(VIDEO OF STARK COMMISSIONERS) - A MUST SEE! - ITS NOT PHIL DAVISON BUT IT IS A TREAT

 

As we (Stark Countians) well know by now, on June 23rd the Ohio Supreme Court ordered Gary D. Zeigler reinstated as Stark County treasurer.

The high court ruled that Stark commissioners (Bosley, Ferguson and Meeks) illegally removed Zeigler from office on August 23, 2010 under Ohio Revised Code Sections 321.37 and 321.38 because 321.38 has no provision it it for "due process of law" and therefore is unconstitutional under Article II, Section 38 of the Ohio Constitution.

Commissioners had removed Zeigler under the permission of the combo of 321.37 and 321.38 for the mere fact that money ($2.96 million) came up missing during the period 2003 through 2009 during his tenure as county treasurer.

His chief deputy treasury (Vince Frustaci) admitted to stealing (June 25, 2010) $2.46 of the amount, however, many believe that he stole the entire missing amount.  Zeigler himself was found by county and federal prosecutors to have had no involvement in the theft.

The sticking point in Zeigler resuming office in other than a limited fashion has been the fact that his bond was canceled last October.

When the bond came up for renewal post-Frustaci theft, Zeigler was able to get a bond.  However, (as seen in the accompanying video in the account of Stark County Personnel Manager Marsha Cimadevilla - it took time).

With the Supreme Court reinstatement, Stark County (the commissioners office) is again trying to get Zeigler bonded.

Apparently, it is going to be some time before Zeigler gets bonded.

In this blog, the SCPR presents a video discussion among the commissioners and Cimadevilla as to the timetable of getting the bond.

It is a must see video!!!

(VIDEOS ON TREE TRIMMER LICENSING & RESCISSION OF EMERGENCY ORDINANCE). DOGWOOD CITY MAYOR (HELD) GETS TRIMMED BY COUNCIL & COUNCIL PRESIDENT SNYDER TO WORK TOWARDS REFORM OF COUNCIL PROCEDURES: PUBLIC SPEAKS AT COMMITTEE OF WHOLE & LESS EMERGENCY LEGISLATION BUT WITH SPECIFICATIONS

 

Jim Repace - a former councilman - who says he is going to run this November, told the SCPR after the North Canton's City Council (Council) meeting last night that the proposed tree trimmer licensing ordinance was the brainchild of Mayor David Held for newly selected Councilman Mark Cerreta to use to make is mark (no pun intended) as a legislator.

Repace also was one of a number of applicants for former Council President Daryl Revoldt's position when Revoldt (as predicted by the SCPR) left North Canton for a post with the Kasich administration.

Cerreta has taken out a petition with a number of others (incumbent DeOrio is missing from the list) for three council-at-large positions.

What was interesting from Council's discussion about the proposed ordinance that several members (Dan Peters - Ward 2 and Pat DeOrio - at large) seemed to be amazed at the lead off of the discussion by Cerreta (as chairman of Ordinance, Rules & Claims Committee) as if the ordinance as originally proposed was going forward.

After the meeting, Peters told yours truly that the last he knew from when Council last met, passing an ordinance was not the way North Canton was going.

They (Peters and DeOrio) understood (see the video below this paragraph) that the ordinance was being scrapped in favor of asking tree trimmers who wanted to do business in the city to have certificates of insurance filed with North Canton which residents could then confirm as being in existence on North Canton's website or by calling city hall.  DeOrio told The Report that if a trimmer dropped the insurance the process would include the insurance company notifying the city of such.

Apparently, the "going ahead as if there had been no understanding of scrapping the ordinance" was a ploy by Held and Cerreta to see if they could push it through notwithstanding the understanding.  At one time in the session, it seemed that there was going to be a showdown on the matter.  However, Council President Jon Snyder jumped into to keep a confrontation from occurring.

The prime movers of this legislation (Councilman Cerreta and Mayor David Held) are Republicans.  One of the basic tenets of the Republican Party is:  (1) "the best government is the least government, " and (2) "we are over regulated - get government out of our lives."  Hmm?

