The Report has been writing for the better part of two years that Reinbold has been contemplating retirement as Stark County clerk of courts and predicting that there would be a Giavasis to Reinbold to Giavasis cycle materialize.
Nancy Reinbold got the job in the first place on the recommendation of her former boss Phil Giavasis when he in 2008 prevailed on the Stark County Democratic Central Committee (Johnnie A. Maier, Jr. the-then chairman of the Stark Dems) for the area covering the Canton Municipal Court District to appoint him to succeed retiring long time clerk of courts Tom Harmon. Harmon himself went on to be a Stark Dems' appointed county commissioner.;
Jumping from the county to Canton brought Phil Giavasis substantially more annual income which of course builds into a much more lucrative retirement.
Some Stark Countians thought that the Phil Giavasis vacancy was open for the general Stark County public to apply for.
One such person was Lawrence Township trustee Mike Stevens.
[W]hen Lawrence Township Trustee Michael Stevens heard of the apparent vacancy; he went and talked to Giavasis to express an interest in succeeding Phil.
As Stevens tells it, Giavasis became visibly annoyed and upset that Stevens would be interested.
Apparently, Phil had let it be known through Stark County Democratic Party chairman Johnnie A. Maier, Jr., that he already knew who his successor would be and that person would be Nancy Reinbold (wife of retiring Stark County Court of Common Pleas judge Richard Reinbold).
One has to believe she has been a mere caretaker for Family Brothers Giavasis until the brother Louis of her benefactor Phil could put himself in a credible position to succeed her.
She gave Louis his start in 2008 after she took over.
A thank you to Phil for recommending her for the job?
Of course, Ohio law prevented Phil himself from hiring a relative.
Undoubtedly, Nancy has a "best person available" story on her hiring of Louis Giavasis someone like Democrat Stark County recorder Rick Campbell had at the ready when he hired politically connected Kody Gonzalez as his chief deputy.
There are many, many inside jobs in Stark County Political subdivision government involving both the Stark County Democratic Party and the Stark County Republican Party.
For the most part, the Stark County taxpaying public can forget applying for Reinbold type jobs that come open.
What audacity! A politically unconnected person applying for a taxpayer paid for job? You have to be kidding, no?
The foregoing thinking, The Report believes, is typical entitlement thinking that many leaders of Stark County political subdivision governments engage in.
One of the funniest "hiring politically connected" persons for taxpayer supported took place when Stark County Board of Elections (BOE, Board) director Jeff Matthews appeared at county commissioners' work session to discuss the BOE's 2014 budget.
In the discourse, Matthews let it be known that the Board would be soon hiring some new personnel.
Would the BOE, Commissioner Regula wanted to know, be posting the positions?
As a matter of Ohio statutory law, the Ohio General Assembly has made the guardians of the integrity of our democratic-republican elections a partisan political structure.
This morning beginning at 09:00 a.m., we witness Commissioner Thomas Bernabei's attempt to get certified as an independent candidate for mayor of Canton at the BOE headquarters located at 3525 Regent in Canton.
Next Monday morning, it will be former Massillon mayor Frank Cicchinelli, Jr attempting to get certified to run as an independent for mayor of Massillon.
To say the least, independents are not favored by either the the Democrat or Republican BOE members and both Bernabei and Cicchinelli have a tough road ahead of them.
And to say it again, the Republicans and Democrats have no problem at all using your money and my money as members of the taxpaying public to support perpetuating themselves and their inside-the-political-beltway-connected friends in office.
No wonder that increasing numbers of citizens are opting out of our democratic-republican system even at the basic level of voting.
The Report believes that the office holding Reinbolds, Matthewses, Giavasises, Harolds, Maiers, Zumbars, Harmons and their ilk are slowly but surely eating away at the public's confidence in the integrity of local institutions of government in terms of the general public's access to taxpayer supported jobs which over time will coalesce with other "the public be damned attitudes" on the part of elected officials and thereby undermine the health of our cherished democratic-republic.
Undoubtedly, these folks will be pointing the finger at others as it becomes more and more apparent that public support for the the American government as administered in waning.
No mirrors allowed in the offices of these folks!
The Stark County Political Report loves the reported magnanimity of Louis Giavasis.
If he gets appointed to succeed Reinbold, he is going to resign as Plain Township trustee.
Lincoln coming to Gettysburg is as vivid in my mind as if it happened yesterday.
Let's see, this is 2015 and Lincoln was last on the face of the earth in 1865.
Hmm?
I know, I know!
