A SPLIT IN THE TOWNSHIPS OVER SALES/USE TAX REPEAL?

Day before yesterday Commissioner Todd Bosley went to the monthly Stark County Township Association meeting to push for a Yes on Issue 5 vote.

Imagine Bosley's surprise when Osnaburg Trustee Richard Pero got up and voiced his opposition to retention of the tax.

More interesting is Pero's reason for saying he was going to vote No on Issue 5.

"Because the commissioners had imposed the tax," that's why.

Bosley made the point that "Well, you have the opportunity to vote on it now."  Meaning that it is now time to determine whether or not the county needs the tax to fix 9-1-1 and for general revenue fund purposes.

But Pero was not going there.

He was still "mad" at the trustees for "imposing" the tax and he was not about to cogitate of whether or not the county actually needs the revenue.

The SCPR focuses on the Bosley/Pero exchange because it highlights the need of Stark County voters to make a determination on the substance of the issue.

Pero is an example of Stark Countians who plan to vote No for the sole reason that the tax was imposed.

Pero's fellow trustee Donna Middaugh (both are running for re-election on November 3rd), said she was voting Yes on Issue 5 because she was convinced the money was needed.

The SCPR understands that 80% or better of the trustees attending the meeting favored the Vote Yes position.

Is the 80% approval rating a sign that the tax is going to be retained or is it the opposite?

The SCPR brought you a story on Thursday about Stark County prosecutor John Ferrero getting up and walking out on a Thursday Stark County Police Chiefs Association meeting when it became clear that the Chiefs would be taking a "neutrality" stand on Issue 5.

The question coursing through yours truly's mind is whether or not dissension among the direct stakeholders in the outcome of the issue is a marker indicating that Stark Countians are going to vote No on retaining the tax.

That's the way it's looking to the Stark County Political Report.

SCPR "ELECTION 2009 SERIES (VOL 15): NORTHWEST SCHOOLS - APATHY PREVAILS, HOW LONG CAN THIS SCHOOL SYSTEM LAST?

Perhaps in a few years Northwest students will be a part of the Massillon School District or another close by district?

There are two elections for the school board this November.

First, there is a slate of three running for three full-term (4 years) positions.  There is no competition is this race.

Second, there are three candidates running to fill two "unexpired" terms.

Because there is no competition for the full-term positions, the SCPR is going to give short shrift to this part of the Northwest school board election.

The apathy/disgust is soooooooooooo strong in Northwest that the race includes a candidate (Beadle) who is a "home schooler" at heart.  He did appear at the Canal Fulton Library candidates night last Wednesday, but it seems as if he is a recent convert to the public school system because he says he has a "special needs" child.

As a taxpaying citizen, he certainly has a right to run.  But how committed, dedicated can a board member be when he has historically had no confidence in the public school system.  Also disturbing was his pleasure at being in a school district (Northwest) with half the property taxes of his former district (Copley - Summit County).

To the SCPR, the addition of Mr. Beadle is a sign that Northwest is headed toward public school oblivion in terms of how we identify the Canal Fulton, Clinton, Lawrence Township, New Franklin, North Lawrence and Wayne County (only a small part of the district) as being the Northwest Local School District.

There may be some hope for Northwest with at least one of the candidates for the "unexpired" two positions that three candidates are vying for.

Where does the hope come from?

From Nicole Metzger, that's who.

The SCPR was not impressed when the Northwest school board circumvented an "open to the public at large" application process to pick Mrs. Metger to succeed her husband who passed away recently.

Short-circuiting the public is a symptom of very, very deep problems with the the board at Northwest.

Notwithstanding, the SCPR's condemnation of the board for cutting out the public, it turns out that Nicole Metzger is "the best of the bunch" in the opinion of yours truly based on her presentation at the candidates night.

She owned up to the huge "lack of trust" problem that the Northwest school board and administration has and seems to have the spunk/etermination to deal with it as well as a forthright willingness to take input from the citizens of the district.

