TRACKING OUR LEGISLATORS SERIES - BOCCIERI "AFTER 200 DAYS" BLOG 1

Recently a reader of the SCPR wrote yours truly with a very good idea.

Why not evaluate newly elected Congressman John Boccieri after 200 days?

The SCPR will go one better. Every week the SCPR will endeavor to have at least one evaluative piece on the congressman.

Boccieri is a member of the House on Agriculture Committee and the House on Transportation and Infrastructure.

So far he has introduced four bills. Below the SCPR has created a graphic of a summary of the bill and where it stands in terms of ultimate passage. What constituents have to determine whether or not govtrack.us is correct in its assessments that Boccieri is a leader or a follower.

The SCPR says it is too early to tell on Boccieri. Only 200 plus days in congress is not nearly enough time to do a meaningful assessment.

One congressional tracking site categorizes congressmen as being very successful at getting bills enacted whereas others sponsor/introduce bills that never get enacted. The SCPR will be providing progress reports on each and every bill Boccieri sponsors. He will be accountable for results.

Here are his first four bills and their current status:


Boccieri's offerings of H.R. 1545 (research dollars for domestic production) and H.R. 3093 (making loans available to medium and small business) seem to be bills that have some potential to help 16th district manufacturers and are in line working toward one of his legislative objectives of improving the local and national economy.

But will he produce on these and future legislative initiatives?

Time will tell and the SCPR will be here to track his record.

NESBITT CHASTISES THE MAN WHO NEEDED CHASTENING; PRAISES THE MEN AND WOMEN OF CANTON CITY GOVERNMENT WHO DESERVE ACCOLADES

Former Canton safety director Tom Nesbitt must have a strong stomach.

He worked for one of the most egotistic men in all of Stark County for 19 months. Canton's safety forces are the better for having had the direction of Nesbitt.

The SCPR does question his buying the Healy line on Police Chief McKimm and working to do the mayor's bidding on Healy. McKimm has a lot of history going back into the Creighton administration and has created some "political" enemies over that time.

McKimm like any other public official certainly needs to be made accountable and responsive, but he should be allowed to be a man who speaks his mind to his superiors as Nesbitt himself is.

Otherwise, Nesbitt performed the way he should have in relation to the mayor. Former services director and chief-of-staff Tom Bernabei also performed the way he should have in relation to Healy. But, as we now know, any one who has the temerity to face off with Healy is history if Healy has any authority over that person.

So Nesbitt and Bernabei are history and Canton is headed for the worse because of their departure.And God bless Tom Nesbitt in his new ventures.

Shame on Mayor William J. Healy, II for what he is doing to Canton.

Nesbitt did the right thing in e-mailing the Canton city employees as he departed praising them for their quality work. Here is a copy of that e-mail:

REP EDITORS HAVE TO BE THE ENVY OF STARK'S "CHEERLEADER-IN-CHIEF" AND FORMER CANTON MAYOR JANET CREIGHTON: NO?

When you don't have the moxie to challenge Stark County's leadership to excellence, what is there left to do?

Cheer-lead, that's what.

Even losing teams have cheerleaders.

And cheerleading seems to be a quality that The Canton Repository editorial board is set on honing and emphasizing these days.

For the life of yours truly, there's nothing to cheer about with the Stark Education Partnership (SEP), if you judge the organization by its president Doctor Adrienne O'Neill (PhD) and her interaction with the hoi polli public.

O'Neill is a lady who did not have the good sense to respond to an e-mail question yours truly sent her about the performance of the SEP about a year ago. As the SCPR is wont to do, the unanswered e-mail was followed up with an "embarrassing to her" telephone call. If that had not worked, then at one of her frequent public appearances, the question(s) would have been asked in that forum.

The goal of the SCPR is not to embarrass, but to get answers to incisive questions. and to prod Stark community leaders into questing for excellence. Undoubtedly, on the Stark high brow social circuit O'Neil gets a steady diet of "softball" education questions. Accordingly, she would not be practiced in handling the really difficult ones.

If O'Neill's take on improving Stark education is indicative of what is going on in Stark County education, then we should all embark on a fervent prayer life.

Back to The Repository Editorial Board.

