CONGRESSMAN JOHN BOCCIERI SHOULD VOTE FOR HEALTH CARE!

Apparently, the extreme right wing of the political spectrum (the SCPR won't say the Republican Party because The Report does not believe that most Republicans support the tactics of the 9-12/teaparty groups) has gotten the word that Congressman John Boccieri is about to support the President's health care initiative in a congressional vote this coming Sunday.

The Report got e-mailed the above flyer (in an unedited format) a day or two ago.  Yours truly has never had much use for the 9-12/teabagger movement and the flyer tells one and all why these organizations are not credible politically active organizations.

So let me get this right?

If Boccieri votes yes on health care reform, he's a traitor?

But if he votes no, he is a patriot?

Most Stark Countians and voters in the 16th congressional district eschew these kinds of tactics.  And so should Congressman Boccieri.

The SCPR views the rhetoric, the tactics and the strategy of these groups to be the equivalent of the John Birch Society of yore.  As an aside, reports have surfaced in the general media about the possible resurgence of the John Birch Society.  If so, the Society will no longer be out there in the fringe alone, it has company with the 9-12/teabagger movements.

Opposition/pressure from these extremists on Boccieri, should tell the congressman all he needs to know about how he should vote.

The SCPR challenges Boccieri to vote yes on the proposed legislation.

On what basis?

First, it is the right thing to do.  Health care insurance companies need to be reined in.  Well known for their arbitrary, excessive-premium-hiking ways to price "undesirables" off its insurance rolls and to deny, deny and deny even more on pre-existing conditions on the absolutely critical need of a human being for healthcare insurance.  They are completely out-of-control and need to be managed by the people of this great nation.

Second, Congressional Budget Office (CBO) figures published yesterday show that passing the current health care initiative will be a federal deficit reducer.

Third, as a Democrat, if Boccieri and enough of his Democratic colleagues vote to scuttle the President's initiative, then he has participated in creating a slippery slope which will likely make him, his colleagues, and the Democratic majority as well as the President "lame ducks" who cannot formulate and pass legislative measures that they think will help the country.

Those are the reasons why the Stark County Political Report urges Congressman John Boccieri to vote YES on health care reform!

VIDEO POSTED: SEE FOR YOURSELF! STARK COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOCUSING ON REINING IN STARK COUNTY'S "ELECTED" (EXCEPT FOR THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS) OFFICIALS ON BUDGETARY ITEMS

FINAL BUDGET IS PASSED BY STARK COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. ACHIEVE 2% IN CUTS FROM 2009, 1.5% SHORT OF GOAL. BUT THEY ARE SATISFIED WITH THIS YEAR'S RESULT. NEXT YEAR LOOMS AS AN "ALL-OUT" CRISIS, NOT TO SAY ANYTHING OF 2012!

DISCLAIMER:  ANY REFERENCES IN THIS BLOG TO THE JUDICIARY ARE FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF A OPINION JOURNALIST AND ARE NOT THE EXPRESSIONS OF ATTORNEY-AT-LAW

Who are the financial hogs in the Stark County government budget in 2010 as compared to 2009?

The Stark County treasurer for one.  Up over 21.5 %.  That will not make too many Stark Countians happy especially in light of - what some are projecting - to be upwards of $3,000,000 in losses growing out of Treasurer Gary Zeigler's allegation that his former chief deputy Vince Frustaci made off with county funds; whatever the number eventually turns out to be.

Zeigler was clearly asleep at the switch and now has the gall to ask for a budget busting increase (in the sense of the goal of -3.5% of the 2009 budget).  If he had any humility about the situation, he would long ago resigned.  But no.  He asks for more.

The next hog-in-chief?  The Stark County Board of Elections (BOE).  Up nearly 15% over 2009.  The SCPR is particularly unhappy with the structure of BOEs in Ohio.  Appointed politicians running our elections in a "cold ward" (Rs versus Ds) fashion.  A real democratic irony.   Isn't that terrific!

Back to the budget thing.

