WHO WOULD HAVE EVER FIGURED HEALY FOR THIS ONE?

Truly astonishing?

Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II hosting an ethics seminar?

What is this world coming to anyway?

The Stark County Political Report (SCPR/The Report) applauds Hizzoner for coming up with this one. If this little ditty doesn't divert attention from the ethics problems that some Cantonians/Stark Countians think the mayor has, then nothing will.

First he proposes ethics reform to Canton City Council. Now he's out to make all of Stark County government more ethical.

Wow!

Who is next?

The Strickland administration, the Ohio General Assembly?

After that?

On to the feds?

And the list of topics at this seminar are exactly what any good "ethics" doctor would order for her patients. Take a look to the left. Isn't it an impressive list?

So the SCPR hopes that it is SRO (Standing Room Only) for this seminar which is to be held at the Edward "Peel" Coleman Community Center, 1400 Sherrick Road SE, Canton on September 9th from 9:00 to 11:00 a.m.

Now this is only a rumor, but the SCPR has heard that each and every attendee will be getting his/her very own "free" bottle of ethics pills with unlimited "free" refills as long as the official is a public official.

The irony of this simply leaves yours truly "speechless!"

Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious!!!

According to the 1964 Walt Disney film [Mary Poppins], [SUPERCALIFRAGILLISTICXPLALIDOCIOUS] is defined as "what you say when you don't know what to say". (from Wikipedia - emphasis added).

WHAT DOES MAYOR HEALY HAVE IN COMMON WITH JOHN ASHCROFT & DON RUMSFELD?

UPDATE: 9:08 A.M.

Rosario Carcione (president of the Canton Professional Firefighters Association - CPFA) told the SCPR this morning that the CPFA has filed a grievance against the Healy administration over the administration's dismissal of 15 fire cadets as being a violation of an agreement on staffing levels in accordance with a Memorandum of Understanding supplemented by e-mails between the CPFA and the Healy administration.

Also, President Carcione revealed to the SCPR that the CPFA has filed an "unfair labor practice" against the Healy administration on the grounds that the fire cadets were dismissed because the Healy administration is retaliating against the CPFA for its filing of the grievance by the union.

ORIGINAL BLOG

Within the past week, a story (as told by former Department of Homeland Security head Tom Ridge) has broken that former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld pressured Ridge to raise the "color" threat level immediately before the 2004 presidential elections.

What does this have to do with Canton mayor William J. Healy, II"?

The Rumsfeld/Ashcroft bullying tactics have been adopted by the Healy administration to bring the Canton Professional Firefighters Association (CPFA) into line in his desperation attempts to make up a $2.8 million budget deficit.

Pure and simple, as Rumsfeld and Ashcroft were willing to play politics with the nation's security warning mechanism so apparently are Mayor Healy and his newly appointed safety director Thomas Ream are playing political "hardball" with the fire and medical safety of Cantonians.

Healy has had to know for some time that the budget was going to be in big time shortfall. One has to ponder as to whether or not he is using the city's financial crisis as a way to gain political control over the firefighter/medic aspect of Canton's safety forces much as he has waged war with Police Chief Dean McKimm to get rid of him so as to have a more direct line of control over Canton's policemen (presumably by a more Healy friendly police chief).

Is this a play on White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's dictum: "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste."

A source tells the SCPR that the real reasons the 15 firefighter cadets were sacrificed by the Healyites is because the CPFA did not roll over immediately on a demand that a re-open on the collective bargaining agreement occur. Yours truly is told that the union was considering a "limited" re-open but was not allowed consideration time (demand was made about 6:00 p.m. on Thursday; the union was accused of "breaking their promise? to re-negotiate" as of 7:00 a.m. on Friday).

Seems like a "straw-man" maneuver to the SCPR, which is consistent with what yours truly knows about Healy and his penchant for political machinations. Only this time, the personal safety of Cantonians has been put in jeopardy.

Hold on to your hats for this one.

The SCPR is about to compliment The Repository Editorial Board.

On Thursday, August 20 (August 20th just happens to be yours truly's birth date), The Rep editors did a very nifty job of posing some important questions for Healy to answer:

Here is the editorial in toto:

Where is Canton’s mayor? Why is William J. Healy II not out in front, literally and figuratively, in addressing a city budget deficit we’re now told will hit $2.8 million this year?