So why are Republicans Cerreta and Held for more government and regulation (including a criminal penalty on offending tree trimmers), while  Democrats DeOrio and Peters lead the charge for less government and substituting voluntary compliance?

Here is the tree trimmer licensing debate (sort of) video in two parts because YouTube limits the duration of stored videos: 

On another matter, right out of the shoot at the beginning of yesterday evening's meeting, President Snyder announced that Council was rescinding Ordinance 53-11 which had been passed on June 6, 2011 as an "emergency" ordinance and proceeding on a "non-emergency basis" with Ordinance 68-11 which had its first reading on the 5th, will have its second reading at a special meeting today and its third and final reading on July 11th when it is likely to pass.

Snyder said to The Report (after the meeting) that North Canton Law Director Hans Nilges felt 53-11 could withstand the legal attack launched by a North Canton resident and one Andy Martin (a former Suarez employee) in a lawsuit filed in Stark County Court of Common Pleas shortly after Council passed the ordinance.

The SCPR also learned that Suarez was not concerned about the delay (68-11 for 53-11) in getting the required ordinance passed.

For the SCPR, the most significant developments occurred after the meeting that came out in The Report's interview of President Snyder.  He told The Report that:

1. He agreed with North Canton citizen Chuck Osborne (although not sure Osborne's number - 92% - is correct, that emergency clause legislation is overused not only in North Canton but across Ohio.  He cited an Ohio audit that commented on the extensive use of emergency clause ordinances.  He has the power - as president - to limit its use and says that he plans to do so.  Moreover, he said that when North Canton uses the emergency clause in the future, he will be requiring that specific reasons be articulated as to why the ordinance needed an immediate effective date (the primary reason for emergency status in the first place); not relying on for the broad and vague "general welfare and in the public interest" language.  Snyder added that North Canton has nothing to hide and has no desire to cut off the citizens right to initiate referendums on legislation a citizen might disagree with.  
2. He was going to prevail on his fellow councilpersons to expand "Public Speaks" to Committee of the Whole meetings.  Snyder said there would have to be time limits (but the president would have discretion to extend in appropriate situations).  His reason?  The real work of Council is in the context of the Committee of the Whole and North Canton citizens should have the opportunity to weigh-in on the process.

Here is Snyder speaking on the issue of emergency legislation and his plans to ask Council to extend the Public Speaks portion of regular council meetings to the Committee of the Whole meetings.

A SCPR WELCOME BACK! TO REINSTATED STARK COUNTY TREASURER GARY D. ZEIGLER - WHAT A DIFFERENCE 12 YEARS HAS WROUGHT?

According to area media report, reinstated (by the Ohio Supreme Court) Stark County Treasurer Gary Zeigler is to show up for work today - not as a mere visit as on a day last week - but for the duration of his term remaining in office (which runs until September, 2013).

This happening suggests that a historical review of the Zeigler political and officeholding is in order.

The date:

As an Akron Beacon Journal article (Andale Gross, May 28, 1999) put it:

"Member of the Stark County Democratic Central Committee last night elected real estate investor Gary Zeigler of Plain Township as county treasurer."

Predecessor Mark Roach had been removed from office in April, 1999 because he had failed to take state of Ohio required education courses.  An ironic twist to the Mark Roach departure was a finding the Ohio Auditor's office on doing an exit audit of the Stark treasury on Roach's leaving office (ousted by county commissioner presumably under ORC 321.37/321.38) in April, 1999 that $1,000 was missing.

He ran for and was elected treasurer in 1992 on the retirement of his father, Harold, in 1993.

While Mark Roach was not accused of taking the money, he was cited and he did repay the missing money as required by Ohio law.

In recent history, the quality of the work of the Stark treasury was flawless.  Mark's father Harold S. Roach took over (via political appointment in 1982, having been in the treasurer's office since 1969 in a non-elected capacity) from John Hoffman and served until his retirement in September, 1993.  The highly respected Harold Roach went on to serve on Canton City Council until 1999 when he again retired.  He passed away on August 19, 2006.