One simple way the BOE could save significant money is to use its new sophisticated copier to scan in documents frequently accessed by the Stark County public so that the time of BOE employees is not taken up with the repetitive task of retrieving records, copying records and waiting on citizens asking for the documents.

If the BOE was as "citizen friendly" as it should be, it would do the scanning and not only save itself a lot of employee hours that could be used on more productive activities and, at the the same time. save Stark County citizens driving time, gasoline/wear and tear on the family car expense and copy costs.

So now they want more money?

For the SCPR's part, unless and until the county starts doing more "no-brainer" things like the BOE thing, then citizens should be clear that public officials are not getting the message and should turn down any sales tax renewals or requests for increases.

This is where the Stark County judges (Common Pleas Court) could weigh-in on BOE members and help the county image, the efficiency of the BOE, and make the public feel appreciated.

It appears that the  judges (particularly Judge Charles Brown) - are the prime movers behind a recently formed task force, headed up by Prosecutor John Ferrero, to look at all aspects of county government so as to position the county to face county voters within a "we've done everything we can to clean up our act," when the county next asks voters to approve a levy.

The SCPR has enormous respect for the judges.  The Report believe they - who practice day-in, day-out the impartial administration of justice - are ideally suited to lead the way to a restoration of the Stark County public trust in the county's local institutions of government.

The Report knows that they have plenty on their plate, but they need to take the lead.  The courts are trusted by the public.  Only the courts have the public stature among all of Stark County government to lead the way back.

Back to the budget, per se.

The next "on-the-next-level financial hog" is Stark County recorder Rick Campbell's office.  Up about 9%.  Yours truly used to praise Campbell for running the most efficient office in all of Stark County government.

But no more.

A sign that Campbell is slipping was evident when he and his chief deputy Kody Gonzalez (son of Stark County Democratic Party chairman Randy Gonzalez) showed up at a Stark County commissioners' meeting (along with Plain Township trustee Louis Giavasis/also the clerk of courts "title czar," in what The Report believes was an attempt to intimidate yours truly on some blogs that were not to the Campbell's liking.

Another interesting tidbit about the recorder's office.  A little over a week ago at a luncheon with an area politician, the politico volunteered that a key recorder's office employee bragged to him that he only "actually" did work in the office about 1 to 2 days.  Hmm?  Maybe Campbell needs to spend less time trying to push around The Report and more time making sure office employees are giving Stark County taxpayers their due.

Mike Hanke and Rick Flory deserve high marks for their work in cajoling the heads of Stark County departments of government in "for real" quest to meet an overall goal of a 3.5% reduction over 2009.  They didn't meet the 3.5%, but they did get to 2%.  The blame is not to be placed on Hanke and Flory.  It belongs on department heads like Zeigler, Campbell and the "politically appointed" Board of Election members.  They are the ones for the Stark County public to get on!

It appears that a renewal will be attempted of the 1/4 of 1% sales tax levy set to expire on June 30, 2011 this November.  If it passes, county officials will still be looking at about a 6% decrease in all departments of Stark County government.  If it doesn't, you can about double that to the 11/12% range; maybe even more.  And don't even ask about 2012.  County office holders are looking at cuts in the 30% plus if a renewal doesn't pass.

Just a word about the sheriff.  He lost about $700,000 on his request but still a little under his 2009 figure.  Swanson was telling county officials that with the cut on request he would have to layoff up to five deputies.  But the word at Wednesday's commissioners' meeting was that the sheriff thinks he just might skate through without making any layoffs.

A couple of nights ago,  yours truly had a conversation with "one in a position to know" who says that Swanson is sandbagging on the county and that the sheriff's office is in the best condition of all of Stark's departments of government.

Hmm?

The Stark County Political Report has obtained a copy of a letter that commissioners will be sending out to county department heads.  Here are some excerpts:

It is not a pretty picture, no?

As the SCPR sees it, Stark County government has a huge job ahead of it to rebuild public trust.  Until department elected and appointed officials (in the case of the Stark BOE) are have perceived by the voting public as having  "gotten it," there will no new money for the county and probably not even a renewal.