The Rep editorial board picks up O'Neill's and SEP's claim to fame in touting the increasing number of graduates from Stark's high schools (which apparently is the "main claim to fame" achievement stretching over 20 years). The truth of the matter is that rates could not go anywhere but up from the abysmal levels that existed when SEP took up this project. You have to start somewhere.

The more important question of SEP and O'Neil is what do Stark's graduates know (core knowledge) and what are the graduates' processing skills (ability to think critically, creatively and innovatively)?

Wouldn't want to spoil a good cheerleading session with questions like those, would you?

Last week Governor Ted Strickland was in town to tell us that the Jackson school system has arrived to the point that if all Ohio schools were like Jackson, Ohio would have no need for educational reform?

Unbelievable!

And guess what we got out of The Rep's editors?

Yes, yes and yes again: SILENCE.

The governor failed to mention Jackson's 36% remediation rate when its graduates go to college and the heavens only know what employers have to spend in extra - make up for what was missed in high school - "education" dollars when these grads hit the workplace.

The SCPR has asked educators throughout Stark County (including O'Neill) about the extraordinarily high remediation rates and has gotten no meaningful answers: only a shrug of the shoulders or some nonsense like "we didn't have the college evaluative tests beforehand."

O'Neil takes a page out of a politician's book and "changed the subject when asked by the SCPR about what is being done about the high remediation rate. All she wants to talk about is the increasing rates of graduation among Stark's high schools. Why shouldn't she. Changing the subject is working. She and SEP gets cheered on by The Repository on cherry picked data that has not been examined critically as to the "real" significance to quality education occurring in Stark.

So Doctor O'Neill, if a school with a 50% graduation rate and a 70% remediation rate increases its graduation rate to 95%; what, pray-tell, would be the new remediation rate?

Since the emphasis is pushing more students out the door with degrees, wouldn't it stand to reason that the remediation rates will escalate. Maybe a little sacrificing quality for quantity might be going on?

Yours truly, in the comments sections of The Repository and perhaps in a "letter to the editor" or two used to chide former Canton mayor Janet Creighton for functioning mainly as a cheerleader in her role as Canton's chief executive.

But for Creighton there was nothing else to do.

Stark County's leadership infrastructure has evaporated with the loss of Canton's industrial base.

The Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce sat and watched and wringed their hands. The chamber is the only game in town as a specific attempt to rebuild Stark's lost leadership capability. But yours truly suspects its curriculum and regimen is not nearly tough enough. Not everyone who engages the program should be able to get through it. And, for the ones who do, there ought to be an accountability-esque report on the chamber's website detailing how the leadership school experience enabled specifically identified graduates to produce measurable results for Stark County.

Back to The Repository Editorial Board.

If Canton had a newspaper with aggressive, thoughtful, reflective, penetrating and a "no nonsense" public accountability qualities about its editorial board, there would be reason to be cheered about the future of Stark.

But the opposite is true.

The Rep appears to be in death throes. The folks at 500 South Market Avenue appear to be just trying to get from day-to-day. Just talk to the everyday Rep employee. Despair abounds everywhere.

Except that is with the editorial board.

Like the cheerleaders for the bottom dwelling team, they will cheer on until the bitter end.

COUNTY COMMISSIONER PETE FERGUSON - EXCUSE ME: "DOCTOR" PETER FERGUSON HAS A PROBLEM AND ITS NOT A BACK PROBLEM - WHAT IS HIS PROBLEM?

UPDATE: AUGUST 03, 2009

Moments ago the SCPR got an e-mail response from Commissioner Pete Ferguson from an e-mail sent several days ago:

Here is the text of the e-mail: (in yellow)

From: Martin Olson, as a citizen/voter in Stark County also, publisher of the Stark County Political Report E-mail: tramols@att.net phone: 330 699 5002 Commissioner Ferguson: As you know from reading my blog, I do not accept that public officials think they can ignore questions related to their public function. whether from the media or an everyday citizen. You still have not answered my questions to you e-mailed on 3/6/2009. Though I think giving you an opportunity - by asking the question via e-mail - to get your material together and reflecting on your response before making it via return e-mail is the preferred way to go; you have ignored me so far. Such is unacceptable. Perhaps, I will have to attend a commissioners' meeting and ask them in public? If you would prefer I ask them at a commissioners' meeting, that's fine with me. Let me know within the next few days. Here are some additional questions posed by a reader of the SCPR: One thing that I wanted to know..... back when he was running, he was promising that he was going to make large donations to local charities whether win or loose. Since he won, I believe the deal was that he was going to donate his first years salary to a charity. Do you know if he has followed through with his promise? If so, what is the charity? Also, does he insist on still being called doctor because he is still practicing medicine??? Another promise broken??