In fact Abraham Lincoln made the trek to the hallowed ground of this Pennsylvania hamlet on November 19, 1863 in order to deliver what now is known as his renown Gettysburg Address.
He came to Gettysburg to honor those who gave their last measure to ensure that the union of the states would be preserved.
But there was a second coming of Lincoln to Gettysburg probably in 1952; maybe 1953.
I was 10 years old at the time.
A former schoolmate of mine in recent days shared with me some of the details she recalled about Lincoln's second coming to Gettysburg.
She says that it was:
Entitled "Mr. Lincoln Goes to Gettysburg" and was sponsored by the Western Maryland Railroad in celebration of its 100th anniversary,
Staffed by townspeople (likely including myself as a "school child") in costume and participated in welcoming in the Lincoln re-enactment alongside professional actors and actresses brought in from New York City,
The participants were "wagoned" out to the Gettysburg National Ceremony to hear the Great Emancipator's famous speech.
What a memory to have carried with me all these years.
It is just one of many, many memories I carry with me of the first 18 years of my life lived out in this historic town.
I lived one-half block from this sacred field of battle.
As a child, the battlefield was my playground.
In the summer months, on many of a day we East Middle Street kids would collect at East Middle and East Confederate Avenue and repeatedly begin our adventures of traversing the sprawling 1863 battle site.
East Confederate Avenue was the starting point.
As a kid, I would stand at the corner of East Confederate and East Middle and let my imagination roam as cars came to a stop at the intersection stop sign before the out-of-towners began their historic battlefield tours.
The license plates were from all over America: Colorado, New Hampshire, Georgia, Texas, Ohio, ... and on and on and on.
Would I some day get to these states to see them for myself, I wondered.
And indeed I have. Nearly all 50 of them.
My own children have taken my wife and I all over the country as well as international. Though raised in Lake Township, they now are located in Virginia, Colorado and Oklahoma. But their jobs have caused their relocations over the years to Georgia, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Texas and of course mom and dad have tagged along with periodic visits.
And, of course, on family vacations and holiday trips we have passed through and visited nearly all the rest of our United States.
On the battlefield itself I can remember as a adventuring kid reading the monuments (some 1,320 of them [LINK] erected on the field recounting the participation of all the then states of the nation in that contest to determine as to whether or not we were to be a United States or a Disunited States.
Over the summers of my youth, I daresay I took in each and every one of them. Getting acquainted with those who gave so much to ensure that we would continue to be a United States of America.
A sampling:
8th Illinois Cavalry Monument,
1st Minnesota Infantry,
13th Vermont Infantry,
Oneida, New York Cavalry,
Hampton's Battery F of the Pennsylvania Independent Light artillery,
4th Michigan Infantry,
17th Maine Infantry,
Irish Brigade,
11th Massachusetts Infantry Regiment
There was no better place to rummage through than Devil's Den. A massive formation of rocks which provided nests for Confederate sharp shooters from which to pick off attacking Union forces who held the high ground of Little Round Top.
For us kids, the attraction were various "rooms" we named the various rock formations as being "the Devil's bathtub," "the Devil's kitchen," and the like.
A favorite childhood stomping ground was Culp's Hill with its observation tower from which one can get a bird's eye view of the borough of Gettysburg and, of course, a panoramic of the countryside which encompassed Pickett's Charge, the Wheatfield, Meade's Headquarters, the High Water Mark of the Confederacy, Lee's Headquarters, Jeb Stuart and his high-riding, but late arriving cavalry and other marks, personages and events of conflict that were present on July 1, July 2 and July 3, 1863.
July 4, 1863 was a day of reflection on the consequences of the three preceding days of battle and a march into the future of the ongoing struggle to determine whether the land was to be two nations or one.
Childhood visitations to creeks which ran under "First Bridge," "Second Bridge," and "Third Bridge" on East Confederate Avenue on the way to "Spangler's Springs" (where Unionists and Confederates lay down their arms - as sort of a temporary "truce" site - to share the natural springs watering hole) were adventures in and of themselves on our summer day forays.
And how could I forget the haunted house on Seminary Ridge (the main abode of Confederate forces at Gettysburg) that our parents drove us by periodically after dark had fallen. We kids would chatter among ourselves contributing various scenarios as to what had happened over the years for the house to become known as the haunted house.
On and on and on go the stories of my childhood of the numerous sites of Gettysburg battlefield day-trips which filled the summers of my youth.
We kids of Gettysburg of the 50s era knew that we had a privileged childhood in having the battlefield as our extended campground of adventure.