Why has Healy not spoken clearly and publicly to city employees, members of City Council and city taxpayers about the budget crisis?

Why has he not made the case for shared sacrifice to all of these stakeholders?

Why has he not started with making sacrifices in his own office budget?

Why, when he decided to lay off 15 cadet firefighters to save money, was he AWOL in actually delivering the pink slips?

Why can’t the public get a straight answer from the Healy administration about how much money will be saved from laying off firefighters?

Why has he not told City Council or the public what other cuts he plans?

Why, when the news about Canton is bad — layoffs, budget difficulties, triple homicides — must the public hear from a surrogate and not the boss himself?

Healy ran for mayor by trumpeting his experience in running a business. The budget crisis and the attendant political risks are the cost of being the boss.

Why isn’t the mayor willing to pay it?

To The Rep's questions, the SCPR asks these:

The way that the city is to tighten its financial belt is to first layoff part-time and seasonal employees which Canton has 33 of, then and only then is the city to look at laying off probationary employees. Why isn't this order of things not being implemented the Healy administration especially in light of the fact that the targeted probationary employees are "safety (firefighters and medics) forces?"

The SCPR is told that Healy kept the "budget thing" to himself and a few confidants resident on the 8th floor. Hmm? How much of a role did Communication Director Adam Herman (Healy's most loyal subordinate) play in formulation the budget?

The affected parties (city workers and their unions) were not consulted, Canton City Council was not included and most importantly Finance committee chairman Greg Hawk was closed out.

Of course, in the Healy way of thinking, these are not trustworthy people.

As if Healy did not have enough problems with Council.

Now he has a new enemies list. The SCPR has learned that Councilmen Kraus, Smuckler, Barton and Prater are with the CPFA are definitely against the mayor on the cadets issue. Yours truly believes that Healy by his cavalier actions has likely created a majority in councilmembers who oppose his continuing on as mayor.

There is a certain irony is all of this too.

A SCPR source relayed a anecdotal account of Healy and the firefighters brouhaha.

It occurred during the O'Jays event at Fawcett Stadium on August 15th attended by about 15,000 people. During the event, the SCPR is told, there were 9 squad calls for medics because of the heat and humidity. Problem was, because of Canton's budget difficulities, only one medic unit was available to service the suffering.

Well, Mayor Healy was at the event. He approached one firefighter and asked "why the the delay." Answer: "Your honor, we were told that there would be no more discretionary overtime." To which Healy said "Hmm, you got me on that one."

Healy then went into action and immediately ordered two additional units to service the OJays crowd.

Hmm? No overtime, unless the mayor is being embarrassed?

The background to the cadet - "do they stay or do they go" saga is that Ream announced to CPFA president Rosario Carcione and the CPFA executive board that there was now in effect a 100% reduction in firefighter overtime and that the city adminstration was no longer going to honor a Memorandum of Understanding (negotiated between the union and former safety director Tom Nesbitt) that 37 firefighter employees each and every day was the "minimum" standard at which city of Canton firefighter/medic forces were to be staffed.

Moreover, if the CPFA went to the media with the Ream decrees, then the CPFA was threatened to do worse to the union than simply dismissing the probationary cadets.

No surprise to the SCPR.

As matters stand now, only 22 or so firefighters are on the job as Cantonians awake each morning. The number would be higher (probably 25 or so) if the cadets had not been let go by Healy. Clearly, Healy's decision has affected public safety coverage in Canton whereas Tom Ridge was there to stop Rumsfeld and Ashcroft.

Healy is clearly a "my way or the highway" type of guy. He requires the same of his subordinates or they become history very quickly. Nobody gets in the mayor's way.

The SCPR believes that Canton's "political animal" is about to do himself in. He is creating enemy after enemy after enemy.

Though he mimics Rumsfeld and Ashcroft in politicalization of nearly all that he touches, he is it. He has no president to back him up. It's all his call.

Cantonians are being worked over big time by the mayor.

"How much longer, O Lord, how much longer?"

REMEMBERING PAST STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT BLOGS

WHAT ROLE DO SUPERINTENDENTS OF SCHOOLS PLAY IN BOARD OF EDUCATION ELECTIONS?

The Stark County Political Report (SCPR/The Report) has long believed that "behind the scenes" many of Stark County's school superintendents get involved in who is going to sit on their districts' boards of education.

Each of the county boards have 5 elected members and they run as "nonpartisans."

Yours truly does not believe for one minute that board of educations races are "really" nonpartisan.

Moreover, depending on who sits on the boards, the life of superintendent can be an "easy street - rubber stamp" existence or they just might have to answer a continuing parade of incisive questions.

If you were superintendent, which would you prefer?

Superintendents work hard at creating the impression that they deal with the hand they are dealt. But the SCPR thinks all too often, some work equally hard (underground) to ensure that they have compliant board members and the hoped for "impression" in reality is an "illusion."

What is going on in Canal Fulton/Clinton/Lawrence Township(Northwest Local School District) may be a case study of a superintendent who is heavily involved in orchestrating the make up of the board he has to work with.

William Stetler is the superintendent at Northwest. Stetler is a person that yours truly knows pretty well inasmuch as he was last (other than a gap at the Ohio Department of Education as the appointee of now politically deposed former state superintendent Susan Zelman [ousted by Governor Strickland]) superintendent in The Report's home district - Lake.

In fact, yours truly's spouse (Mary) served on the Lake Board while Stetler was superintendent.

One of the reasons that Mary ran (at the urging of yours truly) was because it appeared to me that some political gaming was going on and that an "approved" candidate was waiting in the wings waiting to file a petition at the last moment. Only two had filed right up to near or at the filing deadline for three positions. As it turned out, had Mary not filed, the election for Lake for the three "open" slots for the board would not have been a competitive process. Moreover, Mary does dig in and ask incisive questions.

Mary had served on the Lake board previously while Robert Dunnerstick was superintendent. Even her election in the Dunnerstick era was as a superintendent "nonfavored" candidate.

In 2007 she decided it was time to run for the Stark County Educational Service Center (which was formerly known as the Stark County Board of Education). And lo and behold what did she find? What appears to me to be another, "approved" candidate.

Ironically, yours truly believes the "approved" candidate to have been Robert "Skip" Blowers who at the time was a member of the Northwest School District Board of Education.

But if the SCPR is correct in this analysis, "the best laid plans of mice and men" did not work. Mary was elected.

The moral of the story for voters for boards of education candidates is that they should seek to find out who the "superintendent" favors.

Why so?

Well, the SCPR imagines that many superintendents favor board members who will accept the wisdom of the superintendent and his fellow administrators unflinchingly and are loathe to ask penetrating questions, or, heaven forbid, might even vote "no" on the administration recommended action here and there.

School districts which lack scrutinizing board members get into trouble with the voting public very quickly.

Decisions not properly vetted start falling apart which causes community members to get upset which over time leads to distrust and concomitant hostility between the community and the schools.

It all leads back to the superintendents trying to create a cushy environment for themselves and their administration.

Is this what is happening in Northwest?

Perhaps.

A week or so ago, The Report noticed that Nicole Metzger (appointed to fill the term of her husband who tragically died earlier this year) had added a petition.

Her first petition was for one of the "regularly" expiring terms. Her second (only added very recently) was for one of the two "unexpired" terms. Board president Steven Jones filed for an "unexpired" term as did former Canal Fulton councilman Victor Colaianni.

The SCPR's take on this turn of events?

Yours truly thinks that Victor Colaianni is persona non grata from the administration's point of view.

As things stood before Metzer pulled her "unexpired term" petition, Colaianni was going to become a board member (unless someone else stepped in at the last minute to file a petition) because there were two vacancies, two candidates.

Why would Stetler et al (and probably some of the sitting board members) object to Colaianni?

Victor is not as good a questioner as he thinks in his own mind, but he is not likely to be the rubber stamp that Jones and Metzger have demonstrated in their time on the board. However, Stetler and friends might be surprised. Colaianni was not exactly a beacon of inquiry when he served on the Canal Fulton City Council.

A second more subtle reason might be that Stetler and his administrative team see an embarrassing potential conflict-in-interest in the offing if Colaianni is elected.

Public records show that Victor lives at 1708 Bruce St NW, Canal Fulton, Ohio, apparently as a renter.


So?

Well, it so happens that 1708 Bruce Street is owned by John Hexamer who is assistant superintendent of the Northwest Local School District. The ties are shown from redacted public records displayed below.


Could it be that the administration doesn't have the heart to tell Victor that it is not a good idea for him to be on the Northwest school board for a perceived possible "conflict-in-interest" problem and that the Metzger switch is the way to deal with the situation?

More likely, to the SCPR's way of thinking, is Colaianni is an unknown quantity and therefore it is better to be safe rather than sorry.

When you add the above articulated SCPR speculated political intrigue with the Board's history of appointing to board vacancy spots without taking applications from the public-at-large, it is no wonder that Northwest has "trust" problems with its voting public.

The overall moral to the story for this blog is that superintendents make a huge mistake in their and the board of educations members' relationships with the public-at-large when they work backstage to create ideal working conditions for themselves.

Will superintendents ever figure out, that in the end, clandestine efforts to fashion board of education makeup are counterproductive to their own trustworthiness and builds into an insidious undermining of the public's confidence in how public schools are run?

CANTON'S "ETHICALLY CHALLENGED" MAYOR STRIKES AGAIN?

Has a Stark County Political Report (SCPR/The Report) reader connected the dots?

A reader alerted The Report to an item on one of Team Healy's campaign finance reports listing Donald G. Jones with an occupation of "security services" as being a contributed to Healy's successful 2007 campaign to become mayor of Canton.

Here is the specific excerpt from The Repository report on the Healy administration's decison to make Buckeye Protective Service, Inc. a grantee of some of the $421,000 stimulus money:
At the very least, the SCPR believes that the Healy administration should have alerted the public to the fact of the campaign contribution and issued what undoubtedly have been a "disclaimer" that there was no connection whatsoever between the campaign contribution and the exercise of discretion by the administration to direct stimulus money to Buckeye.

In the end, it is the Canton public that assesses the facts and forms an opinion on what is "politically" at play here, if anything.

But the public is entitled to have all the relevant information.

"Hats off" to the SCPR reader who dug out this information and provided it to yours truly.

CENSOR-IN-CHIEF: JEFF GAUGER "EXECUTIVE EDITOR" OF THE CANTON REPOSITORY!!!

UPDATE 08212009 AT 5:34 AM

PLEASE GO DOWN THIS UPDATE AND READ JEFF GAUGER'S EXPLANATION AS TO WHY THE REP TOOK DOWN THE COMMENTS ON THE MORRIS/HORNER STORY.

Here's the SCPR reaction to Gauger:

If the Gauger account is accurate, then there is a serious problem with the managers of The Rep's comments in terms of their ability to monitor and select out abusive comments. Yours truly has much experience in screening out abusers. In fact, the SCPR used to allow anonymous comments but found that under the cloak of anonymity far too many anonymous commenters got way off message and said ugly things that did not meet standards of basic civility. These were "easily" screened out without interfering with the many quality comments received. However, the screening was time consuming.

Now that the SCPR has gone to the simple process of requiring commenters to register with Google first prior to commenting, the quality of comments have picked up considerably and the monitoring function much less of a burden.

The Rep reputedly has much tighter controls over comments than the SCPR in terms of identifying the abusers and dealing with them on a long term basis, but the need to wipe out all of the comments seems to be a huge over reaction to a few claimed abusive comments.

The SCPR is skeptical of Gauger's explanation.

Why is that?

Because Gauger (and, of course, he is the person who sets the standard for his stand-in comments section monitors) has a history of mismanaging the comments and generally is prone to stifling full-blown discussion of important public issues.

A case in point is the Boccieri/Schuring race.

At the outset he announced that The Rep (meaning Gauger himself) was going to be very much in control of who got published in their comments and letters to the editor. And their have been other clear indicators that The Rep editors have an editorial agenda that disfavors "nonabusive" comments/letters to the editors which vary from The Rep's point-of-view.

So in the end the SCPR remains skeptical of Gauger and his "internal mechanism" explanation.

The SCPR is prone to believe that Stark County Democratic Party heavy hitters generated the furor that caused the "over-reaction" at The Rep.

Moreover, the SCPR is probably why the comments reappeared with Gauger's lame explanation>

Note that the SCPR's original blog anticipated the "restoration." And, accordingly, yours truly claims credit for The Rep's reversal.

MARY PARKER'S COMMENTS DIRECT TO SCPR

mary has left a new comment on your post "CENSOR-IN-CHIEF: JEFF GAUGER "EXECUTIVE EDITOR" O...":

When I first heard the breaking news that Frank Morris had been overlooked by the precinct committee persons to take over the seat as the ninth ward council person, I thought two things. One; I can't believe it. Two, I can't wait to see what Martin Olson has to say about this. I have much respect for Mr. Olson, and much respect for his opinions. He's a straight shooter. Had he wrote an editorial saying, that the committee did the right thing in appointing Mr.Brian Horner to fill the vacancy left by Joe Carbenia, I would have had to re-examine my thoughts on Mr. Morris being sidestepped. That's how much value I place on Martin Olson's opinions. When it comes to anything political, I trust his judgment more than my own.

When I finally got to go to his Blog tonight and read his take on the whole affair, I got a bonus. I also got his take on Jeff Gauger. Moments before, I had, while revisiting the Ward 9 story, saw a comment by Jeff, explaining why the thread on this story had been shut down, much to my surprise the previous evening. I accepted Jeff's explanation, knowing how outrageously obnoxious commentors can get.

Then, I come to SCP Blog and read Martin's take on the closing down of the comments in question. So, now I have to wonder, 'What came first, the chicken or the egg?' Did Jeff by chance see Martins write-up about him and the editorial staff at the Rep, and decide to put the thread back on? I'm certainly not going to call Jeff a liar, but I do have my doubts now about why the thread was shut down.

I'm not nearly as wise as Martin or most political astute politicians or other commentors on the Rep comments. I usually keep a low profile on the political threads. That doesn't mean I'm stupid, or easily duped by politicians or editors. I've been following the political stance of the Repository since high school. Only difference between then and now is the change in the editors, and the move from the right to the left. For all intents and purposes, the Rep was a conservative Republican newspaper, and made no bones about it. Now it seems to be either a pro Democratic newspaper, or a cross-dresseer.

"The management at The Rep is so much in bed with the Stark County political and government establishment, that Stark Countians are denied the truth about what is really happening in our local government and, to add insult to injury, Gauger et al deny the public their voice."

Well, if the Rep wants to get in bed with the Stark County political establishment, that's their business. I can't tell them what to do. They can sleep with who they want to, but when you stifle my voice. and the voices of others who supported Frank Morris in the ward 9 fiasco, then you're dragging us into bed with you. I'd rather chose who I want to get in bed with. If you're going to have a true comment section on the Rep website, than no one, conforming to rules should be gagged. I hope this wasn't the case. I said on the Rep, and I'll say here, Frank Morris should be sitting at the council table next Monday night. I wouldn't be anything other than a Democrat, but I'm really disappointed in my party on this one.

GAUGER'S COMMENT ON THE REPOSITORY'S COMMENT PAGE

Jeff Gauger

19 hours ago

We shut down comments yesterday after being besieged with a massive abuse report attack. We received more than 40 abuse reports all about two separate comments on the story in less than 20 minutes, making it impossible to do anything else, so we shut it down. Well put it back on now that the abusive comments have had time to be purged and the hysteria has calmed down.

I support the decision by editors to shut off the comments for the reason cited above. As you know, you may not abuse other commenters. You also may not abuse Repository staff by forcing them to drop all other work to monitor a single thread full time. Im sure that only a couple of people were responsible for the abuse. Nevertheless, its a case where the vandals win.

The thread is back until and unless the vandals strike again.

Jeff Gauger
Executive Editor" type="hidden">

Report Abuse

I was unaware that comments on this story had been shut down until hearing about it in an e-mail from a reader this morning. I then read the comment thread for the first time and saw nothing that I thought merited shutting them down. Then, I talked with the editors who monitored comments yesterday, and here is what one told me in an e-mail:

We shut down comments yesterday after being besieged with a massive abuse report attack. We received more than 40 abuse reports all about two separate comments on the story in less than 20 minutes, making it impossible to do anything else, so we shut it down. Well put it back on now that the abusive comments have had time to be purged and the hysteria has calmed down.

I support the decision by editors to shut off the comments for the reason cited above. As you know, you may not abuse other commenters. You also may not abuse Repository staff by forcing them to drop all other work to monitor a single thread full time. Im sure that only a couple of people were responsible for the abuse. Nevertheless, its a case where the vandals win.

The thread is back until and unless the vandals strike again.

Jeff Gauger
Executive Editor

ORIGINAL BLOG

During the week of March 14 - 20, 2010 the American Society of Newspaper Editors will be pushing its annual "Sunshine Week" which is a Main Street Written Media attempt to be a driving force for more public access to government information.
The editors at The Canton Repository - though the subject matter of their sins differ - are like Senator John Ensign of Nevada.

Ensign has been one of the great moralizers in the United States Senate who has turned hypocrite-in-chief with the revelation that he had an affair with a campaign staffer whom his family has allegedly paid hush money.

Wikipedia has a nice summation of Ensign's hypocrisy/moralizing:

In 1998, after President Bill Clinton admitted to having committed adultery with Monica Lewinsky, Ensign called on him to resign, saying, "He has no credibility left.

In 2004, Ensign spoke on the Senate floor in favor of the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment, which would have barred states from recognizing same-sex marriage. Ensign said:

Marriage is the cornerstone on which our society was founded. For those who say that the Constitution is so sacred that we cannot or should not adopt the Federal Marriage Amendment, I would simply point out that marriage, and the sanctity of that institution, predates the American Constitution and the founding of our nation.

For the editors at The Rep and, in particular, Executive Editor Jeff Gauger to participate in, pontificate about and castigate others about thwarting democracy for one special week a year and then on the other hand muzzle their readers (who happen to be Stark County citizens who enjoy exercising their First Amendment rights) when political hanky-panky appears to have taken place and the parties believed to be part of the hanky-panky call and complain.

The local case in point: Yesterday The Rep published a piece entitled: Political newcomer named Ward 9 representative. As readers of The Rep online edition know, each and every article allows for reader comment. And did the readers of The Rep comment on this story. Go check the comments on this story today. Unless this blog causes a reversal; they are no more. The Rep has censored its readers.

By and large the commenters were incensed that Frank Morris, III who ran a very close race against incumbent (recently deceased) Councilman Joe Carbenia. Morris lost by 7 votes and was declared the loser only after a recount.

But Stark Dems (9th Ward council precinct persons) ignored the 341 voters of the 9th Ward and appointed Stark Democratic political insider Brian Horner as Carbenia's successor. What is so rank about this process is that 6 people trumped 341.

Yours truly, knowing politics as I do, do not believe for one moment that Stark County Democratic Party chairman did not have his hands all over this decision. Precinct committee persons are known by political cognoscenti to be selected because of their devotion to party chairmen.

Horner works for Nancy Reinbold (Stark Common Pleas clerk of courts) who got her job at the instigation Phil Giavasis initiallly who Randy Gonzalez now works for.

Need there be a clearer line?

These people think we are all fools!

And The Repository plays the game with them.

Make no mistake about it, the SCPR applauds the American Society of Newspaper Editors.

However, The Report roundly condemns The Canton Repository Editorial Board and its Executive Editor Jeff Gauger.

Whether its Mayor Healy or some other Stark County politically powerful person, The Repository consistently shows that it bends to political pressure and buries public reaction to the what the public perceives to be political and governmental abuses of power which plague the Stark County community.

So we have a "one-newspaper-town" (The Canton Repository) working hand-in-glove with a "one-party-county-organization" to deprive everyday Stark Countians from exercising their First Amendment rights.

We all know about how some organizations and business keep "cooked books." In a sense that is what The Repository has turned into. A journalistic "cooked book."

The management at The Rep is so much in bed with the Stark County political and government establishment, that Stark Countians are denied the truth about what is really happening in our local government and, to add insult to injury, Gauger et al deny the public their voice.

In theory the SCPR would like to see newspapers thrive and prosper, but when it comes to our local countywide newspaper, wouldn't we be better off just relying on the Internet to get our news and to make our comments.

Although The Rep is a private entity, it trades on the public trust.

What is the biblical expression?

MENE, MENE, TEKEL, and PARSIN: "You have been weighed on the scales and found wanting."

The Canton Repository has fast losing if they have not already losing the public trust!

TRACKING OUR LEGISLATORS SERIES - BOCCIERI : HIDING OUT IN MINERVA?

UPDATE: 08/20/2009 6:39 AM

E-MAIL RESPONSE TO ORIGINAL POST BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF MINERVA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

I was provided a copy of your blog and wanted to clarify some items for your readers.

The Minerva Area Chamber of Commerce asked Congressman Boccieri to come to Minerva shortly after his vote on Cap & Trade; to address our chamber members, various issues affecting our businesses in Minerva, and in this case, specifically on his vote on CAP & TRADE and the potential impacts. The congressman agreed to meet with us sometime over the recess session. Working with the congressman’s staff we were able to identify a mutually agreeable date to hold the event. In addition, the chamber, not the congressman nor his staff, set the forum and the agenda. As a benefit to being a chamber member, the chamber, not the congressman nor his staff, limited the invitations to our current chamber members as a benefit of being a member. This forum will allow our chamber members, our businesses leaders, the opportunity to be heard on issues directly impacting them, and to have a direct dialogue with the congressman.

Our chamber members are faced with serious issues regarding various legislative initiatives such as CAP & TRADE, CARD CHECK, Health Care Reform, Bush era tax relief rollback, etc.; and the impending impacts they will have on their operations. We are pleased that Congressman Boccieri has accepted our invitation, which will allow Minerva area business leaders the forum to address issues impacting their business directly with the congressman. A “town hall” meeting is beyond the scope of the mission of the chamber and is well beyond the capability of this office. Should any of your readers wish to join the Minerva chamber and attend the event, they may contact me directly at the number listed below.

V/R

Lawrence A. Kosiba

Executive Director

Minerva Area Chamber of Commerce &

Economic Development

Ph: 330-868-7979

If you are a United States congressman, it is hard to "hide-out." But 16th District Congressman John Boccieri is trying.

The SCPR has received a copy of an e-mail generated by the executive director of the Minerva Chamber of Commerce which makes it abundantly clear that in these days of "town hall meetings" at which congressmen, U.S. senators and even the president have to answer tough questions, John Boccieri has gone low profile.

What is interesting here is that one wouldn't think that Democrat John Boccieri would seek refuge with chamber of commerce of types.

But desperate times call for desperate measures.

Note in the e-mail (see contents below) that the Minerva Chamber has given the Boccieri staff the final call on who gets in and who doesn't at Boccieri's appearance at the chamber on August 24th.

Here is a list of chamber/Boccieri people who you might contact if you "really, really" want to attend this event.

And here is the e-mail:

Subject: Congressman Boccieri Breakfast - Not Releasable Yet

I’ve arranged to have Congressman Boccieri come here to Minerva on Monday August 24 from 8:30 – 9:30 to talk with our Chamber Members.

THIS IS NOT OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AND IS NOT A TOWN HALL MEETING AND NOT A HEALTH CARE FORUM

The meeting will be presented as a BENEFIT to our CURRENT chamber members; be limited to current chambers members ONLY; and will focus on what the proposed legislation in congress will have on our businesses.

Anyone from the public wishing to attend will be directed to contact the Congressman’s office to find out where and when he will be conducting Town Hall meetings that they can attend – this is being presented as a benefit to our chamber members.


Each Chamber member will be allowed ONE individual from the company (must be a senior employee – no relatives/associates/etc) to attend via prior reservation/approval to get a head count;
Cost will be $10 per person to cover the cost of the meal;
Although not confirmed yet, the breakfast will be held at Classic 57;
Board members will have a separate invitation so if you are on the Board such as American Road & Machine; Dave Hank will have an invite and his business will have one invitation;

We are looking at four areas for discussion and how they will impact Minerva businesses:  CARD CHECK; CAP & TRADE; Health Care Reform; and Banking legislation.

Any questions – let me know – we will discuss more at Monday’s Board meeting.

Larry

Lawrence A. Kosiba
Executive Director
Minerva Area Chamber of Commerce &
Economic Development

Ph: 330-868-7979
FAX:  330-868-3347