It is inspiring to see a person such as Nicole Metzger, who has gone through an excruciatingly difficult personal tragedy,  to apparently be the person who will redeem the public trust, if anyone can.

It certainly will not be Stephen C. Jones.  The SCPR's take on Jones, over the years of being familiar with him and his tenure on the board (broken for a period of time because he didn't get enough qualifying signatures for one election cycle), is that he is on the arrogant/dismissive side and thereby is likely a huge reason why the board has gotten in such disfavor with the board's constituents.

He reinforces the SCPR's take on him by, one, not appearing at the candidates night and, two, by not turning in answers to a questionnaire sent to him by The Repository.

While Victor Colaianni is questionable credentials to be a school board member, he has to be a better bet than Jones.  Colaianni will most likely be more attentive to Northwest's consumers of education that Jones.  However, the SCPR does have questions about his judgment.  Hopefully, he has improved.  He is a former member of the Canal Fulton City Council.

Here is a video of the Metzger and Colaianni presentations at the Canal Fulton Friends of the Library candidate night.

SCPR "ELECTION 2009 SERIES" (VOL 14): LAWRENCE TOWNSHP TRUSTEE RACE

The SCPR was out to Canal Fulton/Lawrence Township on Wednesday evening.

With video camera in hand, The Report captured the presentations of the six candidates for Lawarence Township trustee.

Six are vying for two slots.

Each candidate gets space on the video inserted in this blog which readers can view below.

Karen Nelsen is the SCPR's top choice as she had the most visionary, clear and specific agenda.

Incumbent trustee Marvin Hardgrove is a good second choice.  Hardgrove has been trustee for 18 years and has specific projects (toranado warning siren and water park) in the works for the next four years, if elected.

Pat Jorden is a long time community resident who has spent countless hours monitoring and contributing (as a citizen) to the welfare of Lawrence Township and, in the judgment of the SCPR, would be a viable alternative to either Nelsen or Hardgrove for voters who have a problem with either of these two.

Darci Knight, Lester Kamph and Shawn Lockhart round out the field of candidates.  Nothing that the SCPR heard in their presentations distinguishes them as potential trustees.

MARLBORO TWP POLICE CHIEF RON DEVIES INFURIATES PROSECUTOR JOHN FERRERO OVER STARK COUNTY POLICE CHIEFS' ASS'N FAILURE TO ENDORSE ISSUE 5. SO MUCH SO THAT FERRERO STORMS OUT OF AMISH DOOR RESTAURANT IN A HUFF!

UPDATE:  10/15/2009 AT 7:30 PM

EMAIL FROM CHIEF DEVIES:

I just wanted to clarify that my comments were not to suggest ALL county agencies were ineffectively managed. There are many county agencies I have no experience with and thus have no opinion on. I am also in NO way a spokesperson for the Stark County Police Chief's Association. I support 911 and am not opposed to central dispatch. I am opposed to the management model. In my own opinion I would prefer a system similar to RED Center or Cencom where the users oversee the management of the system and not politicians. But again this is only one police chief's opinion.

Chief Ron Devies

Prosecutor John Ferrero and Police Chief Ron Devies (Marlboro Township) tangle again.

TANGLE #1


Back in January, 2009 when Ferrero weighed in on the side of Marlboro trustees Tim Wise (the son of a former [retired] Stark County judge and brother of a former Stark County prosecutor) and Dave Wolf over a communication problem involving the termination of Devies' son Kyle as the Township computer system maintainer.

The SCPR has editorialized frequently that it was an outrage that Ferrero, in his role as county prosecutor, let the communication problem escalate into felony criminal charges against Devies and his son.

Ferrero (former Stark County Democratic Party chairman and for whom Tim Wise's brother worked), in the opinion of the SCPR, tried to duck the political ramifications of  the Marlboro matter by sending it to a for grand jury consideration.  It is a well-known adage that any prosecutor worth his salt can "get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich."  

