the dialog between the commissioners and the residents, it came out that the commissioners were told by the residents that Stark County Chief Deputy Rick Perez told them that the sheriff's department would not be responding to future noise complaints.

Why not?

Because of 16% in budgetary cuts which is forcing Sheriff Swanson to cut 41 deputies.  The cuts have already begun with 26 layoffs notices being published this week.

Stark Countians can expect a dramatic cut in the quality and quantity of services coming from Swanson's department.

Just what kind of cuts?

Well, the SCPR obtained a copy of a letter generated by Swanson through his right hand man Rick Perez on December 8th which contains indicators of what Stark Countians can expect.

The core of the letter is to the effect that fire officials who show up on the scene of a fire/medical emergency and come upon a fatality are to make an on-the-spot determination as to how the person died.  If from natural causes, no call to the sheriff.  If from other causes, a call needs to be made to the sheriff.

So, for example, it appears that the fire department chief of let's say from Greentown, (inasmuch as Greentown serves entirely within the police jurisdiction of the Stark County Sheriff's department) will have the Swanson-assigned responsibility to determine if a "victim" dead person was truly a victim or suffered a natural calamity merely on looking at the body.

Swanson's directive does not apply to areas in Stark County which has policing units other than the sheriff's office within fire jurisdictions (and, presumably, in areas [e.g. Plain Township] in which Sheriff Swanson's office has supplemental policing contracts with).

While the Stark County Political Report understands the budgetary pressures that Swanson is under, the "do not report natural cause deaths" directive is downright silly and has all the earmarks of being some sort of an outlandish publicity gambit about it.

What fire chief in Stark County is going to take Swanson's letter seriously?

Answer:  none!

What fire chief would want to risk being wrong?  One mistake and the offending fire chief likely would be an ex-fire-chief in a hurry!!!

So this is another instance in which Sheriff Swanson needs to grow up as an elected official and get real in his prescriptions for what ails the finances of county government and forget the absurd, vindictive-esque stuff that he allows to be put out in his name.

Will he?

Not likely, so says the SCPR.

Remember, back when commissioners imposed tax (late December, 2008) and Swanson appearing at a meeting with an attitude (that's healthy; a sheriff with an attitude) articulating his "poop on the public" response to citizen protests to his double-dipping on pension benefits?

The Stark County Political Report does not believe that Swanson and his temperament is the right person to manage the downsizing of county operations.

Though he has the right to remain through December 31, 2011 as he fills out his term as an elected official, wouldn't it be better for him (in the sense of stress relief) and for Stark Countians that he resign, and for Stark County Democratic officials to pursue the appointment of a Ken Koher-esque (re:  Stark County treasury) as his replacement?

The SCPR has had numerous reports that Swanson will not be filling out his term.

Let's hope that these persistent reports proves true in the near future and Swanson does the right thing for himself and for Stark Contians and steps aside as the tough decision making gets underway.

MARLBORO TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS TO STAY AWAY IN LARGE NUMBERS FROM TRUSTEES "DEVIES" WORK SESSION ON MONDAY?

UPDATE: 12:30 P.M.

COMMENT FROM LARRY DORDEA. Officer Dordea was Sheriff Swanson's opponent in November, 2008 and plans to run for sheriff again in November, 2012.

COMMENT FOLLOWS:

Mr Olson,

I spent two days outside the courtroom so I was not privy to the opening statements. The Devies' are fine men and their attorneys some [sic] up the situation with a level of clarity that needs to be seen all throughout Marlboro Township. This was a political witch hunt that was aided and abetted by the Stark County Sheriff's Office and the Stark County Prosecutor’s Office. There is no excuse for the way this went down, both county offices were represented by their "heavy hitters", their notorious "big guns". You have done a much needed service by making this video available to the public. Thank you for taking the time and putting forth the effort to follow this unwarranted criminal case to its conclusion.

I agree with you that apologies are in order but these offices and their representatives have a history of the hard line. No apologies and no explanations. I sincerely doubt that they are sorry for anything but losing the case and I doubt they are ashamed of the shoddy work that they did. What has happened to our once outstanding sheriff’s office?

To Ron and Kyle, I am ashamed, both as a lifetime law enforcement officer and as a life time Stark County resident. Neither of you deserved the mistreatment that you suffered and you have proven the quality of your character both during this prolonged persecution and every day since your vindication. I have no idea where all of this will eventually lead but know that many good people believe in you and will stand with you. May god bless you and keep you safe.