FERGUSON'S RESPONSE: (in gold)

In response to your e-mail although I make charitable donations, I never said I would donate my salary to charity and I never have and do not insist on being called doctor.

THE ORIGINAL BLOG
During the run up to the 2008 elections, the SCPR did a piece on the campaign between Pete Ferguson (Democrat) and John Hagan (Republican) in a contest for who was going to succeed Jane Vignos (Republican) as Stark County commissioner.

Political insiders from both sides of the aisle were telling yours truly how utterly lazy each were being in campaigning for office.

Their laziness was highly relevant material for a SCPR blog.

Why's that?

Because if you can't work your tail off to get a job, once you get the job then it highly likely you are going to sit back, relax and muse to yourself "mission accomplished. i got my job without much effort: why would I change my style now?"

And that it exactly what has happened.

Pete Ferguson is about the most comatose county commissioner that Stark County has had in many a year. To boot, one of the most insecure! (insists on being called DOCTOR Ferguson). Moreover, he does not keep his promises (see below), at least to the SCPR.

Stark Countians were between "the devil and the deep blue sea" on selecting between Ferguson and Hagan because both have the same public sector work ethic.

When the SCPR did the "laziest" article, Ferguson called yours truly to complain. "But Martin, I have always liked you," he said. As if that has anything to do with anything.

By all reports, Ferguson is a nice guy, but the SCPR does not factor in "nice person, nasty person" attributes.

In the same telephone call, yours truly asked Ferguson to answer a few questions: Ferguson: "I don't have the time now, but I will call you back."

I'm still waiting Commissioner Ferguson.

On the Stark County commissioners website, visitors are invited to e-mail the commissioners. So being naive, as yours truly is prone to be, off went an e-mail to Ferguson (March 6, 2009).

What was the was the question and what was the answer?

The question had to do with a potential "conflict-in-interest" and seeking specific information on campaign contributions.

The answer?

I'm still waiting Commissioner Ferguson.

The SCPR adamantly maintains that public officials are duty bound to answer citizen questions. And, when they don't or if they "cherry pick" (i.e. answer only self-aggrandizing questions); that, in and of itself disqualifies them to be re-elected.

So, DOCTOR Ferguson when are you going to keep your promise and return that call? And, when are you going to answer the e-mail?

HEALY: ANOTHER UNWISE DECISION?

Healy in a recent press release says: “I can think of no better person for the job," referring to Canton safety director designee Thomas Ream (August 4, 2009).

Really?

Well, when Healy selected Tom Nesbitt (a guy with effrontery to disagree publicly with Mayor Healy), Ream was among the applicants. In a turnabout from "I found a better person" (Nesbitt - early 2008) to - now that Nesbitt is "persona non-grata" for not being enough of a TeamHealy player to: there's "no better person" (Ream) because who else would take this job?

Recently, the SCPR did a piece on Ream (CLICK HERE) which outlines reasons why Ream does not appear (in the opinion of The Report) to be a good choice to succeed Thomas Nesbitt as Canton safety director.

Additional reasons have surfaced which indicate that, perhaps, Mayor William J. Healy, II (a man of extraordinary ability - in his own mind) should not be his own personnel chief.

Reasons why the Ream appointment is likely to come back to haunt Healy include:

1. Ream has been the deputy to Chief Dean McKimm and sources tell the SCPR that the two have had a tenuous relationship at best. So how is that the underling is going to deal with his former superior - a man that Mayor Healy has been trying to get fired for some time now? Did Healy exact a promise from Ream that he would push hard to get McKimm out?
   