The politicos have had their day abusing the public trust. 

Now the public is about to have its say.

Having a sheriff say "poop on the public;" having folks given public jobs to the exclusion of the general public - for no other reason than that they are politically connected, and having elected officials refusing to be accountable to the voting public ARE OVER!

The arrogant ones; those who go to Columbus and spend taxpayer money at the capital city's finest hotels without regard to even getting the taxpayer a government discount; those who refuse to have their public meetings videotaped, those who try to intimidate journalistic opinion/accountability under the cover of office; those who staff public office with their political friends and hire the family members of their politically powerful colleagues are on the brink of "a great awakening!"

Too many Stark County government officials and those of the political subdivisions have run roughshod over the taxpaying public.

Is the public about to say:  "enough is enough?"

Likely, indeed!

The pity of all this is that those who will suffer because of the public's growing discontent with the poor, poor quality of all too many Stark government leaders will not be the leaders themselves.

For sure, they will take care of themselves to the bitter end.

No, it will be the ordinary local government workers (those who do not drive a Lexus) who will get no pay raises, have to pay a larger share of their health care cuts, and get laid off before those of their colleagues who have a political connection with the boss.

Why would the ordinary among us support those living "high off the hog" at taxpayer expense?

The answer:  they won't.  Those days are evaporating very quickly.

WILL A WING OF THE STARK COUNTY JAIL BE CLOSING?

The Stark County Political Report has learned that commissioners may vote today to cut Stark County Sheriff Tim Swanson $700,000 short on his "requested" budget funding for 2010.  However, the Stark County Veterans Service Commission will definitely gets its fully requested budget.

Swanson (who met with Commissioner Steve Meeks and County Administrator Mike Hanke on Monday morning) has let it be known that if the cut occurs, then he may be left with no alternative but to cut a wing of the jail.  Apparently, if Swanson makes good on the closing, it will leave Stark County courts with a huge dilemma in terms of finding prisoner space for sentenced offenders.

A source in a position to know says that closing a wing of the jail would not necessarily mean a release of inmates.  A more likely scenario is that "non-violent" offenders would not be given jail time because of cramped quarters in the remaining space at the jail.

So Stark Countians should expect a spirited debate among commissioners today as to whether or not to make the budget cut.

In the end, this is a game of "brinkmanship," the SCPR believes,  Sheriff Swanson will prevail on in the end. Commissioner Todd Bosley has already committed to objecting to the cut.  Would he vote not to approve the budget, if Ferguson and Meeks opted to cut the sheriff.  Probably not.

The Report has also learned that quick on the heels of the budget approval this year will be communication from the commissioners to Stark County department heads to start planning now for a 5% to 10% budget cuts in 2011.

The SCPR is beginning to believe that within the bowels of the Stark County commissioners office, discussions are underway to place a sales tax issue on the ballot in November, 2010.  If one takes too much from the public discussion at commissioners' meeting, it seems too obvious that there will not be an additional tax, but a renewal of the June, 2011 expiring 1/4th of 1% sales tax.

However, such talk may be a feint and what might well materialize is a sales tax specific for the operation of the county jail which represents 1/3rd of the county budget.

Think about it. If commissioners could get the voting public to buy into to supporting the jail with a direct levy, then that would free up about $16 million for the rest of the Stark County general fund budgeting.

Such a maneuver would solve county budgeting problems in a hurry.

And voters would not even have realized they have been "slipped a mickey!"

ELUM GOES AFTER THE STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT?

The Stark County Political Report (begun in March, 2008) is an online only publication that purposes to offer incisive political analysis (journalistic opinion), and, to some degree do investigative journalism, for the benefit of the Stark County public, on Stark County-based politics and government.

Yours truly (unrelated to the fact of being an attorney for some 37 years now) has thought for a number of years that Stark County's only countywide newspaper (The Repository) is so hooked into "the powers that be" in Stark County, that many times its editors have made decisions not to work certain stories or to become apologists for certain political and governmental officials.

So what to do?