And we sensed a reverence and awe of those, who in all too many instances, gave the ultimate so that we could grow up in a United States of America.
While the Confederates were disunionists, they did demonstrate courage and determination for the cause they believed in. It just was the wrong cause.
To borrow a few words from Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, "it is fitting and proper" that we Americans in 2013 take time at the 150 anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg to celebrate the fact that the Union victory at Gettysburg was the "turning point" in the civil war on the march towards the union enduring and America becoming the most successful experiment in democracy that the world has ever seen.
As a native child of Gettysburg, I shall ever treasure having had a childhood and ensuing growing up years to absorb the significance of the sacrifice made in the town and on the surrounding fields to ensure that we would be a united people. A union that has turned out to be a light to the nations of the world as a beacon of democratic-republicanism.
U.S. presidents have visited historical Gettysburg. None was more meaningful to me than John F. Kennedy's (LINK) visit on March 30, 1963 (mere months before the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg).
Particularly meaningful to me because the toured the national shrine under the guidance (a licensed guide) of my 11th grade American History teacher Mett Sheads here pictured with the 35th president.
Sheads was the inspiration for me to continue my education beyond high school onto post-graduate work.
It has been point of pride with we native Gettysburgians that Dwight D. Eisenhower, our 34th U.S. president, chose to buy a farm right outside our town in 1955 (my seventh grade year) and make it his retirement home in 1961. (LINK)
In all 24 presidents of the "United States" have been to Gettysburg (LINK1) (LINK2) beginning with Washington.
In fact, during the Eisenhower administration, Gettysburg served as a "temporary White House" for a recuperating president.
This nexus underscores the reality that the small town of some 7,000 residents is an important cog of our national identity of being united notwithstanding our history of cultural diversity.
On this fourth of July we celebrate our birth as an independent democratic-republic with a sense of purpose to remain united in making the world a better place for all of us to live in.
Living in Gettysburg as a child into young adulthood was indeed a rich experience.
BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO PROTEST ============================= FERRUCCIO/SHERER RECUSAL STILL A "LIVE" ISSUE EVEN WITH STARK DEMS WITHDRAWAL?
UPDATED: 08:35 AM
On May 4, 2015 Stark County Commissioner Thomas M. Bernabei - a lifelong Democrat - voted "issues only" in the May 5, 2015 Stark County primary election. And on the same day, he filed petitions with the Stark County Board of Elections to run as an "independent" candidate of either the Democratic, Republican or any other organized political party.
Yesterday, July 2, 2015 at about 4:00 p.m. Bernabei's Cleveland based attorney (Raymond V. Vasvari, Jr.), just two days in advance of the celebration of Independence Day of the United States of America, filed a brief articulating legal arguments as to why Bernabei's actions in the week leading up to May 4, 2015 were effective as a matter of law to change his legal status from being a Democrat to that of being an "independent" registered voter.
On May 29th, well known and highly respected Canton attorney Lee Plakas filed a protest to Bernabei running as an "independent" the representing the Stark County Democratic Party, the Ohio Democratic Party and seven of Canton City Council's eleven Democratic councilpersons including Plakas law associate Edmond Mack (Ward 8) and included in the filing a voluminous legal brief on his take on the relevant issues of the case.
A mere two days - July 6, 2015 - after America's July 4th Independence Day celebration of separating from Great Britain, Cantonians will learn whether or not the Stark County Board of Elections (BOE, Board) thinks Commissioner Tom Bernabei has successfully (i.e. in accordance with Ohio statutory law) declared his political separation from the Democratic Party.
For the board members who are allowed to sit in judgement (Democratic members Sam Ferruccio, Jr. and William V. Sherer are under challenge by Bernabei), the issues are, as articulated in the Vasvari brief: a) did Tom Bernabei resign his positions in the Democratic Party, and announce his status as an Independent candidate for Mayor of Canton, in good faith, and;
(b) was Tom Bernabei a lawful resident in the City of Canton when his petitions to run as a
mayoral candidate were filed? It will however be interesting to see how Vasvari proceeds at the BOE hearing which is set to begin at 09:00 a.m. at the Board's offices located at 3525 Regent Avenue in Canton.
(Ferruccio/Sherer)
The Report thinks he is likely to challenge the right of Ferruccio and Sherer to participate as the first order of business.