Given the experience with Mark Roach, it was important that the Stark County Democratic Central Committee appoint a successor with impeccable credentials.

While not all of the candidates vying to succeed Roach were all that prepared to be treasurer, there were three who were.

Likely the most qualified was Linda Karman (who became interim treasurer until the appointment) who had worked her way up through the ranks (as Mark Roach's father Harold had done) and on being appointed interim treasurer held the position of head cashier.  She retired on June 30, 1999.

A second person who should have been above Zeigler is Hartville resident Steven Nestor who at the time was chief deputy for the Summit County treasury.

However, there was another name in the mix that should have trumped Zeigler that will be familiar to Stark Countians.

Who might that have been?  None other than Ken Koher (at the time a former bank president from Navarre) who the Democrats finally had the wisdom to make interim treasurer when Zeigler was ousted by Stark County Commissioners Bosley, Ferguson and Meeks on August 23, 2010 pursuant to Ohio Revised Code Sections 321.37/321.38 on the heels of the Stark County treasury coming up $2.96 million short (a little more than $1,000, huh?) due to a theft (at least $2.46 million of the loss) by the then Chief Deputy Vince Frustaci.  Zeigler was found by county and federal prosecutors not to have been involved in the theft.

Of course hindsight is 20/20, but looking at the credentials of Zeigler, he in the opinion of the SCPR, pales by comparison to Karman, Nestor and Koher.

The Report does not believe Zeigler was the least qualified (next to last in the opinion of the SCPR) to have been appointed treasurer.  Others contending for the spot include former Perry Township Trustee Jim Holmes (now a member of the Stark County Educational Service Center) and Jimmy Babcock (a former employee of Auditor Kim Perez and currently running for a council-at-large seat on Canton City Council).

Yours truly will leave up to readers of the SCPR to guess who The Report thinks Zeigler bested to avoid being dead last in qualifications of the six candidates.

The SCPR has never taken Zeigler seriously as a substantive person who is qualified to hold elective office.

The Report thinks that Commissioner Janet Creighton - when she talks about the Stark County Democratic Party "good ole boys" has her sights squarely on Gary Zeigler as a prime person filling the bill, at least that is, until what local attorney and civic activist Craig T. Conley terms as being "Zeiglergate" got going.  He ran four times for county commissioner:  1990, 1994, 1996; losing all four times (the 1990 results are not available online).

His tenaciousness in running for political office is a sign to the SCPR that Zeigler does not go away easy.

So it should surprise none that he refused to resign in the face of overwhelming negative Stark County perception and concomitant public opinion (in terms of his failure to have safeguards in place at the Stark treasury) on his performance in office after the Frustaci revelations.

Although The Report has been told by a county elected official that negotiations are underway to try to get Zeigler to resign, one has to be skeptical that they will be successful.  His attorney denies that Zeigler is negotiating terms and conditions (under the cover of a civil liability suit to hold liable for missing money that the county has not yet recovered) which could lead to his resignation.  Time will tell the tale on this one.

One wouldn't think he would have the temerity to run for re-election.

But if he does, it should surprise no one!  Zeigler has a very thick hide.  He just might be unrealistic enough to think he can get reelected.

Generally, the party chairman has a person in mind who he wants when party central committee appointments come up.  Yours truly knows first hand that Johnnie A. Maier, Jr definitely weighed in on central committee persons to vote for his person.  And The Report has to believe that Ferrero (party chairman at the time the Roach successor was appointed) did the same thing.

But (even for him - if only he could have divined the future) the appointment of Zeigler has turned out to be a nightmare.  Ferrero's chief attorney in representing the county put the best face on it in this excerpt from a piece done by Laurie Huffman of the Alliance Review, to wit:

A main point of this blog is to compare what Zeigler said/did on taking office in 1999 in making reforms in light of the $1,000 in missing money during the Mark Roach tenure and what others were saying about Zeigler's administration of the office as time wore on with a focus on the latter part of his administration.