Answer:  create an alternative!

Hence, the birth of the Stark County Political Report (SCPR, The Report).

One of most democratizing forces in the world today has been the explosion of the Internet.  Because of its ease of use and inexpense, the Internet provides folks like yours truly the opportunity to take their storehouse of knowledge and share it with the public for the public benefit.

The Report has published over 1,150 blogs to date.

The Stark County public's reception has been gratifying.

But there are some (in local government and politics) who are not so pleased.

And they have used a number of devices to attempt to nullify the SCPR.

The latest in a series of attacks on The Report appears to be coming from Judge Edward Elum of the Massillon Municipal Court.

As readers know, Elum has been the subject of a number of public controversies in recent times.  His latest is a flap that the SCPR believes Elum initiated on the competence of Massillon Chief of Police Rob Williams.

But beyond the Williams thing, the SCPR has been hearing for a couple of years that a number of Massillonians (chiefly, Massillon Mayor Francis H. Cicchinelli, Jr.) that Elum is on a political power grab quest that goes beyond Elum's role as judge.

Cicchinelli broached Elum as a subject - with a "why does Elum hate me? ponderment - with the SCPR in the late spring, early summer of 2008 when The Report went to Massillon and did about a two hour videotaped interview for publication on The Report.

Now mind you.  This interview had nothing to do with the fact that yours truly is an attorney.  It had everything to do and only to do with the Stark County Political Report.

Over the ensuing two years, The Report has received a steady diet of information on the Cicchinelli/Elum "disagreement."  In the judgment of yours truly - from a journalistic standpoint - the acrimony ripened to the point of deserving detailed treatment in the context of a blog within the past week on the basis of an e-mail received from a reader and on the basis of media reports prevalent in area media in recent times.

Here are links to SCPR blogs that reference Elum:

• ELUM: GET OVER IT  
• TIGERLAND IN AN UPROAR 
• CICCHINELLI/CATAZARO-PERRY WAR ERUPTS ANEW  
• TRIAL HEAT: CATAZARO-PERRY/CICHINELLI POLITICAL FIGHT? 
• DEMOCRAT TO DEMOCRAT

Since the SCPR has become a formidable force in critiquing Stark County government and in yours truly's incisive political analysis, several efforts have been initiated to nullify The Report's effect:

1.  Some Stark County political/government officials refuse to talk to The Report about questions concerning their political/governmental actions.  A prime example is Mayor William J. Healy, II.  Moreover, The Report believes that Healy (along with Plain Township trustee Louis Giavasis) put pressure on Q92 general manager Don Peterson to take the SCPR periodic political analysis (started at the initiative of Pat DeLuca - DeLuca in the Morning)  off-the-air.

Peterson took yours truly aside, after one such appearance, and told yours truly that his son played soccer with Healy's son and that therefore he was in a position to know that the SCPR had the wrong take on Healy.  Moreover, he offered to set up a Healy/SCPR connect which evaporated when The Report continued critical blogs of the Mayor.

Another interesting side to the Healy/SCPR saga was an Adam Herman initiative (prior to a Canton City Council meeting) to know what it would take for the SCPR to be less critical of Healy.

2.  The SCPR has done a series of blogs criticizing local officials for "apparently" setting aside public jobs (or having their office holding political friends) for family, friends and political loyalists to the exclusion of the Stark County and political subdivision general public.

An example that the SCPR brings forth periodically is the move from the Stark County recorder's office by Lisa Jackson Campbell (daughter of former Commissioner Gayle Jackson, sister of Massillon deputy clerk of courts Shane Jackson [also political director of the Stark County Democratic Party] and political ally of Massillon clerk of courts [and former chairman of the Stark County Democratic Party] Johnnie A. Maier, Jr., who is also a political appointee member of the Stark County Board of Elections.

Campbell, when she became Recorder Rick Campbell's wife had to find a new job because Ohio Ethics law prohibits a husband/wife hire situation in a public office context.  Where did she end up?  As chief administrator for the Plain Township Board of Trustees.

The SCPR has written several blogs questioning whether or not the "apparent" consideration of an alternative (to Campbell) hire was the "real" thing or "for appearances only."

Obviously, Recorder Campbell and Trustee Louis Giavasis did not like the SCPR's inquiry.  About a month and one-half ago the two showed up at a Stark County commissioners meeting "apparently" to deliver public request documents to yours truly (which had been requested of the Stark County auditor - not the recorder) and then to try to jawbone The Report on its blogs concerning the Plain Township hire of Campbell.  It was shortly after this episode that DeLuca of Q92 told yours truly that Giavasis had called in and complained about on-air statements I had made about him.

3.  Now the Elum thing.  Saturday night at 10:17 p.m., Judge Elum sat down and wrote an email to yours truly saying that it come to his attention that two blogs had been written that "may" have been in violation of disciplinary rule regarding the governance of the bar and that he is directing attorneys to file complaints against yours truly with Board of Disciplinary Counsel branch of the Ohio Supreme Court.

First, such an allegation presupposes that the SCPR's blogs are written in the context of yours truly writing from the standpoint of being a lawyer.

However, such is not the case.  The SCPR is written from the standpoint of "journalistic opinion and, to some degree - journalistic investigation."

It had not occurred to yours truly that there are those out there who are so desperate to get at the SCPR and the blog's pointed critique of Stark County government and politicians that they would endeavor, through the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, to get at a journalist.

Accordingly, The Report revised the two blogs in question to make it clear that yours truly's analysis of Elum, Maier et al has nothing whatsoever to do with the SCPR happening to be an attorney.  And that the blogs - as are all blogs - are journalistic endeavors in The Report's exercise of his U.S. Constitution First Amendment rights.

The rule in question:  Bar R. V.  Section 2. Duty of Lawyers.

It is the duty of the lawyer to maintain a respectful attitude toward the courts, not for the sake of the temporary incumbent of the judicial office, but for the maintenance of its supreme importance. (emphasis added).

Well, even as a journalist, yours truly has the highest and deepest respect for Stark County's courts.  And, Elum is a temporary incumbent.  Nothing in the blogs was intended to reflect on the office of the Massillon Municipal Court judge. 

When someone like Eddie Elum gets out in the public square of political opinion, does he think he can weigh-in as a citizen like every one of us and not be subject to criticism?

The SCPR has been a lot more respectful of Judge Elum, even out in the "political" public square than vice-a-versa.

Take a look at what Elum had to say to yours truly in his referenced email:

Martin

I received some excepts (sic) on your blog covering a meeting that I had last week with Chief Rob Williams and Chief Prosecutor John Simpson. Our meeting was very constructive and helpful.  Your statements are false and misleading.  You have no conscience, lack professionalism and make no effort to ascertain the facts. As a member of the Bar, you are an embarrassment.  You do nothing to promote the high ethical standards of our legal profession.

  Again:

"Your statements are false and misleading.  You have no conscience, lack professionalism and make no effort to ascertain the facts."

False/misleading in what respect?

No conscience?  Isn't that a little bit over the top?  Think that might not ought to be narrowed down a bit?

Lack professionalism?  For commenting on Elum's public square involvement?  Exercising First Amendment rights?  Maybe there are different perspectives on whether or not the SCPR blog is professional?

Yours truly gets told many times over that The Report is professionally done and does substantiate blogs to a much higher degree that most other blogs.

No effort to ascertain the facts?  Talking with Mayor Cicchinelli is not an effort to ascertain the facts?  On other issues, the SCPR talked with Elum himself, Public Safety Director Mike Loudiana, Council member Larry Slagle, Mayor Cicchinelli, Pat DeLuca of Q92, Matt Rink of The Independent, and others - "no effort to ascertain the facts?"  Really?

It appears - that whereas The Report is not writing as an attorney, but as a blogger/journalist  - very clearly that Judge Elum is acting as a judicial officer in his personal attack email directed against yours truly.  Question?  Should yours truly file a complaint under the Judicial Code of Conduct against Elum?

The SCPR has a thick hide and will treat Elum's tirade as understandable in the context of being evaluated in his extrajudicial conduct and The Report will not endeavor to turn his intemperate email into a Judicial Code of Conduct complaint against Elum.  Because The Report wants to be generous to Judge Elum and take the personal attack as not being against a licensed Ohio attorney of 37 years plus who might some day appear in his court.  Rather The Report chooses to take the attack as being against a journalist.

Another interesting aside to this back and forth between the SCPR and Elum is - what The Report believes to have been - an Elum attempt to deter (if not intimidate) yours truly from writing a blog based on a citizen inquiry in the first place.

The question here becomes whether or not Elum is trying to be coercive on the SCPR in the context of being a judge?  If that were the case, such could be another basis for a complaint to be filed under the Code of Judicial Conduct.  As before, though, yours truly is not inclined to so act.  From yours truly, this is all about journalism and nothing about a judge/court - attorney relationship.

However, it should be interesting to blog readers to know why The Report even thinks there might have been an attempt at coercion.

First, in a penned note on a copy of the initial "asking questions" email I had sent him, Elum seems to yours truly to be playing on The Report's sense of ego in trying to deflect the SCPR's effort to pursue a tip that a SCPR reader had sent in, to wit:

Second, in a reply email Elum tries to steer The Report to another topic, to wit:

You are missing the fact that the courts, with the assistance of the clerk of court, has expended over $1M to assist the City in capital improvements, repairs, maintenance, and computers that we were not obligated to do.  These expenditures had to be made by the City, but it had no funds to do them.  The court and clerk found creative ways to assist the City in the completion of these projects to make everything work for the general public.  Your blog should focus on the collaborative efforts of all three branches of government to make our community life better place to live.  eddie

No harm in Elum trying, but the SCPR doggedly pursues stories and is not vulnerable to being distracted even if the person happens to be a judge.  No doubt about it, some journalists would feel a bit intimidated by a judge having an opinion on what is "smart" to write about.  Just not the SCPR.


CONCLUSION

For 37 years yours truly has been an attorney and for all of those 37 years has never once questioned the sanctity of the courts.  In fact, in The Report's blogs, yours truly has praised Judge Lee Sinclair (Stark County Common Pleas) for doing justice in the case of Marlboro Township Police Chief Ron Devies' case.  Such is yours truly's take on our court system.  It is clearly the best in the world.

Yours truly is proud that his middle daughter is an attorney who practiced as a prosecutor on a daily basis over a 5 year span.

The Olson family is squarely a "rule of law" family!

While the Stark County Political Report is a journalistic effort and The Report is solely written as an opinion/investigative journalism blog, inasmuch as yours truly is co-incidentally an attorney, yours truly has many times over in his 37 years as an attorney manifested profound respect for Stark's judiciary and hereby reaffirms that respect.

The Report believes that the real actor in this attack on yours truly is by former Stark County Party chairman Johnnie A. Maier, Jr who also happens to be Massillon Municipal Court clerk and a politically appointed member of the Stark Board of Elections (BOE).

Recently, The Report got into a "stare down" with the BOE over The Report's right to videotape the Board's public meetings.  Apparently, the objector was Board president William Cline.  But the SCPR doesn't buy that at all.

The Report believes that Maier is the "real" actor.

Maier has been the subject of many SCPR blogs because of how consummately involved he is in the "back room" side of Stark County politics.  Reports have gotten back to The Report of how very, very angry Maier gets at The Report's political opinions of his political activities.

Could it be that Elum's directive to go after yours truly be a contrivance of Johnnie A. Maier, Jr?

The Report thinks so.

In any event, yours truly will deal with Elum's "apparent" attempt to make yours truly's journalistic enterprise into something that it is not!

Such is the price that one pays for pursuing the truth.

The Stark County Political Report is about journalism-in-action and ONLY about journalism-in- action!!!

OVER 100 APPLY TO BE STARK'S NEXT DOG WARDEN. CAN THE COMMISSIONERS GET THE RIGHT PERSON?