The SCPR believes that Ferrero's handling of the situation reeked of politics.  From the outset, yours truly (though an attorney, not a criminal defense attorney) predicted that if the case went to trial, there would be an acquittal.

What Ferrero should have done is brought in an outside Stark County prosecutor to evaluate the Devies situation.  His handling of this case was a disservice to the Wise family, the Devies family and to the Stark County public.

Ferrero owes all the aforementioned an apology.

But don't hold your breath for that to happen.

Typically, prosecutors across America want law enforcement officers to build pretty much air tight cases before agreeing to prosecute.  In fact, police officials frequently get upset with prosecutors because the officials thing they have worked up a good case; only to have the prosecutor refuse to take the case forward.

The SCPR believes that Ferrero is no exception.


So why didn't he deal with the Devies case proportionally?

Ferrero even sent his "top gun" Dennis Barr in to try the case.  That's how into a conviction Ferrero was.

But it didn't work.

Rick Perez (the man who wants to succeed Tim Swanson as Stark County sheriff) did not distinguish himself in his investigation of the Devies father and son and his case fell apart when tried before Judge Lee Sinclair of the Stark County Court of Common Pleas.

Judge Sinclair dismissed all charges at the end of the prosecution's case.  Talk about a legal "slam-dunk?"  Ohio versus Ron and Kyle Devies is a classic case of "no case."

The best prosecutor in all of America could not have gotten a conviction of the Devises.

TANGLE #2

 Earlier today the Stark County Police Chiefs Association had its monthly meeting at the Amish Door Restaurant in Wilmot (located in extreme southwest Stark County).

One of the agenda items was whether or not the Association would endorse the retention of the county commissioners' imposition of a 0.50 sales/use tax increase in December, 2008.

Who should step up to the microphone?

You've got it.  Marlboro Township Police Chief Ron Devies.

Devies tells the SCPR that he opposed endorsing Issue 5 because there is too much inefficiency in Stark County government.  Moreover, he says that he told the assembled police chiefs that the only two county agencies which are efficient are the Stark County Crime Lab and the Stark County Parks.  In his conversation with The Report, Devies added that he failed but intended to include the Stark County coroner's office.

Although he was not aware of it at the time, Devies says that he was told by other chiefs that upon hearing the Devies evaluation of the quality of Stark County government, Prosecutor Ferrero, visibly upset, got up from his table and left.

One more interesting thing.  Ferrero was so upset that he left without paying his bill.  The SCPR understands that Ferrero did call back to the restaurant to apologize for not paying his bill.

It is reported that Jackson Chief of Police Harley Nester came to Ferrero's rescue.

Undoubtedly, the folks at the Amish understood the Ferrero goof.


THE FINAL WORD

The failure of the Stark County Police Chiefs Association to endorse Issue 5 could be a serious blow to the issue's chance of surviving the Stark Citizens for the Right to Vote repeal effort.

And it doesn't help that Prosecutor Ferrero (who, The Report, understands does not attend many of the Chiefs' monthly meetings), chose to through a temper tantrum today.

But as the SCPR has written about Ferrero before, it does not appear to yours truly that Ferrero exercises sound jusgment in his capacity as Stark County prosecutor!

SCPR "ELECTION 2009 SERIES" (VOL 13): WHO FROM THE "VOTE YES FOR SAFETY COMMITTIEE" WILL ANSWER THE "STARK CITIZENS FOR THE RIGHT TO VOTE?" IS THE "VOTE YES FOR SAFETY COMMITTEE" RUNNING AN HONEST CAMPAIGN? DOES CHARLES SNYDER OF THE STARK CITIZENS HAVE HIS FACTS RIGHT?

A pox on both their houses?

Such could be the response of Stark County voters on Issue 5 come November 3rd.

But the "pox" remedy won't work.

Because it's an up or down vote on Issue 5.

"Not voting," is not a viable option. 