Though Plakas has notified the BOE that the Stark Democratic Party as a Protester has been rescinded, Vasvari in his July 2nd filing says that the withdrawal of the Stark Dems does not solve the Ferruccio and Sherer conflict in interest problem. For if a determination is made that Ferruccio and Sherer will not participate, such is probably going to make all the difference in the world in the outcome. The Report thinks it is likely that the Republican members are going to find legal justification that Bernabei made the necessary disaffiliations and did so in good faith and that he had established a Canton residency before filing his petitions to run for mayor of Canton whereas the Democrats are likely to find the opposite. If the Democrats are excluded, then one would think that the BOE will certify Bernabei and it will then be on to the Ohio Supreme Court. If the Democrats are not excluded, it is likely that there will be a 2 to 2 tie and Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted will break it likely in Bernabei's favor. But either way Husted rules, an Ohio Supreme Court appeal is surely in the offing. As we learned when Husted broke a tie in favor of George T. Maier on his certification as a 2014 candidate for sheriff, it is better to go into a Supreme Court proceeding as a BOE winner than a loser if the high court uses an "abuse of discretion" standard as it did in Maier. However, Vasvari in his BOE brief in opposition to the protest raises a powerful First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution argument which probably means that a Ohio Supreme Court appeal will be decided not on an "abuse of discretion" basis but rather on a Constitutional law basis.
One more thing.
Should the July 6th hearing result in Ferruccio and Sherer not being recused, Bernabei/Vasvari have preserved said refusal as a basis for appeal.
Now wouldn't a remand by the Ohio Supreme Court to the Stark BOE for rehearing without Ferruccio and Sherer participating be something?
Stark County once again in the news on less than an auspicious basis, no?
Here is a copy of the brief in opposition to the protest filed by Attorney Vasvari yesterday.
While yesterday's vote resulted in a stalemate (a 3 to 3 tied vote) and therefore the 07/01/2015 Massillon Financial Restoration Plan was not adopted, there may be a way out notwithstanding Mayor Catazaro-Perry seeming to be an impassable roadblock.
It appears to The Stark County Political Report that the key to the Massillon Financial Planning and Supervision Commission (Commission) being accepted by a simple majority (likely a 4 to 3 vote; Hanrahan: "consensus is not likely") is for Massillon City Council to scrap that part of its Restoration Plan (Plan) that calls for council to cut the pay of certain elected officials.
Dropping the cuts will only cost the Plan some $30,000 in revenue: A mere "drop in the bucket" when it comes to solving Massillon's longer term financial woes.
Commission member Bob Yund, the SCPR thinks, committed himself to changing his vote from "no" to "yes" on the Plan presented to the Commission yesterday on the condition that council takes the elected officials pay cut out of the Plan.
As The Report sees it, Yund was the only realistic person among the three "no" votes (Catazaro-Perry, Campbell, and, of course, Yund) when the six members present (council president Tony Townsend was absent) voted on the Plan submitted to the Commission on June 19th and formally considered by the Commission yesterday.
The Report suspects that Townsend likely knew he would be put on the spot in breaking the three to three tie on accepting/rejecting the 07/01/2015 Restoration Plan submitted to the Commission yesterday and therefore opted to bail out on the meeting.
Bail out?
Why?
Democrat and Catazaro-Perry ally Townsend is in for the political fight of his life to remain as council president this November with former Republican Claudette Istnick qualifying to run as an "independent" against him this November and The Report thinks he knows that he must avoid any controversy if he is to have any chance at all remaining as council president.
Hence his absence reportedly for "personal/family" reasons yesterday.
However, to repeat, there is a pretty simple way out of the stalemate that the SCPR assigns to Mayor Kathy as being the cause of as between her administration and Massillon City Council.
To say it again, the simple path to resolution is through MFP&SC member Bob Yund.
The Report sees Yund as a "good faith" member of the Commission.
From the video of Yund's participation in yesterday's meeting (see video posted at the end of this blog) note that:
He initiated a detailed discussion of what the specific levy passage campaign would entail and in the process got a response from Councilman Paul Manson on the particulars as they exist as of 07/01/2015,
He broached a topic that appears to have gone over like "a lead balloon;" that being the idea of eliminating the income tax reduction credit completely, but MOST IMPORTANTLY,
In responding to desperate moves by Chairwoman Hanrahan, as cited above, he offer to changeover from a "no" to a "yes" on the 07/01/2015 Plan if only council would remove the pay cuts to elected officials as specified in the graphic above.
Yours truly does not see Catazaro-Perry nor Elaine Campbell as a "good faith" members.
The latter two seemed to throw in everything but the kitchen sink in explaining to the very, very, very patient chairwoman (Sharon Hanrahan) when she asked each "no" vote what it would take to change their respective votes to a "yes" vote.
Some of what Campbell had to say yesterday includes:
Out-of-the-gate her questioning of the "good faith" of council in formulating its part of the Plan,
She was obviously disappointed that the 07/01/2015 Plan does not contain a formal and developed campaign, and
she gave specific examples of what council should have done prior to yesterday's meeting very little of which could be accomplished before the Commission next meets in August
Massillon Cable TV owner and Commission member Bob Gessner finally did it!
Did what?
He looked Her Honor in the face and zinged away with one direct question after another and showed her for the impossible person she is on the question of working out a "come let us reason together" restoration plan for the financial fiscal emergency that the SCPR thinks she brought on unnecessarily in the first place.
If readers watch no other video published in this blog, this one pretty much tells the whole story about the obstinate mayor of Massillon.
Several meetings ago, The Report detected in Gessner a statesmanlike quality and in the two meetings since, he has done nothing but confirm and expand upon that impression.
His questions are such that it is obvious that he has carefully read the Plan presented and he persists with his queries until he gets clear answers.
A focus on Mayor Catazaro-Perry's engagement yesterday shows:
The mayor to be zeroing in on the restoration of the income tax credit reduction
to those who work out-of-town on the base 1.8% Massillon income tax rate,
which she and council have battled over the percentage of which almost from day one of her administration in January, 2012,
as bringing back the reduction means according to her:
that there will be a loss on the 1.8% rate loss of MP&RD revenue,
Her transitioning into a discussion (in the manner of throwing everything including the proverbial kitchen sink) from the effect of the restored income tax credit on the 1.8% and the effect of same on MP&RD revenues to the Plan or lack thereof as such impacts on:
the reduction of revenue to replace equipment in all Massillon departments of government,
the loss of some $85,000 in proprietary fund dollars used to deal with street repairs,
Massillon's crumbling streets and the need to replace scads of storm sewer grates,
Being behind on vehicle replacement,
Thinking the proposed .2% income tax increase will have a hard time getting passed,
Notes that council has not yet passed authorizing legislation to place the .2% proposed increase on the March, 2016 ballot
SCPR Note: which of course will not be collected until beginning with January, 2017 and will not be available to deal with the mayor's concerns as outlined above probably until mid-2017,
Saying that the Plan is not a good faith, doable, supported by all of council and therefore will not work because it is not a solid plan,
Making the 10% cuts of elected Massillon elected officials a sticking point,
Using her discussion with one member of council (Andrea Scassa, Democrat, Ward 3) as evidence of the administration reaching out to council only to be rebuffed by council,
Requesting that the Commission reject the Plan and "go back to the drawing board" claims that she has been shut out of the process of Plan development by council,
Rambling on in a confusing, disjointed dissent to the Plan
The Report suspects that Catazaro-Perry and MFP&SC member Campbell spend a lot of time on the telephone jointly preparing their hand-in-glove agenda that comes off as being an tag team effort to undermine and make impossible council's endeavor to work collaboratively with the administration to develop a Plan which all can wholeheartedly support.
More and more it seems that the mayor is intent on sabotaging any Plan - though she has signed off on it (see Gessner grilling her on inconsistency in the Gessner video above) - in hopes she can delay the Commission process enough to get by November's election with herself re-elected and perhaps a sufficient number of new councilpersons (there will be at least three) sympathetic with her whims so that she can have her way.
It is a risky strategy she appears to be embarked on.
As things stand now, if former mayor Frank Cicchinelli gets on the ballot as a "independent" candidate for mayor in November; The Report believes she would lose rather decidedly.
Many times when reality of a losing hand sinks in, the bad cards card holder seeks to delay for delay's sake in hopes that the adversary will make a huge mistake and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
That's where the SCPR sees Catazaro-Perry at the present time.
Who knows?
She might "pull a rabbit out-of-a-hat" and surprise everybody by winning a second time over Cicchinelli and if she has fantastic good fortune on election day in November, she might even get a favorable simple majority (5 to 4) on council out of the election.
There no doubt with The Report that "Hell will freeze over" before the mayor and her joined-at-the-hip-friend Campbell will vote for any plan but one the mayor thinks is a face-saving-plan for her politically-out-of-control ego.
By the way, the SCPR agrees with the mayor that there are those council members who are being political with the Restoration Plan matter.
However, not nearly to the degree as she is.
The SCPR is highly impressed with Sharon Hanrahan with her patient, methodical and peace making approach of leadership.
As shown in the video the entire one hour and 42 minute session posted at the end of this blog, Chairwoman Hanrahan's commitment to cobbling together a majority (four of seven members) to get a Plan on the road to implementation is obvious:
She, in contrast to Catazaro-Perry, focuses on the positives of council's contribution to developing the Plan, to wit:
Emphasizing that council included "drop-dead dates" of getting things done such as:
August 1st, the date by which council and the mayor will have put together a campaign committee staffed by community persons, and
August 31st, the date by which council says it will have passed legislation by to put the .2% income tax increase on the March, 2016 primary election ballot,
She points out that in setting dates for action to be taken, council creates a standard by which the Commission can judge the genuineness of the body's commitment to making the Plan work, and therefore,
She expresses a willingness (which how she actually voted) to give council the benefit of any doubt that council's work on the Plan has been and will continue to be in "good faith."
But Hanrahan with all her experience as the top Ohio Office of Management and Budget administrator of Financial Planning and Supervision has not had to deal with the volatile political situation like the one currently in place in Massillon.
The Report gets the impression that she thinks that most of the problem reaching a concord lies with Massillon's council.
However, as with Gessner, yours truly sees her slowly but surely coming to a realization how dug in the mayor is on having things go her way notwithstanding the mayor's disingenuous insistence that she has bent over backwards to work with council.
Hanrahan has to be totally frustrated with the political battles taking place between the mayor and council that has made it seemingly impossible to get the two sides together on a Plan for the well being of the people of Massillon.
But if anybody can pull it off, it will be Hanrahan.
All Massillon council has to do is to leave the Plan unchanged after dropping the elected officials pay cut.
And if Yund is a man of his word, he will join the Hanrahan, Gessner and the third "yes" vote and pass the Plan 4 to 3 at the Commission's next scheduled meeting of August 3rd at 1:30 p.m. at the Massillon Chamber of Commerce conference room.
Council members should not waste their time trying to satisfy the mayor's and Campbell's multiple and confusing and undoable (timewise) objections.
If council were to change anything else in the Plan, such would only be new material for the mayor twist into a new basis for why a majority of Commission members should reject the Plan.
Council should not be foolish enough to take the Catazaro-Perry/Campbell bait.
Catazaro-Perry is so far out there in political "la-la-land" that she actually thinks that her "behind-closed-doors" session with solitary council member Andrea Scassa was the equivalent having a successful negotiation with all of council.
Councilman Paul Manson told the SCPR yesterday that Councilwoman Scassa herself told her colleagues that what she brought to them from her one-on-one with the mayor were what she termed as being "talking points."
The Report does see Scassa as person of enormous goodwill who could be a bridge between council and the mayor except the mayor has not and yours truly thinks will never authentically reach out to council in a collaborative mode.
Manson after the meeting had this conversation with The Report:
And here is the full video of yesterday's session:
One of the themes of The Stark County Political Report since George T. Maier arrived on the Stark County scene in the newly elected Kathy Catazaro-Perry administration in January, 2012 is the man's innate arrogance.
George, a former State Highway Patrolman and Deputy Director of the Ohio Department of Public Safety, is the brother of Johnnie A. Maier, Jr who is Massillon's elected clerk of courts and a former Stark County Dems' chairman whom The Report believes from his perch in Massillon rules the Stark County Democratic Party.
George's arrogance was demonstrated in spades recently when he sent his recently hired chief deputy John Campbell (a pal from Maier's Ohio Department of Public Safety and State Patrol days) and long time and highly respected Stark County chief jail administrator Brian Arnold to a county commissioner meeting (June 17th, LINK) - though unprepared for commissioners' questions - expecting to gain commissioner approval of a Maier proposed agreement for Stark County to house SUMMIT COUNTY prisoners at $70 per day thus saving Summit County taxpayers $54 per day in the cost of housing prisoners.
Stark Countians have Commissioner Janet Creighton (commissioners' meeting of June 17th) to thank for stopping the Maier speeding train. Stopped at least for the moment.
It may be that Creighton's "putting on the brakes" to the Maier "get out of my way" effort will result in the idea being totally scrapped.
The SCPR's June 23rd blog on the June 17th presented to commissioners "out of nowhere" plan:
meaning that Sheriff Maier apparently on his own without consulting with several strategically placed key players in Stark County's criminal justice system about his "rent-a-jail" scheme vis-a-vis Summit County,
opened the eyes of some of those key players, and
consequently, their concerns about Maier's move surfaced on the agenda of Stark County's Corrections Planning Commission meeting of June 25, 2015, to wit:
After the June 17th commissioners' presentation by Maier representatives Campbell and Arnold, the SCPR contacted Stark county judicial officials for a reaction.