It is said that "dog is man's best friend."  The point is reversed in Stark County these days to read:  "Is man dog's best friend?"

It remains to be seen.

In dismissing former dog warden Evert Gibson last month, the current Board of Commissioners were saying that a predecessor board did not get it right in making Gibson the warden back in 2004.

But will this Board do any better?

Perhaps not.

Why would the SCPR muse such?

After all, they have over 100 applicants to choose from this go around.

Well, one has to be pessimistic because they managed to raise questions on filling a deputy dog warden position recently.  The ultimate hire turned out to be the stepson of former Commissioner Tom Harmon (resigned December 2, 2009).

The SCPR was incredulous when Commissioner Todd Bosley claimed to The Report that the hire had nothing to do with the hire being Harmon's stepson, and that Bosley had actually done a public service by lobbying for the hire and thereby saved the county from hiring someone not qualified for the job.

Not qualified for the job?

How did anyone get to serious consideration when over 30 people applied for the job?

Bosley blamed it on Gibson, saying that he had a handpicked person and only on prodding by the commissioners did the commissioners get more than one recommendation.

The SCPR is not buying.

Why not?

Because the commissioners could have rebid the job and would have gotten a new round of applicants.

Will the commissioners do better this time around?

The Report believes one has to be skeptical.

But we shall see.

There are over 100 applicants that will be considered by a Dog Warden Advisory Board (DWAB).  Lenny Cooper (a communications professor at Mount Union College) is president of the Board and says that he is in the process of the winnowing through the applications to come up with a list of, perhaps, as many as 10 for the commissioners to choose among for a "finalist" interview.

Right now the Board, composed of seven Stark Countians, is looking for a replacement of an October resignee (the veterinarian member) from the Board.

Moreover, he says that the DWAB plans to have its list of five to ten ready by the end of March.

The members of the DWAB include:

Dana Muntean  - Designs by Dana
Steven Swank  - Canton Police Department
Nanci Anderson Miller - American Heart Assoc.
Rosemary Hayne - Perry Local Schools
Sarah Roushe - Colonial Nursing Center
Len Cooper - Mount Union College

Hopefully the Dog Warden Advisory Board will do such a terrific job of narrowing the selection process so as to give the politicized Stark County Board of Commissioners (in the sense that they have to stand for election and as such solicit campaign contributions and campaign worker support) no wiggle room in terms of appointing a political connected person.

The SCPR will be paying close attention to the process and will be the community's "watchdog" so as to provide the Stark County public with the best possible selectee as the next Stark County Dog Warden.

MAY, 2011 DEM PRIMARY IN FULL SWING? HEALY TRYING TO FORCE A VOTE ON CHRIS SMITH WATERPARK ISSUE?

It is "political" game on for Mayor William J. Healy, II.  He is in a delightful side of this game.

Which side?

Answer:  either side.

At last Council meeting, he had Communications Director Adam Herman agitating various members of Council to force an "up or down" vote on Councilwoman Chris Smith's effort to get Council approval of using $495,000 in Ohio grant money to fund the building of some version of a waterpark in Smith's ward.

Why and "up or down" vote?

Because Healy wants to put prime 2011 opponent Councilman Bill Smuckler on record one way or the other on the issue.

Smuckler's "real" position is that the finances on the project are shaky and that a prudent councilperson would vote "no" on Smith's pet project.

However, if he votes that way, he has no hope at all that Smith and others representing "inner-city" wards will be neutral in a Smuckler/Healy primary in 2011.

His preference?

Keep the measure bottled up in committee and then he does not go on the record at all.

For Healy's part, he thinks he wins either way.

If the the project gets approved, he can say that it was his Administration that provided the heft to get the bill out of committee and up for the approving vote.

If the project gets voted down - even if Smuckler votes for it; Healy can and will say that the Administration tried.

So what will the Smuckler game plan be?

Keep Smith's measure bottled up in committee.

Will Smuckler's game plan work?

Probably.

Smuckler's key ally Greg Hawk is chair of the Finance Committee!