Larry Dordea

ORIGINAL POST

Marlboro Township trustees (except for Wayne Schilig) are still on the hot seat for the way they handled a misunderstanding between them and former employee Kyle Devies.

On January 5, 2009, the trustees decided to dismiss township computer specialist Devies, but gave him a very short timeline (one day) to transition the computer system from software he personally owned to that owned by the township.

Consequently, there was a glitch that caused some of the township's computers to be inoperative for a period of time.

Relationships between Kyle's father Ron (Marlboro police chief) and Trustees Wise and Wolf have been strained from the time the two first took office in January, 2010.

The SCPR's understanding of the Devies' position is that Wise and Wolf have been on Ron's case ever since, looking for a reason to get at him - one way or another.

SCPR blog readers can search the blog for videos featuring Chief Devies describing the run-ins with the Wise/Wolf duo searching per the graphic to the immediate left of this text.


A number of township residents believe that Wlse and Wolf pounced on the computer glitch and Ron's effort (an advisory role) to help Kyle to make the switch properly and lawfully as an opportunity to make a law enforcement matter out of the incident.

The result was that Ron and Kyle were charged with one count each with 4th degree felonies (obstructing public business) and Ron with additional misdemeanor count (dereliction of duty).

The SCPR has already opinionated in this blog about the monumental failure of the Stark County sheriff and prosecutor to screen out what the SCPR believed from the get-go as being a obvious non law enforcement matter.

Stark County Common Pleas Judge Lee Sinclair did his part to see that justice was done to the Devies by dismissing the case at the end of the prosecutor's presentation of evidence.

But the battle rages on to restore the Devies - as nearly as possible - to the situation they were in before being put through a totally uncalled for law enforcement process (i.e. being formally indicted).

No apologies from the sheriff, the prosecutor nor Trustees Wise and Wolf.

Ron Devies says that Trustee Wise is adamantly opposed to compensating he and his son for their expenses incurred in connection with the event. Wolf reportedly is waffling on the matter, while Trustee Schilig is for compensating.

So has justice been done?

Only partly: Judge Sinclair's decision.

For the fullest measure of justice to occur (in the opinion of the SCPR), Sheriff Swanson, Prosecutor Ferrero and Trustees Wise and Wolf would have to write public apologies. Moreover, the trustees would have to compensate the Devies for their expenses.

The trustee have called a "work session" for Monday, June 15th to hear township residents on the Devies matter. The SCPR hears that residents are so skeptical of the sincerity of the meeting, that many do not plan to attend. Ron Devies himself has told The Report that he will be unable to attend.

The SCPR is including in this blog posting a video of the opening statements of Prosecutor Dennis Barr and defense attorneys Jeff Jakimedes (Kyle Devies) and Richard Reinbold (Ron Devies).

The video provides an outline of how the trial proceeded.

The video is immediately below.http:

MAYOR HEALY & SHERIFF SWANSON IN "EXTENDED" CONVERSATION - ABOUT WHAT? COULD IT BE ABOUT A CERTAIN CANTON POLICE CHIEF?

Sheriff Swanson's office recently investigated allegations that Mayor Healy had an inappropriate relationship with a 16 year old. The investigation resulted in "no charges" being filed.

The last person the Swanson should want to be seen huddled up with is Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II.

Why?

Well, to hear Mayor Healy tell it, he has all these political enemies out there who are trying to keep him from being a successful mayor of Canton. Healy implied, in various media appearances, that the allegations on the 16 year old came from among his political enemies.

If Healy is correct, might not these same political enemies bide their time until one or more of them come up with more allegations?

Of course!

Well, who is to investigate?

Sheriff Swanson?

Most likely.

So if Swanson is perceived in the general Stark County public to be buddy-buddy with Healy, will Swanson have to do another Gary Zeigler/Stark County treasurer's office investigation maneuver: fade into the background?

The STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report/SCPR) has written recently how Healy and Swanson were seen huddled up at a recently celebrity event talking for about an hour.

The point of the previous SCPR piece was that while Healy had leaned on others to pass on possible law enforcement rumors to Sheriff Swanson touching on a Canton City Councilman; Healy didn't breathe a word of it to Swanson in the one hour huddle up.