There will be a winner and there will be a loser in the early hours of November 4, 2009.

Listen to Charles Snyder of the Stark Citizens for the Right to Vote committee (SCRVC) giving that groups take on the issue and a recent NAVE gathering at the Canton Civic Center:  (Vote Yes for Public Safety had no representative present)



Take a look at the full web page on the website of the Vote Yes for Safety:

As the SCPR sees it, the most glaring problem for the Stark Citizens folks is that a 39% net increase in revenue to the county is simply inaccurate.

As the SCPR sees it, the most glaring problem for the Vote Yes folks is its avoidance of forthrightly discussing the fact that there is a revenue enhancement for the county general fund in Issue 5.

Yours truly is not surprised that Snyder et al can't or won't get their fact right.  The Report's take on these folks is that they are so impassioned about their cause that they fail to bring themselves (because of the fervor) to informing the electorate in a thoroughgoing and hence accurate fashion.

Yours truly is surprised that the Vote Yes folks mimic the Stark Citizens in not presenting a complete picture by their avoidance of the revenue ramifications of Issue 5.

Why does the SCPR differentiate between the two?

Because Vote Yes leaders are former and current elected public officials who are duty bound to keep the public trust.

No excuses for the Snyder and friends.  They are utterly unimpressive with their "let's throw everything including the kitchen sink" approach.

Their only valid argument is that citizens should send a message to the commissioners by repealing a imposed tax.

For Stark Countians who vote No on Issue 5, such is a valid basis in the opinion of the SCPR.  The rest of the Stark Citizens' arguments are bogus except the point about alternatives to fix 9-1-1 should be considered.

They have hurt their cause in playing loose with the facts and throwing in the irrelevant (e.g. the Gary Zeigler argument).

So have Reinbold (a former Stark County Common Pleas Court judge) and Jane Vignos (a former county official who voted to impose the tax) and their allies Stark County Democratic Party chairman Randy Gonzalez (also a Jackson Township official and Canton Municipal Court official), Commissioners Harmon, Bosley hurting the "Yes" cause by virtue of their trying to mislead the voters into thinking that Issue 5 is all about fixing Stark's broken 9-1-1 system.

The SCPR calls this "the fear factor."   And if there wasn't a tax increase for general county operations, the public should be fearful of not having a properly functioning 9-1-1. (though the fix must be cost effective and rational). With the general revenue raising part of Issue 5, came the responsibility to go beyond "fear" and justify the need for general operations money.  Stark officials are operating on fear alone.

For former and current public officials, who are often victims of distortions and outright untruths, to engage in the "avoidance" tactic on Issue 5, should make fair minded people less sympathtic when the cry foul in their victimhood.

Moreover, if the "Yes" folks win, the failure to be totally forthcoming with all the sub-issues on Issue 5, de-legitimizes, in a de facto sort of way, the general revenue fund aspect of the increased tax.

When a public official achieves an objective through a deception worked on voters, then they increase the cynicism of day-in, day-out Stark Countians who then get knee-jerk when other public officials asked for increased taxes in their venues.

School, fire, police, road and social service levies difficulties increase incrementally with every misleading campaign that a public official has a hand in.

The SCPR suspects that the out-and-out politicos among the group of current and former public officials named above have come up with the deception campaign.    But their should be no protest from the "go along, to get along" about being lumped in.  They have lent their public prestige to a highly unsavory approach.

Shame on them.

And, shame on the Stark Citizens group.  These folks are setting the cause of citizen activism back with their approach.  Ordinary folks need to think twice, three, four and more times when asked by the likes of the Stark Citizens for the Right to Vote to join their effort.

Because people to get judged by their associations.

Both groups are having a hand in the degeneration of public discourse concerning the hard issues that everyday Stark Countians have to deal with on November 3rd.

So what to do?

For the SCPR, the inclination is to vote with the "Yes" folks.