Here are a series of quotes by Zeigler from a follow up Akron Beacon Journal piece (August 13, 1999), again by Andale Gross):

Despite multiple findings by the State of Ohio Auditor that all was not administratively and procedurally well with the Stark County treasury, Zeigler has always said that he properly administered his office and therefore there was no reason to resign.

Moreover, despite the fact that his successors (Allbritain, Koher and Zumbar) have made quite a few changes (from what Zeigler did and did not have in place), Zeigler continues to insist that he ran a shipshape office.

So those Stark Countians who are awaiting the day that Zeigler will own up to a articulated "I could have done better," appear to have a better chance of seeing _____?

Yes!

"Hell freezing over!!!"

(VIDEOS - JUDGE BROWN & REENTRY INTRO) STARK COUNTY COMMON PLEAS COURT "REENTRY" INITIATIVE. AN EXAMPLE OF LOCAL GOV'T WORKING FOR YOU

Stark County is a troubled county these days.

Most of the difficulty is traceable to a loss of confidence in county government because of the situation that materialized on April 1, 2009 with the revelation that the Stark County treasury had been victimized by its former Chief Deputy Vince Frustaci with a theft which some believe to have been as much of $2.96 million (Frustaci admitted to $2.46 million).

However, there was also the perceived need by the then Stark County commissioners (Bosley, Harmon and Vignos - December, 2008) to "impose" a 0.5 sales tax on Stark Countians  and thereby indicating that they did not trust Stark Countians to being open to vote in the sales tax.

The commissioners said that the tax was to fix a "broken 9-1-1 emergency services" system.  Also, a part of the "imposed" tax was money for the county general fund.  However, the general fund portion of the tax was well hidden from all but the most discerning of citizens.

And Stark Countians in November, 2009 voiced their disgust with Stark County's political/governmental leadership by resoundly repeal the tax by a 2 to 1 margin.

Matters began looking up for the county in November, 2010 with the election of Republican Janet Creighton and Democrat Thomas Bernabei to the Stark County Board of Commissioners.

But the county was to be dealt another setback to moving forward with the Ohio Supreme Couryt decision of June 23rd of this year that commissioners had unconstitutionally removed Gary Zeigler as county treasurer on August 23, 2010 under Ohio Revised Code Section 321.37/321/38.  These sections of Ohio law allowed commissioners to remove Zeigler on the mere fact money had come up missing from the treasury.  For Zeigler had been cleared by county and federal prosecutors of having any involvement in the Frustaci theft.

A setback?

Yes, a setback.

On Zeigler's removal Stark Countians elected Republican Alex Zumbar as treasurer and he built on the efforts of interim Treasurers Jaime Allbritain and Ken Koher to make many changes in the internal procedures of the treasury to ensure as much as possible that there would be no Frustaci repeat.

Tomorrow Zeigler reassumes office (not officially because he has not obtained a required bond) and perhaps Stark Countians are feeling that they are back to square one.

In the midst of all this negativity in Stark, the SCPR started thinking about truly positive things that are happening in Stark County and with the 4th of July approaching why not initiate a SCPR award for county projects that somehow encourage independence.

The Report did not have to look far.  For nearly five years yours truly has been interested in and followed the progress of  the Stark County Reentry Initiative (Initiative).

The Initiative fits the criterion that The Report has developed in determining potential awardees of this new annual Independence Day award.

What is the criterion?

It is:  what Stark County local government program over the past 12 months best exemplifies an effort to empower Stark Countians to function as independent and free Americans.

Begun in 2006 when Walter J. Arrington of Canton's Peoples Baptist Church approach Stark County Common Pleas Judge Charles E. Brfown, Jr. with the idea of creating a felon prisoner reentry/reintegration into society program.

From its Strategic Plan as articulated in a June 8, 2006 publication, Judge Brown succinctly defines the purpose and scope of the program, to wit:

On Friday, July 1st, the SCPR spent the morning videotaping what is called the Stark County Common Please Reentry Court.