What did Healy and Swanson talk about?

The word to The Report is that Healy was seeking advice on how to deal with Canton Police Chief Dean McKimm.

The Report has frequently written about Healy's dissatisfaction with McKimm (civil service protected) which spread to Safety Director Tom Nesbitt (who continues to look for work elsewhere) when Nesbitt could not find a basis to fire McKimm which would pass muster with the Canton Civil Service Commission.

The Report has also written frequently how smart Mayor Healy is. At least in his own eyes.

Well, the celebrity event conversation was not too smart for Healy nor Sheriff Swanson.

How in the world could Healy ever make a credible presentation to the civil service folks after all his "cloak and dagger" machinations? Moreover, how could Sheriff Swanson's office possibly be the investigating agency if Healy's political enemies were to make additional future allegations?

Clearly, the Healy/Swanson duo has a constitutional right of "freedom of association" like every other American.

But then when it comes to the Sheriff doing his public job doesn't this consideration, in the light of close encounters of the type described in this blog, militate - from a public perception point-of-view - that if the Mayor should become a subject in an investigation in the future that Swanson step aside?

Isn't "being to close to the subject matter of the investigation" exactly the same kind of thing that prompted Ohio Auditor Mary Taylor to push Swanson to the sidelines in the Stark County treasury investigation?

Will Swanson ever learn to be civil and courteous but ever mindful of the need keep an appropriate distance from local politicians and public figures?

SHOULD SHERIFF SWANSON AND PROSECUTOR FERRERO BE TAKING A NEW LOOK AT HOW POLITICALLY SENSITIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT MATTERS ARE HANDLED IN STARK?

Recently Stark County Sheriff Tim Swanson's office has been involved in three high profile investigations in which the subjects involve political factors.

First, in late 2008, it was the anonymous allegations that Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II had been involved in an inappropriate relationship with a 15/16 year old. Swanson investigated and in collaboration with Stark County Prosecutor John Ferrero's office determined that there would be no charges filed against Healy. And then Swanson obtained a legal opinion that the media and public would not have access to the file.

Second, in two Marlboro Township trustees asked Swanson's office to investigate whether or not Marlboro Township police chief Ron Devies and his son Kyle did anything to "criminally" alter township computers. The investigation led to Stark County Prosecutor John Ferrero to seat a grand jury which resulted in each of the Devies being indicted for fourth degree felonies.

Third, Treasurer Gary Zeigler (Stark County) in March fired Stark Countian and chief deputy Vince Frustaci accusing Frustaci of stealing county money. Swanson was in the thick of investigative efforts but later announced he was receding to the background.

So?

By the time we get to treasurer's office matter, maybe just maybe, Sheriff Swanson is learning that he is a political figure in Stark County who is a Democrat in which all the elected countywide offices (non-judicial) are Democrats. And through in heavily Democratic Canton and Massillon.

So?

Well, the sheriff is known to be a solid, loyal Democrat who supports many, many locally well known Democrat office holders. He contributes to many of their campaigns and vice-a-versa.

So?

Well, when these political colleagues are subject to criminal investigation, is it in the interest of the impartial administration of justice for Swanson to be leading the investigation?

Moreover, when subjects are the political adversaries of the sheriff (e.g. Ron Devies was a strong supporter of Swanson's last opponent - Republican Dordea), is it in the interest of the impartial administration of justice for Swanson to be leading the investigation?

The Report thinks not.

By the time we get to the Frustaci matter (which occurred soon after Swanson had written a letter to the editor of The Repository supporting the way Zeigler runs his office), apparently the sheriff himself agrees or does he? (Swanson self-describes as being in the background)

It would be easy enough for Sheriff Swanson, and by the way, Prosecutor Ferrero, to recuse themselves from the investigations of high profile cases involving political figures or dynamics and bring in outside law enforcement officials.

Why bring this up now?

Because there is a political fight between Mayor Healy and Canton Councilman Greg Hawk underway which may have law enforcement implications. Healy is trying through others to get Sheriff Swanson's office involved.

Swanson shouldn't bite. If an investigation is merited, it should be done by Republican law enforcement officials from out of county.

The Report does not say that Swanson or Ferrero have let political bias affect any of their work.