However, it is only an inclination.  Imposition and deception by public officials do not sit well with yours truly, by anyone, but especially by folks charged with exercising the public trust.

The Yes folks have to provide a compelling fact-based REASON to vote yes.

The No folks have to provide a compelling fact-based REASON to vote no.

The SCPR is skeptical that either group will do so.

TOM BERNABEI "A HUGE HELP" TO NEW SARTA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR KIRT CONRAD; BUT A "BURDEN" TO CANTON MAYOR WILLIAM J. HEALY, II?

Kirt Conrad, who took over the helm at the Stark Area Regional Transit Authority about six weeks ago, appeared at the Stark County commissioners' weekly meeting last week to introduce himself.

In doing so he provides a thumbnail sketch of recent developments at SARTA and he heaped praise (see video below) on interim Executive Director Thomas Bernabei for his command of the SARTA situation and his indispensable role in making the transition to new leadership an easy process.

Hmm?

So Bernabei is effective at SARTA but not with the Healy administration.

Public transportation is one of the most difficult administrative tasks in all of America; not just Canton.  With no prior experience Bernabei takes over (March, 2009) a extremely difficult job on short notice and is highly effective and in a posiiton to bring the new director up-to-speed in short order.

Yet he is not good enough for Mayor William J. Healy, II.

The SCPR presents this contrast to show how utterly out-of-touch Mayor Healy is in dealing with the gargantuan task of administrating Ohio's eighth largerst urban area.

Healy needs all the help he can get.

The two most effective administrators that once served in his administration are no more.

Why?

Because of Healy's out-of-control ego, that's why.

There couldn't be a better example of a politician's ego being an albatross around the neck that not only drags down the politician, but also is bringing the once proud, great Hall-of-Fame city to her knees.

Back to Executive Director Conrad.

Undoubtedly, he has received a warm welcome to Stark County.  Hopefully, he brings with him skills and insights that will help make up for the deficiencies that are painfully obvious as existing on City Hall's 8th floor.

Here is the video of Director Conrad at the October 7th county commissioners meeting.

TOM HARMON HAS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT HE IS PUSHING. IT COULD BE THE BASIS OF A REBIRTH WITH AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLUS FOR ALL OF STARK COUNTY, IF HE CAN TAKE OFF HIS "NARROW VISION" GOGGLES?

Anyone who has been reading the Stark County Political Report knows that The Report has been pushing Commissioner Tom Harmon to make good on his promise to make economic development happen in Stark since he got a "political" appointment to be commissioner back in 2007.

The SCPR is highly skeptical of politicos, not just Harmon, and whether or not they want to do anything for anybody other than themselves.

With a "you have been wrong, Martin" demeanor, Commissioner Harmon handed yours truly a copy of  a  "Proposed Canton-Stark County Agricultural & Livestock Expo Arena" at last Wednesday's commissioners' meeting with the verbal:  "How this for a guy [Harmon - teased the SCPR] who doesn't know anything about economic development" (as the SCPR has written about the commissioner).

Because the SCPR has been waiting for Harmon to act for nearly two years, the proposal got devoured on-the-spot.  Only kidding.  The Report applauds Harmon for taking this idea and moving it forward.

Moreover, it could be that Harmon is on to something with his "proposed" project of what his written proposal names the "Canton-Stark County Agricultural & Livestock Expo Arena.

The SCPR gladly eats a little bit of crow after talking with Harmon about 45 minutes today about the proposal.

It is obvious to yours truly that Harmon has worked this project hard trying to get government grants (stimulus & earmarks [aka known as "pork"]  to the tune of $5  to $10 million to build the facility) and at some personal expense in terms of footing the bill for some travel, food and lodging in visiting similar facilities located in Wilmington and Springfield, Ohio.

What drives Harmon?

The prospect that the facility and its activities could bring as much as $12 to $15 million to Stark County businesses each and every year.

When it to comes economic development for Stark County, the SCPR relishes being wrong on saying that certain public officials are not getting the job done.

Please, please public officials, prove me wrong over and over and over again.

While Commissioner Harmon is clearly working arduously on this project, it is a long way from producing a tangible benefit in terms of jobs for Stark Countians.

This idea is not Harmon's.  It belongs to Attorney Elizabeth Burick of Lake Township who is a horse lover.  Burick is a former Lake Township trustee who is well connected with the high reaches of the Stark County Democratic Party. She has served on former Stark County Democratic Party chair Johnnie A. Maier, Jr's campaign committees (as treasurer) and has worked for him at the Massillon clerk of courts office.

At first blush, the SCPR - after talking with folks who understand the horse show circuit - believes the  proposal is misnamed.  To accurately reflect the purpose of the arena as conceived by Burick, it should be named "The Equine Expo Arena."

Harmon tells the SCPR that the envisioned Expo Center could be used for other purposes than horse shows and related activities, but he cautions that the horse show community plans to use Expo about 46 weeks a year.

A SCPR source is very skeptical of the "46 weeks a year" and says it will likely be more like 20 weeks a year.  A big difference, if the source is accurate.

Another point made is that horse lovers are highly territorial in terms of the facilities they use.  The thought is that any other projected use of the Expo Center would face difficulties if the activity was not to the liking of the horse show folks.

So right out-of-the box, it appears that the concept is way too narrow to justify the county to allow Stark County owned land to be used by a very narrow set of Stark Countians who have incorporated as the "non-profit" Canton-Stark County Agricultural & Livestock Expo Arena with Elizabeth Burick as its head.

A curiosity?

If this project is projected to be lucrative for Stark County businesses, why is a non-profit being formed and not a profit-making entity?  Hmm?

Another negative.  Fair parking (on the north side of the fair grounds where Expo is slated to be built) would be diminished by the construction of a facility that will have a very narrow use.

But the idea of the project could be the first spark of a vision that some Stark Countians have to renew the Stark County Fairgrounds so that it can be a huge economic/financial positive for Stark.

Harmon didn't say so, but the SCPR wonders if the commissioners will use the development of the fair grounds to kill off the Stark County Fair eventually.

A source (not Commissioner Harmon) tells the SCPR that most of the buildings (including the Grandstand) are in poor condition and in desperate need of repair.

One of the ideas behind the Expo Center is that it might help the Stark County Fair Board become self-sufficient and thereby in a position to generate funds to repair the degenerating buildings.

A much more stimulating idea would be to take Burick's idea and expand it considerably.

The SCPR likes the idea of an Stark Countian with huge connection with Stark County's and Ohio's agricultural community that a project be put together to build an arena complex which could accommodate Burick et al but also serve serve the larger Stark County agricultural interest as well as the general public.

But the complex would "replace" the dilapidated (the SCPR's opinion) buildings.

Such a complex would dwarf the $12 to $15 million that is currently enticing Harmon.

It could link up with Hall of Fame activities, perhaps, serve as an indoor soccer facility and be used to establish and run "youth character development center" for Stark County's younger generations who do not have access to farm-like facilities.

You name it,  Everything should be on the table.

Stark County sheriff Tim Swanson is said to have stated recently that he cannot remember the last time his officers arrested a person with 4-H experience in his/her life.

Commissioner Harmon pointed out to yours truly that "agriculture" is the biggest economic factor in Stark County.

A terrific point.

And Stark County government needs to play to this countywide strength and not limit the county to the micro-vision of Burick and her friends in the horse community.

One of the SCPR's quarrels with the Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce is that the organization's leadership development program is not producing visionaries that can take Stark's strengths and parlay them into a sterling local economy some what disconnected from state and national trends.

The SCPR feels as if the Burick proposal is a done deal among the movers and shakers who lead Stark County. 

If such is the case, then Stark County will settle for the micro when what is called for is macro economic development.

Stark County needs a much grander plan than the "Canton-Stark County Agricultural & Livestock Arena."