In order to provide Stark Countians with a sampling of actual cases which come before the court (Judge Brown presides over the Court session on Friday once a month) the following video is presented showing the Stark County Common Pleas Reentry Court in session:



At the end of the court session, the SCPR sat down with Judge Brown and had him - via videotape - provide Stark Countians an overview of the program and to present data that indicates that the program is highly effective in getting Stark County citizens who have made mistakes return from of life in which every decision is made for them to become fully autonomous adults reintegrated into society at large enjoying the freedoms that our forefathers fought to secure.

Congratulations to the Stark County Reentry Initiative for being selected as the First Annual "Independence Day" Award Recipient.

Here is the SCPR video with Judge Brown:

STARK GOP & REPUBLICAN ATTORNEY & CIVIC ACTIVIST CRAIG CONLEY TRYING TO GOAD DEMS INTO FILING A ORC 3.07 & 3.08 ACTION TO REMOVE REINSTATED CO. TREAS. ZEIGLER. WOULD THAT BE A SMART THING FOR THE DEMS TO DO?

Stark County Republican Party Chairman Jeff Matthews says if anyone files an action under Ohio Revised Code Sections 3.07 and 3.08, it should be the Stark County Democratic Party.

Dems Party Chairman Gonzalez's response:  (a paraphrase)  "Our only obligation was to ask Zeigler to resign" (which Gonzalez et al has done, perhaps, repeatedly).  It would have been a godsend for Stark's organized Democrats and the Party's elected officials had Zeigler done so.

But Zeigler has repeatedly said that he did not do anything wrong in the management of his office which implicitly is to say (in the opinion of the SCPR) that he had adequate and reasonable safeguards in place to prevent his former chief deputy - Vince Frustaci - from making off with county money to the tune of what some say is $2.96 million (Frustaci has admitted to taking $2.46 million)

Moreover, county and federal prosecutors have exonerated him of any involvement in the theft itself.

At face value one might say that since Zeigler adamantly maintains that he minded the county treasury properly, that is the full explanation of why he has not heeded calls for his resignation.

But is it?

Some think that Zeigler (being wholly blameless in his eyes) is outraged that the Stark Dems "threw him under the bus" and that his insistence of reassuming office in light of the June 23rd Ohio Supreme Court decision reinstating him is sort of a revenge on the Stark Dems.

The problem for Zeigler and the Stark County organized Democrats is that the Stark County voting public seems to think that Zeigler did not have adequate and reasonable safeguards in place.  Moreover, The Report believes that the public perceives that Zeigler (before the Frustaci story broke) was a key member of the Dems' "good ole boy network" and therefore his stubborness in not resigning rubs off on most of the remaining Stark County Democratic Party officeholders.

Zeigler clearly cannot get re-elected if he chooses to run again in 2012 and his former connections to many of the remaining Democratic officeholders could be a key factor in their losing.

One has to wonder whether or not Zeigler would get a measure of satisfaction in their losing.

Back now to the focal point of this blog:  Gonzalez's rejection of the Stark GOP's (and Republican Craig Conley's) entreaty for the Stark Dems to initiate a constitutional challenge to Zeigler remaining in office.

Here is a copy of a letter sent by Conley to Gonzalez on Friday:

So, the question remains:  should the Dems take up the Republican challenge?

Con:  As pointed out by Conley a larger number of valid Stark County voters signatures would be needed (about 20,000).  While very doable given the Stark County electorate's negative take on Zeigler's handling of his office, it still would divert Party resources from the 2011 and 2012 elections, and make the Republicans' task to win whatever offices/issues are at stake much easier to achieve.

Pro:  It is likely that unless or until the Stark County voting public has cleaned its own house, they will not be of a mind to elect Democrats to anything.  Going the 3.07/3.08 route would be proof positive that the Stark Democrats (win or lose) are doing everything they can to deal with its Zeigler problems.  Win or lose, having made the effort should go along away towards Stark Countians being open to electing Democrats countywide.