But when you have political elements lurking around a law enforcement situation, isn't is best for all including the Stark County system of justice "to avoid the very appearance" that political relationships might be perceived by the public at large to be at play?

DISCUSSION: IS MAYOR WILLIAM J. HEALY, II ABOUT TO GET "LUCKY?"

CORRECTION: 03/28/2009 AT 11:55 AM. Jack DeSario was a "political consultant" to William J. Healy, II in his race for mayor of Canton; not "campaign manager" as stated below. A SCPR thank you to the TeamHealy member who wrote in to point out the error.

These days Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II is probably saying to himself: "I'd rather be lucky than smart." That is quiet a leap for Healy who prides himself on and widely touts himself as being a graduate of the New York University Stern School of Business."

But a politician has to do what a politician must do to survive.

And Healy's luck may be turning?

Earlier this week Governor Ted Strickland announced Stark County's share of federal stimulus money: $21.5 million.

Guess where most of it, if not all, goes?

You've got it. To the city of Canton.

Remember that the governor has a huge stake in the survival of the Healy administration.

How's that?

It took Strickland (according to Jack DeSario) to get DeSario to agree to become the campaign manager of the TeamHealy Committee (the Mayor's campaign committee).

Some Stark Countians believe DeSario's involvement was a key to Healy's victory over Republican Janet Creighton. Although DeSario denies that he had anything to do with Healy being able to attract campaign donations from Cuyahoga County political figures, a number of local political observers are skeptical of the denial.

It has long been a sticking point with Stark County Democratic officials and undoubtedly the likes of Chris Redfern (chairman of the Ohio Democratic Party who personally donated $5,000 to the Healy campaign), that Canton (before Healy's election) was the only one of Ohio's eight major cities not to have a Democrat as mayor.

So it stands to reason, once your man wins you will do anything the law allows for to keep him in office, although his performance on the job indicates that he is heading pell mell for failure.

Hum? Stimulus money? Canton's economy is going nowhere? So why wouldn't the governor who is an arch-Healy supporter, with tons of discretionary authority, direct the money where certainly a huge need exists, (Canton has an 11.5% unemployment rate) and - by the way - co-incidentally props up a political ally?

Now on to the Swanson factor.

It could be that Stark County Sheriff Tim Swanson is so deficient in manpower that he cannot conduct expeditious and efficient investigations.

If such is the case, Swanson needs to farm out his work to less busy investigatory units - especially when there may be a political dynamic to the matter being investigated.

Maybe the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report) is just seeing things that don't exist, but it does appear to The Report that Swanson has tough time being expeditious and efficient in investigation on politically sensitive cases.

The Report believes that Marlboro Township Devies case is an example of a "slowdown." In the judgment of The Report, there is no way it should have taken over two months for Swanson to make a determination of whether or not Marlboro Police Chief Ron Devies and his son Kyle may have violated Ohio's criminal laws in course of Kyle being a township employee working the township's computer system.

The Report has an advantage over the readers of this blog. The Report has a working knowledge of the intricacies, relationships and connections of Stark County politics from both sides of the isle.

The Report does not believe Tim Swanson is dumb enough to let the fact that Ron Devies openly supported his opponent (Republican Larry Dordea) in Swanson's 2008 re-election campaign be a motivation in how the Devies matter has been handled.

If politics were involved in what The Report perceives to be a slowdown, and The Report emphasizes the IF, then the politicizing factor would have been far more subtle and virtually untraceable to the average observer.

The Report does not know whether or not politics were a factor in the perceived slowdown in the Devies investigation nor, for that matter, in the Healy investigation. But The Report does know that political relationships and connections exist deep within the Stark County political establishment which could - if were ever know the truth of the matter - end up being factors.

Okay, assuming The Report's perception is correct and there was indeed a slowdown in Devies; such begs the question:

Why?

The Report believes that the investigators were having a difficult time finding (criminal charge wise) something to nail the Devies' with. And there were a couple of township trustees rear-ends to protect (from possible civil suits, if nothing else - NOTE: the SCPR has learned that Stark County Prosecutor John Ferrero sent "civil side" legal counsel to the last Marlboro Township trustee meeting to advise the trustees during the meeting). And, maybe just maybe, political pressure (from the deep recesses of Stark County political relationships and connections) was being brought to bear to find something.

Well, how does The Report's take on Devies factor into the Healy situation.

Pretty much the same, but with one important difference. In the Healy situation, the political push (if there is one) from Stark County's deep political recesses would be the opposite of what The Report speculates in the Devies matter.

In Healy, The Report's conjectured reasoning is that slowdown is needed to give time for the local political climate surrounding the Mayor to cool down. Once matters cool down, then it would be easier to sell a "no bill" to the awaiting public.

Whether or not The Report is correct in its analysis, one thing is for sure.

The political survivability of Mayor Healy is looking better everyday.

Healy may in time join in on a chorus with his TeamHealy devotees, the New York Sun editor September 21, 1897 penned the refrain: "Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus."

DISCUSSION: SWANSON'S TWO CHIEF DEPUTIES (PEREZ) ON & TO BE ON (MCDONALD) RETIRE/REHIRE LIST? MUST BE CATCHING?

Earlier this week the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report) learned that The Report missed a Stark County official who had retired and got rehired.

The Report is not one to slight proper recognition a retiree/rehiree.

Today, The Report adds Chief Deputy Rick Perez (brother of Stark County Auditor Kim Perez) to the STARK COUNTY PUBLIC OFFICIALS RETIREMENT HALL OF FAME. The Report apologizes to Chief Deputy Perez for the inadvertent omission.

The same source who chided The Report for missing Perez also informed The Report that Chief Deputy Mike McDonald (who is in charge of the Stark County jail) is planning a retire/rehire soon.

It is one thing for an elected official to do a retire/rehire a la Sheriff Tim Swanson (because he announced his plan before running for re-election). But it is quite another for the unelected to do the same. Of course, the sheriff bears responsibility for rehiring Perez. As he does, if McDonald follows through with retirement and then ends up back in his pre-retirement job.

Doesn't Swanson have officers in his department to promote when senior deputies retire?

DISCUSSION: GAUGER OF THE REPOSITORY - "SET UP MAN" OR "SCREW UP MAN?"

On Friday past, the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report) alerted readers to the imminent meeting that was about to take place at Mayor Healy's request with "the powers that be" at The Repository.

Clearly, this meeting was designed by Healy to finesse "Canton Reps" executive editor and derivatively the whole machinery of The Repository into being Healy's "set up man."

According to Wikipedia: "Setup pitchers, unlike closers, commonly appear in games where their team is tied or even behind ... "

Mayor Healy is looking to "close out" this game ahead. Right now, in the opinion of The Report, Healy is behind. And he is using The Rep to keep the wolves at bay while he scrambles to get ahead of this story.

Why would The Repository become Healy's ally in this fight for his political life. That is not "the only newspaper's - in town - " role. All of us who know Jamey Healy are empathetic with him. What a horrible spot to be in. But if he is in a problem, he has no one to blame but himself.

The job of an effective media is to set its own agenda of when, where and under what circumstances and ground rules to question. Not the subject himself.

What The Repository failed to do - or if it did and just is not sharing with the general public, is ask Healy about the e-mails and/or text messages that reportedly exist and are supposedly in Sheriff Swanson's possession which are said to have emanated from Healy himself to the 16 year old who is the subject matter of allegations that Healy had an inappropriate relationship with.

What The Rep has done is let Healy set the table. Can't blame Healy for trying. Apparently, he has succeeded.

The Report hopes that it is shown that none of these reports about a Healy "inappropriate relationship" are not true. Healy is correct (see "Healy hires lawyer to find who sent 'sordid' letters," The Rep on 2/22/2009) these accusations "have distracted him from important city business."

But to get to point of a final determination, all the documentary matter (electronic included) needs to be dealt with.

Healy talks very freely about the outrageous anonymous letters, as well he should. How about the other side of things, mayor?

Is Healy prepared to say that no e-mails and/or text messages between him and the 16 year old exist?

As matters stand, we don't know whether or not any such electronic communications exist?

Why?

Because The Repository has failed Stark County once again in its questioning/investigatory role. And because Mayor Healy hasn't volunteered the information.

Why doesn't the mayor (who yours truly knows well) call The Report?

Readers of The Report know that talking to yours truly is not likely to be a conversation Healy would relish.

In the end The Report says that Jeff Gauger is both a "set up man" and a "screw up man" for The Rep's handling of the "private" interview with a "public" figure on issues of huge public importance.