2. Though the SCPR believes that Healy is intent on ridding Canton of McKimm, yours truly has learned that Ream has his own agenda on McKimm. A source tells The Report that several years ago Ream decided that it was time for McKimm to go. So the source says he initiated a petition directed to the Creighton administration to be signed by the four leadership captains of the Canton Police Department (CPD) asking that McKimm be removed as chief. But, the source continues, one captain (Myers) would not sign and so the CPD major (the then equivalent to deputy chief) refused to sign because he would only do so if all the captains signed on. With Ream being dead set against McKimm, is there any question that Ream/McKimm warfare with besiege the Healy administration. It seems as if Healy in a perverse sort of way enjoys dissonance and disharmony. Is there any better way to distract from his failure to bring positive change and redirection to Canton? In the opinion of the SCPR, It is kind of a cover for Healy's failure to move Canton forward.
   
3. Ream seems as if he may have exercised several poor judgments - from a public perception point-of-view - to wit:

• meeting a Repository reporter soon after three persons were murdered outside the White Crown Cafe (having gone there in the first place for the stated purpose of presenting a police presence in the neighborhood [as fleeting as it was] with the Repository reporter reportedly buying him at least one beer at Ream's request. A source tells the SCPR that Ream was not in uniform and that he drank four beers while there "to soothe the concerns of neighborhood citizens."
  

• Refusing to take a "lie detector" exam when he reached the "finals" when Perry Township trustees were selecting a replacement for their retiring police chief. Why? Ream, the SCPR understands, says it is the principle of the matter. As a senior police official he should be "above" taking a polygraph. The SCPR does not buy this pontification. The Healy administration has a huge credibility problem beginning with the mayor and there are enough questions about Reams dealings as an officer in the CPD (e.g. how does one work at Stark State teaching at the police academy during hours he is to be on the job at the CPD?) that compel questions being put to him that may generate some interesting readings from the results. Now that Healy has determined there will be no polygraph, "hizzonner" has to bear the full weight of any revelations that might come out down the road about his new safety director. Healy has not properly and fully vetted Ream and he now owns the full consequences of the possibility (probability in the opinion of the SCPR) that the "chickens will come home to roost!"
  

• Becoming personally involved during the Creighton administration to steer business to Motorola amidst allegations that he had an "inappropriate" relationship with a Motorola sales person. As the story goes, Canton was in the process of evaluating "in car video equipment" to be installed in CPD police cars. Motorola and Coban Technologies were among the equipment manufacturers being considered. Motorola's equipment was the highest priced and the least reliable according to the SCPR source, yet Ream was intent on Motorola being the selected vendor. Get this. The source says Motorola is "out of the business" of selling this equipment which, if true, means that Ream's insistence on Motorola would have put the CPD in a bad way. The key here is that this selection process puts Ream's judgment in doubt on another basis which cannot be good for a man who is Canton's safety director. Fortunately for Canton and the CPD, the Creighton administration sniffed this one out and went a different direction than Ream wanted.
  
• As articulated above, the SCPR believes that Healy has not thoroughly vetted Ream. But when you know the man will be a "team player" why go further? Here is Healy of TeamHealy fame drooling - in a press release excerpt - over Ream and the likelihood he will be a team player:
  

Healy also highlighted Ream’s team-based leadership philosophy as a “good fit” with the rest of his Cabinet members and department heads, and said that this will allow his administration to more effectively serve city residents in the future.

The SCPR is skeptical of the "good fit."

Time will tell who is right: the SCPR or Hizzonner William J. Healy, II?

For the sake of Cantonians, let us all hope that that the "Whiz Kid" from the New York University Stern School of Business is correct in his evaluation and selection of Thomas Ream as the new safety director of Canton.

ALLIANCE REPUBLICANS JOKE ABOUT 16TH DISTRICT CONGRESSMAN JOHN BOCCIERI "FINALLY" MOVING INTO ALLIANCE AND THE 16TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT

The SCPR has learned that Alliance Republicans were in a jocular/festive mood at a recent party functions. The topic? Democratic congressman John Boccieri is "finally" moving into Alliance within the actual confines of the 16th congressional district.

Alliance mayor Middleton was heard joking about how Alan Andreani (Republican Alliance councilman-at-large) was going to have Congressman Boccieri moving in next door. Some Stark County Republicans are skeptical that Boccieri ever really lived in a home he rented in Alliance about a year ago.

The U.S Constitution does not require that a congressman/congresswoman actually live in the district they represent, only that they live somewhere in the state.

Although Youngstown (the area Boccieri originally hails from is close to Pennsylvania, it is in Ohio.

In the spirit of good humor, the SCPR welcomes Congressman John Boccieri into the 16th.

HOLDING THE GOVERNOR ACCOUNTABLE SERIES: "THE POLITICAL SEASON IS IN FULL BLOOM?" JACKSON HAS 36% COLLEGE REMEDIATION RATE - NO NEED FOR REFORM?

If there ever was a sure sign Ted Strickland is in for the fight of his political life, all doubt is removed with his "kickoff political barn - err school storming trip to various school districts in Ohio to make the case that he and his administration is making progress on his promise to "Turnaround Ohio" made to Ohio voters in the 2006 gubernatorial campaign.

Reforming Ohio's education infrastructure is the key to his "turnaround" promise.

Strickland, you will recall, said early on in his administration that he would be a "failed governor" if he failed to reform education in Ohio.

Undoubtedly, his political operatives say that he is making headway.

But is he?

Strickland came to Stark County on Friday to Jackson Township. What he had to say makes one wonder if Strickland has read his own Ohio Board of Regent's report on how ill-prepared Jackson graduates are for college?

Jackson, Lake and North Canton are the best we have in Stark and they all share similar numbers on the need for remediation.

A keystone to the Strickland Ohio economic development plan is having high school graduates ready for college (for those who choose to attend) or ready for the workforce.

The SCPR compared Jackson to Hudson High School (Summit County). And sorry to say the results were not even close.

Hudson is the creme-de-la-creme but it has always been no matter what the folks in Columbus do or don't do.

Recently, Jackson has passed a "survive these times" levy after failure of larger levies which might have enabled Jackson administrators and faculty to cut into the gulf between the Jackson and Hudson remediation rates.

But Stark Countians would not approve the higher levies.

So the only solution will have to be with the state of Ohio or more well off districts like Hudson will continue to outshine Stark County's 17 school districts.

And get this.

Stark Taxpayers get to pay twice for what were are not getting from Stark's high schools. If those students go to either Kent - Stark or Stark State and our grads are required to take remediation course; they get no credit and still have to pay tuition and buy books for these non-credit towards graduation course.

If they attend college outside of Stark, then the rest of Ohio's taxpayers help Stark Countians with the "double taxation" as we do them.

There are many more costs to Stark's, Ohio's and the nation's economies for the high remediation rate.

Employers who get "unprepared" recently graduated from high schools have to make up for the deficiencies in basic educational skills (reading, writing and math) by purchasing technology which does basic human skills and thereby masks the graduates lack of fundamental skills. Moreover, these employers may have to provide post high school training that is general and not job specific just to get the newly high school graduated employee to the point where they can cope with job specific add-on skills.

So employers all too often end up with a "surcharge tax" of sorts because of the failures of Stark's high schools.

And there are other costs that the SCRP will be holding up to Stark County educational officials and the governor as huge barriers to turning around Stark's and Ohio's economy.

When Strickland first appeared on the gubernatorial political scene, yours truly thought Strickland was different from the typical politician. However, skepticism has replaced the initial hope.

Strickland seems to buying to the politics of the likes of former Stark County Democratic Party chairman Johnnie A. Maier, Jr and his ilk which include: "spin" the failures, finger point at political opponents, revise and qualify political history/statements and above all - don't be a stand up and be accountable public official.

For Ohio and Stark County to have any chance at all to become a place for the creative, the energetic, the industrious, the imaginative, the optimistic and the forward thinking to take up residence; the bench mark of the need for remediation at college and in the workplace with have to be at the Hudson level or below statewide.

Until it is, Stark County and Ohio will continue to be the backwater of economical growth and development.

Strickland may get re-elected in 2010, but he is well on his way to being a failed governor on his self selected substantive standard - education.

If he fails, he will survive the personal put-down, but Stark County and Ohio may not!