Gonzalez in rejecting the Stark GOP/Conley prod is preserving Party resources.

But to what end if the Stark County public feels that Party has not done all it can to put Zeigler behind it?

JUST HOW SMART IS JIM RENACCI?

 

The only dumber thing that Jim Renacci could have done than what he did at his town hall (Conversation with your Congressman) meeting at Malone University Thursday night (i.e. bring a canned slideshow full of Republican talking points) was to bring along with him Republican Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan.

Here are some poll numbers on the popularity of  Ryan's A Roadmap for America's Future:

Oh, he did other dumb things. 

First, he showed he was acting the Republican political hack, perhaps Tea Partier, in using the politically charged term Obamacare to refer to the Affordable Care Act.  In front of a crowd of senior citizens who are scared to death of what Ryan, Renacci and the Republicans might try to do to Medicare.  You've got to be kidding, Jimbo?  Try that one on a crowd of avowed Tea Partiers, it might go over better, no?

Second, in using the inflammatory language, he set off the probability that he was going to incur hostility from many in his town hall crowd.  Anticipating that he was going to incur wrath for using the O word, he blames the attendees in advance, promising to have them thrown out if they dare react.  Real smart, huh?  People who will be voting in great numbers in November, 2012.

Third, he showed his insecurity in requiring questions to be written.  Obviously, he does not trust himself to take spontaneous questions.  The Report has seen first hand how poorly he handles the serendipitous at his North Canton town hall meeting during his campaign for congress.  

Fourth, he played the loyal Republican foot soldier in voting for Ryan's plan in a formal congressional vote.  Renacci has voted 100% with the Republican leadership after criticizing his 2010 opponent John Boccieri of voting 94% plus a little with Democrat leader Nancy Pelosi.  Maybe just maybe, folks might be able to figure out that there is just a tad of hypocrisy in Renacci.  Think maybe?

All of which lead to the question:  how smart is Jim Renacci anyway?

John Boccieri did some pretty dumb things also as a freshman congressman in making rounds around his 16th Congressional District

He went around the district with his "Congressman on your Corner" dog and pony show pretending that he was going to vote against Cap and Trade.  But anyone with any political sophistication knew that in the end he was going to vote for the bill.

Moreover, he did vote against the Affordable Care Act in an early vote on the measure (not the final vote, obviously) suggesting he might vote against its ultimate passage.  Wrong!  He got "arm twisted" by the Obama administration into voting for it.

So both Renacci and the man he defeated show/showed how little respect they have for you and I - the voters in the 16th.

When Renacci runs next it will be in a presidential year.  And he better hope that President Obama is wildly unpopular.  For he is showing that he is not very politically astute.

Let the SCPR be the first to say it.  Congressman Jim Renacci is doing his very best to be a one-term congressman.

If his new district (reapportionment is kicking in) is proximate to the currently configured district (the 16th), you can bet that he will have an opponent and The Report strongly believes that it will a Renacci/Boccieri rematch.

If Renacci keeps pumping the Paul Ryan Plan for getting the deficit under control by attacking current and future senior citizens then indeed it may well be that Renacci and Ryan go down in political flames together in November, 2012!

NEGOTIATIONS UNDERWAY TO SECURE REINSTATED TREASURER ZEIGLER'S RESIGNATION? CRAIG T. CONLEY SAYS THAT "HE WILL NOT" BE SPEARHEADING A ORC 3.07/3.08 ACTION TO REMOVE ZEIGLER FROM OFFICE.

The Stark County Political Report has learned from a Stark County elected official in a position to know that negotiations are underway between the county prosecutor's office and legal counsel for reinstated Stark County Treasurer Gary D. Zeigler to secure Zeigler's resignation.

Apparently, the platform for the settlement discussions is the lawsuit filed by prosecutor's pursuant to a demand by then Stark County Auditor Kim Perez pursuant to Ohio Revised Code Section 321.37 that action be taken to recover from Zeigler about $2.96 million in missing county money believed to be stolen by former Chief Deputy Vince Frustaci.  In pleading guilty to an information filed by federal prosecutors filed in June, 2010, Frustaci admitted to stealing $2.46 million.