In response, yours truly has been told in no uncertain words by a number of sources that Maier's "rent-a-jail" proposal was one gigantic surprise in that Stark County back in 1995 and lingering since then has been a huge issue with regard of having adequate space (and/or staffing) at the county jail to get criminals off Stark County streets and into confinement.
One judge told The Report that the news of a potential of 80 unused beds at the county jail might prompt him to start sending more "should be in jail" defendants to 4500 Atlantic Boulevard notwithstanding that doing so would put the court over its assigned allocation of available beds.
The Report hears that Judge Andrew Zumbar of the Alliance Municipal Court was mighty displeased to hear of Maier's "rent-a-jail" plan.
As the following video shows:
There was some consternation expressed about the sudden unveiling of the plan on the part of some of the participants in the June 25th Corrections Planning Commission meeting, resulting in:
(for example) Commission chairman Judge Frank Forchione saying (see video below) he was under the impression that the jail was full and he had to be releasing people,
the activation of the CJIS (Criminal Justice Information System) Committee subcommittee to specifically consider the matter of jail bed use (this, of course, coming after Sheriff Maier submitted the proposed Stark/Summit County agreement) which consists of:
Sheriff Maier
Corrections Planning Commission chair Judge Frank Forchione (Stark County Common Pleas),
Kody Gonzalez, director of CJIS,
Phil Giavasis, Clerk of Canton Municipal Court and Stark County Dems chairman,
John Campbell (recently hired retiree from Ohio State Highway Patrol) in his capacity of chief deputy of the Stark County sheriff's office,
pre-trial release director,
Stark County Commissioner Thomas Bernabei,
Stark County Jail Administrator Brian Arnold,
Judge John Poulos of the Canton Municipal Court
Pay close attention to how Giavasis handles Judge Forchione's questions.
The video:
Isn't it obvious that he and Sheriff Maier or Campbell or Arnold have had prior to the Corrections Planning Commission June 25th meeting contact on the unused bed jail rental feasibility factor with Giavasis and that Giavasis is being protective of sheriff's office personnel.
Note the Giavasis' "we [the subcommittee] have had no need to meet" comment he uttered at least twice during last Thursday morning's meeting.
Really?
The sheriff's office had a contract prepared for commissioner approval on June 17th and there was no need to meet in advance of the 17th with a subcommittee that includes a Common Pleas Court judge and out court connected officials?
To be kind to Maier and not describe him as being arrogant once again in this blog, how about billing him as being presumptuous?
The SCPR would not be surprised to - on follow up, which readers can be sure yours truly will do - learn that the Summit County "rent-a-jail" Sheriff Maier initiative gets "the deep six" and never to be heard about again because Maier will be told in very blunt terms that the safety of Stark Countians is the county's top priority and our judges need to have access to ALL 501 beds!
Judge Taryn Heath of the Stark County Court of Common Pleas at the conclusion of the June 25th meeting would not comment to The Report on Maier's Summit County prisoner housing proposal.
However, she did say that the Common Pleas judges meet monthly and that it is likely the July meeting (scheduled for the 14th) would produce a response on the use of jail beds issue.
That Maier would attempt to ram the proposal through without a thoroughgoing vetting is no surprise to the SCPR.
In The Report's opinion, Maier, Jr. and brother George are political bullies who endeavor to intimidate a number of Stark's elected Democratic officials and a few Republicans into doing their political will.
Former Democratic sheriff Tim Swanson recently related to yours truly the case of Maier, Jr. and then Ohio Democratic Party chairman Chris Redfern getting all over him about his endorsing in the 2006 statewide elections Republican attorney general candidate Betty Montgomery over Youngstown area Democrat Marc Dann.
Swanson was right to place his political party identity to second place or lower on his priority list in endorsing Montgomery. He showed he cared more about the best interests of Ohioans over partisan political interest as he did in bring his successful Quo Warranto in getting George T. Maier removed as sheriff.
Only the likes of Stark County prosecutor John Ferrero, himself a Massillon native and Swanson, have shown the political will and strength to stand in the way of the ambitious Maier brothers in their more or less successful quest - through power politics - to dominate Stark County government and politics.
One of The Report's favorite graphics created by yours truly is one in which Maier, Jr. is surrounded by many Stark County officials who yours truly thinks are beholden to Maier, Jr.
The Report believes that Maier, Jr., in insinuating himself into the political circle of former Democratic governor Ted Strickland, prevailed upon the governor to make brother George a political appointee to the second most powerful spot in the Ohio Department of Public Safety.
And, of course, as Mayor Catazaro-Perry's political sponsor and mentor most certainly had to figure into having brother George appointed Massillon safety director.
Beyond that, Junior had to be telling George that "I have the political clout to make you Stark County sheriff" when November, 2012 sheriff-elect Mike McDonald was not able to take office on January 7, 2013 due to an illness which claimed his life in February.
Consequently, the county became embroiled in "a knock down, drag out" political fight between the Ferrero/Swanson forces and the Maiers over whether or not George was qualified to be sheriff.
Swanson convinced the Ohio Supreme Court that George was unqualified for the period February 5, 2013 through November 6, 2013 notwithstanding Maier's guarantee that if he applied he would be qualified.
Eventually, the Maiers prevailed but the Ohio secretary of state and the Ohio Supreme Court never definitively determined Maier to be qualified under the-then existing Ohio law.
The Report's take is that the Maiers' successfully bulldozed George Maier into being Stark County sheriff.
Moreover, the SCPR is of the opinion that he has demonstrated character defects - as articulated in a number of prior published blogs - that The Report thinks makes him a risk of being a potential disaster in the making as a public official.
The Report is gathering material for another blog which seems to show that Sheriff George T. Maier is staffing non-union positions and doing other official acts which reward those who are his political loyalists at the expense, of course, of Stark County taxpayers but without (in the case of the positions) having an opportunity to apply for the jobs.
Hopefully, The Report is wrong about him.
For Stark County can ill-afford another countywide official fiasco!!!
It appears that Stark County Commissioner Thomas Bernabei, through his newly selected legal counsel Raymond V. Vasvari, Jr. (a Clevelander, see background below), has played his ultimate "trump" card "right out of the chute" in his endeavor to become Canton's first ever (at least in the modern era) non-partisan mayor.
Yesterday, Vasvari filed a Motion for Recusal (see pleading below) of Stark County Board of Elections members (BOE, Board) Sam Ferruccio, Jr. and William V. Sherer, II from hearing the question of whether or not the BOE should certify lifelong Democrat Bernabei as an independent candidate for mayor of Canton in a Board hearing scheduled for July 6, 2015 at 9:00 a.m.
In a preview of "what is likely to come" in his forthcoming direct responsive pleading to Stark/Ohio Dems' attorney Lee Plakas' May 29th filed protest of the Bernabei candidacy, Cleveland attorney Raymond V. Vasvari, Jr. invoked First Amendment U.S. Constitutional issues inherent in the case.
The SCPR sees the First Amendment approach as Bernabei's best chance to ultimately win the legal argument on the certification question.
And, the First Amendment Right of Association may even play in the political side of the question.
The Report envisions the BOE/Ohio Secretary of State/Ohio Supreme Court scenario perhaps playing out his way:
Republican BOE members Curt Braden and William Cline to support certifying Bernabei.
Democrat BOE members Ferruccio and Sherer voting not to certify (of course, having refused to recuse themselves),
Result: a two to two tie,
Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted breaks the tie in siding with Braden and Cline reasoning that:
Members Ferruccio and Sherer had a conflict in interest in that they were in effect protesters under the umbrella entity the Stark County Democratic Party and therefore were disqualified from exercising their Ohio statutory role of being adjudicators of their own interests,
Though not a judge, Husted articulates that he is impressed with the First Amendment argument and that therefore the voters of Canton should decide whether or not Tom Bernabei should become mayor of Canton, (see Husted, In re: Maier, "let the people decide" LINK 1, Ohio Supreme Court; LINK 2 Ohio Supreme Court; LINK 3, Ohio Secretary of State)
The case is appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court which in the main employs an "abuse of discretion" standard on Husted's reasoning and consequently affirms the secretary's tie breaking vote in favor of certification.
Undoubtedly, Vasvari's First Amendment approach will play big in the Ohio Supreme Court,
LINKS to prior SCPR blogs on the Bernabei quest to run as an independent:
B.A. - Political Science
J.D.
AN INDEPENDENT MINDED POLITICAL COMMENTATOR
Until 1976 I was a Republican. Since then I have considered myself a Democrat. So after long term stints of being a Republican, then a Democrat, I have come to the political position I feel most comfortable with - being an INDEPENDENT MINDED ANALYST who demands effectiveness of our politicians - Republican, Democrat or whatever.
I have changed my political affiliation to "non-partisan" by not voting in either political party primary election.