Zeigler himself was exonerated by county and federal prosecutors of any involvement in the theft.

However, issues remain as to Zeigler's liability for unrecovered portions of the $2.96 million of missing money from the county treasury.  From bonds and insurance and miscellaneous assets of Frustaci, about $1.5 million have been recovered.

So the county is looking to Zeigler to make the treasury whole for the remaining uncovered losses.  His attorneys say that he has done nothing wrong and therefore are fighting the county claim against their client.

The Report's source says that Judge Inderlied (the out-of-county judge assigned to the case by the Ohio Supreme Court) has asked attorneys for the county and Zeigler to resolve their differences.  Apparently, with Zeigler's reinstatement as county treasurer (he only needs a bond to officially resume his office), the settlement discussions have been expanded to secure Zeigler's resignation.

But there is a sticking point on Zeigler agreeing to resign.

The SCPR is told that Zeigler is insisting on being paid not only on back pay and benefits (which The Report is told is undisputed by the county) but also for pay and benefits running through September, 2013.  One county official tells The Report that such (payments for unprovided - in terms of actual service - future services as treasurer) is a killer as far as that official is concerned.  For if the county were to agree to include such in a settlement package to Zeigler, the county would be paying twice for a county treasurer.

It will be interesting to see where these negotiations go, if anywhere.  For the SCPR's part, Zeigler agreeing to resign would be a Godsend for Stark County and the county could finally get on with healing a rift between itself and the Stark County public.  As long as what local attorney and civic activist Craig T. Conley has coined as being "Zeiglergate," festers, The Report believes there is no chance that the commissioners' proposed 1/2 cent sales tax issue that most certainly will be on the November ballot is DOA.

However, if the situation in the county treasury has some finality to it, there just may be a glimmer of hope that Stark Countians will be of a mind to give commissioners a financial fresh start which coupled with the new board of commissioners' clearly improved accountability, transparency, and accessibility might actually get the county on a pathway to a full and complete recovery in the context of a hopefully improving state and national economy.

If Zeigler does resign, then it will be up to the Stark County Democratic Party (SCDP) to appoint an interim treasurer to serve out Zeigler's term.

What the SCDP ought to do if called upon to replace Zeigler is to show that in the public interest it can overcome politics and appoint Republican Alex Zumbar to the post that he was elected to (illegally, according to the Ohio Supreme Court) over Democrat Ken Koher.

Yours truly can hear Stark County Democratic leaders already saying:  "Olson is off his rocker, no way Jose!"  And nobody understands realpoltik better than The Report.  However, it would be nice if political parties could put self-interest aside for the public good. 

Alternatively, the Dems should reappoint Ken Koher as a replacement.

On another front in the myriad of issues/actions surround the Zeigler situation, Crag Conley told The Report "he will not" be spearheading an Ohio Revised Code Section 3.07/3.08 action against Zeigler.  It was reported in area media yesterday that Conley "might" take the matter on.

Conley does dispute Zeigler's attorneys contention that Zeigler has done nothing wrong in the "civil law" context.  Conley (who is an attorney) believes that it is highly plausible that - were a ORC 3.07/3.08 initiated - a civil wrong (e.g. non-feasance) could be proved.


Others who question Zeigler's contention that "I did nothing wrong," (in the context of how he administratively managed the treasurer's office) include Stark County Auditor Alan Harold and the State of Ohio Auditor's office.  No one disputes (including Conley, Harold and the Ohio auditor) the county and federal findings that Zeigler did nothing criminally wrong.

Here is a copy of a communication sent out by Alan Harold yesterday that should shed more light to the Stark County public  on contentions made by Harold, former treasurer Alex Zumbar among others of measures that have been taken in the treasurer's office to cure perceived deficiencies that carried over from the Zeigler administration of the office, to wit: