WILL THERE BE A STARK DEMOCRATIC PARTY PRIMARY TO DETERMINE THE PARTY'S NOMINEE FOR SHERIFF IN NOV, 2012?

 UPDATE - 06/18/2011 12:45 PM

ORIGINAL POST

The SCPR has been hearing for some time persistent reports that Jackson Township Chief of Police David Zink is considering a run for sheriff of Stark County as a Democrat.

He tells that he is being encourage to run by a number of Stark Countians.

Moreover, he tells The Report that he hasn't even approached Stark County Democratic Chairman Randy Gonzalez (who also happens to be Jackson Township's fiscal officer) because he is sifting through a number of criteria in coming to a decision of whether or not he will be running to replace long time Sheriff Tim Swanson (who has all but declared he will not be running for another term).

Swanson's preference as his replacement is Chief Deputy Rick Perez.  However, the political landscape seems to have turned against Perez because he appears to be perceived by many in the Stark County public to be a "card carrying member" of the Stark County "organized" Democratic Party's "good old boy" network.

Alternatively, Swanson seems to gone to an alternative.  That would Chief Deputy Mike McDonald who has taken out petitions to run.

Zink, who was appointed Jackson chief on March 26, 2010 and who has been a member fo the Jackson police force for about 27 years, says that in coming to a decision, he is:

• consulting with his family (wife and four children),
• surveying the receptivity of his running with the Jackson citizenry, and
• assessing whether or not he can raise sufficient campaign funds to be able to get his message out to the Stark County public.

What will that message be, if he decides to run?

Stark County needs to have more coordination and collaboration among the county's considerable number of police districts (township, villages, cities, and, of course, the sheriff's department).  Moreover, he looks to take measures to empower and enhance countywide law enforcement in the context of county financial stresses by pushing for the deputizing of all political subdivision police.

He sees the current countywide police function (i.e. the sheriff's department) to being too isolated - in terms of relationships - from the political subdivision policing units and, if he chooses to run and is elected, he would focus on changing the current model into one in which Stark's various police departments share services and equipment so as to eliminate duplicative efforts and redundant costly equipment.

He says that Mike McDonald cannot win because he is too closely tied to Sheriff Swanson and the inefficiencies and deficient collaborative modeling that has been exemplified by the Swanson run sheriff's department.

2012 may see to be far off.  However, unless the Ohio General Assembly decides to move the 2012 primary to May from its current March setting, candidates for the primary will have to file petitions in early December.

Accordingly, Zink only as about five months to make up his mind.

Stay tuned folks.  The 2012 primaries could get real interesting! 

Anothe possiblity for the Democrats - according to information The Report has been getting is Canton Safety Director Thomas Ream.

On the Republican side look for Hartville Chief of Police Larry Dordea to run for a second time for sheriff.  He lost to Swanson in 2008.

Dordea, a former Alliance police chief, is an Alliance city council member and is rnnning for re-election.

He to could have primary oppositon - The Report hears - from Canal Fulton Mayor John Grogan who is a lieutenant with the Summit County sheriff's office.

STARK COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FALL INTO STORM WATER "DRAINAGE DITCH" IN PERRY TOWNSHIP? DID THEY HELP OR HURT THEIR CHANCES TO GET A 0.5% SALES TAX INCREASE PASSED - COME NOVEMBER?

 

UPDATE:  CREIGHTON VIDEO REPAIRED

The Stark County commissioners have - of late - been lamenting the poor turnout at their series of 22 community meetings designed to:  (1) explain the particulars of the county's financial/fiscal crisis and, (2) to build up support for a sales tax increase of 0.5% they plan to place on the November ballot.

After Wednesday night's Perry Township meeting, they may be rethinking their dismay at poor turnouts.

About 30 Perry residents showed up at Perry Township Hall and for about 1-1/2 hours vented on the commissioners.  Nearly all the venting had to do with flooding/sewer backups that many Perry residents have been experiencing over the past ten years or so.  2011 has been a particularly rough year on Perryites.

So what is to vent on the commissioners about?

How about a near total breakdown in the county ditching system in and about Perry Township resulting in flooding and sewer backups in many Perry homes.

According to Stark County Engineering Department Hydraulics Engineer Gary Conner (who has been working on this problem for nearly 40 years), the ditches have not been maintained in a proper manner since the late 1970s.  He says that beginning in the 1980s Stark County commissioners have failed to make the needed investment in storm ditch drainage and that the inattention is a huge factor in why residents are experiencing flooding and sewer backups as never before.

Conner said that it would take $7 million to $10 million a year over ten years to solve Stark County's (which, obviously, includes more than the Perry Township ditching) to repair Stark's decrepit storm draining ditches.

Currently, Stark County is spending $100,000 annually on Stark's ditching problem which, of course, is not a maintenance program.  Rather, it is an "emergency" fund.  On Wednesday, Commissioner Creighton acknowledge that Stark County is in now way, shape or form prepared - financially - for a Katrina like catastrophe.

When the now deceased Mike Rehfus was county engineer (probably about the year 2007), he teamed up with then Stark County Commissioner Todd Bosley to implement Bosley's dream of spending $1 million a year on trying to catch up on Stark's deficit ditch cleaning and repair program.  According to Conner, the program last about a year and one-half until county financial pressure caused commissioners to strip about half of the money from ditching repair.  In implementing the program, the county engineer bought a couple pieces of equipment needed for the project and assigned two men to work on nothing put ditch projects.

Fast forward to June 15, 2011 at Perry Township Hall and you have "the perfect storm" of citizen complaints that, at times, seemed overwhelming to Commissioners Bernabei, Creighton and Ferguson.

The SCPR has prepared a kaleidoscope video of various attendees at the Wednesday night meeting to give readers of The Report a thorough sampling of the outrage visited on the commissioners.

Video #1:

VIDEO #2

The commissioners were not exactly shrinking violets.

In order:  first, Creighton, then Bernabei and lastly Ferguson here of videos of the commissioners' responses.

First, Creighton:

Second, Bernabei:

Third, Ferguson:

Particularly telling was an exchange between Commission Tom Bernabei and a resident in which the resident asked whether or not a voter passage of a 0.5% sales tax increase would provide enough money to fix the drain ditch problem?

Answer?  In a terse one word response, Bernabei said an emphatic NO!

So what is a realistic answer?

A Storm Water Utility!

A what?

A Storm Water Utility!!

What?

A Storm Water Utility!!!

 

As the Perry Township community meeting concluded, the Stark commissioners promised the assembled Perry citizens that they would investigate establishing a storm water utility for Stark County.  Moreover, they committed to working towards finding a solution to the flooding and sanitary sewer backup problems that residents are experiencing.

The question is this:  will the commissioners keep their promises?

They talk about re-establishing trust of the citizenry with county government.

It is on matters like these "is where the rubber hits road."

If they deliver, the beginnings of building trust will be at hand. 

If they don't, more alienation will build in.  

And future boards of county commissioners will experience even greater problems than the 2011-2012 Stark County Board of County Commissioners.

(VIDEOS: CREIGHTON, BERNABEI, FERGUSON & GREEN) COMMISSIONERS BERNABEI & FERGUSON (THE DEMS) BREAK RANKS WITH REPUBLICAN CREIGHTON ON PAY RAISE ISSUE. HMM?

The members of the current Stark County Board of County Commissioners like to say that their decisions have nothing whatsoever to do with politics/political philosophies.

But the fact of the matter is that Commissioner Janet Creighton is a Republican and widely advertises that she "is proud of it!"  Commissioners Pete Ferguson and Tom Bernabei are Democrats.

Ferguson - to the SCPR - comes pretty close to being non-political.  However, it would be a mistake to say that he does not have a political side to him. 

Bernabei - The Report says - is political to a point.  He certainly is a powerful force in Canton city politics having been elected councilman and law director (as a Democrat) over span of the last 20 years or so.  In order to be successful he had to have the blessing of local Democratic Party power brokers which includes organized labor.

But Bernabei has let it be known that he is his own man and it has become common wisdom that one (i.e. politically interested persons) do not want to press him too much to let political considerations enter into his deliberations on the likely prospect that  he has and will vent on an errant lobbyist (in a generic sense of the expression) big time.   Even local Republican Party operatives believe that Bernabei is a straight shooter.

Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II found out where politics kicks out with Bernabei.  He ended up firing Bernabei as his services director and chief of staff because he was a vocal critic of some of Healy's programs, policies and processes.

One of Bernabei's political philosophical sympathies is with organized labor.  While the SCPR does not believe that Bernabei consciously factors the politics of having a good relationship with unions into his decision making, it would be naive to think that philosophical empathy does not weigh-in at least in a latent sort of way.

On the other hand, The Report believes that Commissioner Janet Creighton - while not anti-organized-labor - certainly takes a harder look at unions than either Bernabei or Ferguson.

Here is a video of Creighton expounding on Mark Kvamme (Kasich economic development czar) and the frustrations that county commissioners are experiencing in their dealings with unions:



Last week Stark Countians witnessed Bernabei, Creighton and Ferguson being in lock-step in chastising the Stark County Veteran Service Commission (VSC - Robert Toth, director [he is paid about $100,000 per year]) for granting 3.5% and 5% raises to the Stark County department of government's 12 employees.  It has been a couple of years since VSC employees have had a raise.

These employees are unorganized types.  Moreover, the VSC gets its "earmarked" (0.5 of a mill of the county property tax) money funneled through the Stark County general fund.  The VSC is entitled to spend $3.5 million per year, if its board so chooses.  However, for the current fiscal year the VSC has budgeted only about $1.4 million therefore benefits the Stark County general fund about $2.0 million a year.

Yesterday, county commissioners had an executive session in which to discuss with Stark County Board of Developmental Disability (DD) officials whether or not the commissioners would approve contracts (two of them) whereby teachers, professional trainers and support staff (union employees) get a 2% raise over three years.  None of DD's money comes from the county general fund.

After the executive session, Creighton voted "no" on the contracts (2); Ferguson and Bernabei voted "yes."  Bernabei says that up to three to four days ago he was leaning towards voting "no," but that DD officials were able to convince him to change his mind.

Here is a video of the vote.  Creighton explains her "no" vote; Bernabei - his "yes" vote.



Bernabei denied to the SCPR that any affinity for or pressure from organized labor played any role in his vote. 

After the commissioners' meeting, Commissioner Bernabei expanded on his reasons for supporting the DD negotiated contract and addressed SCPR questions regarding his vote (as compared to his VSC position) sending a mixed message.  Here is the video of the extended remarks:



Last night the commissioners were at Perry Township for one of the twenty-two community designed to explain county budgetary problems and therefore the reasons why Stark Countians should support a 0.5% sales tax increase in November.  During the meeting a Perry resident has if the commissioners would promise that there would be "no pay increases" to county employees if the 0.5% increase were to be approved.

Answer:  "we can't make that promise."  Reason:  the commissioners appropriate.  They do not have the power to dictate to department heads whether or not they can give raises.

True enough.  But there is more to the story.

The commissioners divide over the VSC and the DD raises itself shows, even the commissioners disagree with one another depending upon the circumstances.

As The Report sees it, Commission Creighton has the correct take - in terms of sending a consistent message - (really the only power the commissioners have over pay raises).

Bernabei and Ferguson, however they describe their motivations, are indeed sending a "mixed message."

The SCPR believes that should the one percent sales tax be approved in November, voters should not be surprised to see other county department heads apply some of their post-sales-tax-increase appropriations to employee pay raises.

Such is a consequence of sending mixed messages!

Mixed messages or not, it appears that commissioners will be getting the enthusiastic support of the folks at Developmental Disabilities.  In the video which follows Superintendent and CEO Bill Green expresses his gratitude at the commissioners' approval action and gives his endorsement for the expected 0.5% sales tax levy that commissioners are expected to put on the November ballot.

STARK COMMISSIONERS ARE REALLY GETTING CONCERNED? COUNTY TO BE OUT OF MONEY FOR NON-CRIMINAL JUSTICE SERVICES IN ABOUT 6 MONTHS?

By the Stark County Political Report's calculation the Stark Commissioners have been out campaigning  since February 9th of this year (Plain Township community meeting).

And well they should be!

For two reasons:

1. They have an URGENT need to restore trust on the part of Stark Countians in county government, and
2. If they can convince Stark Countians to trust them, then they need to convince those who vote to increase the sales tax by 0.5%.

ON THE TRUST ISSUE

One sees this all the time from government officials.  When there is no self-serving need to be in touch with the electorate; they aren't.

Meanwhile, something like the Vince Frustaci scandal (re:  former Stark County chief deputy treasurer who stole Stark County taxpayer money) surfaces.

All of a sudden public confidence and trust in that branch of government (and in all accretive sense - all of government) nose dives.

Consequence?  Publicly perceived (rightly or wrongly) government officials that the public thinks could have or should have done such and such to prevent the problem cannot get elected dog catcher and requests for additional revenues (taxes) are non-starters.

A number of Stark County officials probably lost in 2010 (at least in part) because of the public perception of  "could have/should have" came out of the Frustaci scandal with.

On finances:  the Stark County commissioners have a herculean task to restore enough trust and confidence vis-a-vis the Stark County public as a consequence of  the Frustaci scandal.

Beginning in February, commissioners launched a "meet with the public" series designed to account to the public on county finances.  By the time they have concluded on June 30th in Marlboro Township, they will have conducted 22 meetings.

To what effect?

Highly questionable!

Why so?

Because very few Stark Countians have been attending these meetings.

Jackson Township produced the best turn out and the city of Canton (believe it or not) - the worst.  Maybe 25 or 30 attended Jackson.

How many in Canton?  ZERO!!!

One of the alarming this about the commissioners' series of community meetings (all of which were held in township halls or council chambers and the like), relatively few of local government officials attended.  And, it appears, absolutely none went out and encouraged their citizenry to attend.

Of course, if the 0.5% sales tax that the commissioners are certainly going to be putting on the November ballot goes down and county services for non-criminal justice matters are reduced to a skeletal level, who will all of a sudden get activated?

You've got it.  All those township, village, city and board of education public officials who could not get off their collective duffs and help the county commissioners in their endeavor to connect to and educate the public.

Commissioner Creighton sounds the alarm bells at commissioner meetings in suggesting that the finances of the county (if the 0.5% sales tax fails) could go so low that the treasurer's office may not have the personnel to collect/process property tax and other revenues that are due the county.  Moreover, the auditor's office - she suggests - may not have the personnel to do such things has process requests for advances (made commonly by boards of education) and payments to local governments.

Is this hype on Creighton's part?

The SCPR thinks so.  But maybe not!

At Monday's (this week) work session, Creighton initiated a request of Commissioners Bernabei and Ferguson that they join her in scheduling a meeting of virtually all of Stark County's public officials (including boards of educations, school treasurers and the like) so as to specifically confront them with the looming 2012 county fiscal crisis that she says will impact each and every one of them whether they are a village, city, county, township or board of education official.

No date has been set and on checking with Commissioner Creighton this morning there is some question as to whether or not such a meeting will actually be set up.

The Report thinks it should occur and local government officials made to face up to what is in the offing for them and their collective constituencies across Stark County.

The first of two hearings that are required by Ohio law for commissioners to hold is set for 1:30 p.m. Room 318 of the Stark County Office Building on June 21st (next Tuesday).

The Report expects a number of opponents to the tax increase to be present.  The exchange should be interesting and yours truly encourages Stark Countians to show up in great numbers.

Community activist and local attorney Craig T. Conley (a participant in the "Vote No Increased Taxes Committee" that successfully opposed retention - November, 2009 - of the commissioner [Bosley, Harmon and Vignos] imposed 0.5% increase of December, 2008) has told The Report that he opposes a 0.5% increase and is insistent that the county has not done enough to rein-in benefit costs at the Stark County Sheriff's department.

ON THE NUMBERS WHICH COMMISSIONERS SAY JUSTIFY A TAX INCREASE

The SCPR presents below a series of documents produced by the Stark County commissioners which give their version of how the finances of the county will shake out should Stark Countians.

(VIDEO) COMMISSIONER FERGUSON & NORTH CANTON MAYOR DAVID HELD COLLABORATING ON VETERANS HOME FOR THE DOGWOOD CITY. COULD MEAN THAT FERGUSON WILL BE RUNNING FOR SECOND TERM AS COUNTY COMMISSIONER.

 

At yesterday's work session of the Stark County Commissioners, Commissioner Ferguson shared with fellow commissioners Janet Creighton and Tom Bernabei the results of a meeting he had in Columbus last Thursday with Director Moe of the Ohio Veteran Services Commission, Mayor David Held of North Canton, state Representative Kirk Schuring (R-Jackson, the 51st) and state Representative Christina Hagan (R-Marlboro, the 50th) to explore the prospects for getting a veterans home located in Stark County.

The effort is an outgrowth of a letter generated out of the Cuyahoga County Veterans Service Commission which fell into the hands of Commissioner Ferguson.

As Commissioner Ferguson explains in the accompanying video, if the project is realized (and Representative Schuring says (to Mayor Held) that - if it happens - it will be at least three years in the making), then North Canton or wherever the home is eventually located could get up to 200 jobs.

The political significance of the timeline is that Commissioner Ferguson's term expires on December 31, 2012.  As readers of the SCPR know, doing something for military veterans has been a consuming passion with Ferguson.  The Report can't imagine that he would not want to remain to see this project through to the end.

Ferguson has worked hard disassociate himself from what fellow commissioner Janet Creighton has termed as being the "good old boys network" of the Stark County Democratic Party.  Should he seek re-election, which The Report believes he will, only then will Stark Countians know the full impact of the Frustaci scandal.

No Democratic official had any involvement whatsoever in former Stark Treasury Chief Deputy Vince Frustaci theft of at least $2.46 million (some believe to have been $2.96 million) in Stark County taxpayer money.  However, there may be a public perception that certain public officials (e.g. Kim Perez, Todd Bosley, Steve Meeks) did not exercise enough oversight to see to it that the possibility of a theft of public funds be eliminated.

Perez (for auditor), Bosley (for state representative) and Meeks (for county commissioner)  (thought by many to part of a Democratic officials "good old boy network") were soundly defeated in November, 2010 and one has to wonder whether or not a negative public perception as set forth above played a part in the outcome.  Bosley may have caught a double whammy because of his participation in imposing a 0.5 sales tax increase on Stark Countians in December, 2008.

Ferguson has been commissioner since January, 2008.  He was a member of the board that removed Gary Zeigler as county treasurer - August, 2010) under permissive authority of the Ohio Revised Code for the mere fact money was missing from the treasury even though Zeigler was completely exonerated of any involvement by county and federal prosecutors.  So his success or failure in 2012's election might well be dependent on whether or not in the public mind he was  part of the network as expounded upon above.

Here is the video of Commissioner Ferguson and Mayor Held speaking about the prospects of a veterans home for Stark County and specifically for North Canton.

APPARENTLY, REP. SCHURING (R-JACKSON) GETS NO RESPECT IN COLUMBUS? STARK COUNTY SUFFERS!

For many Stark Countians, they "can wait until the cows come home" before state Representative J. Kirk Schuring delivers on any promises of getting legislative action done for them.

It's not that Schuring does not try.  It appears however that he has so little regard of his fellows in the Ohio General Assembly (OGA - including his stint in the Senate) that despite being in the body (OGA) for over 16 years, he has relatively little to show for himself.

His "really big splash" in his legislative career which started in 1995 was in 2008 as he prepared to run against the state Senator John Boccieri for the 16th District congressional seat that, as a state senator himself, he tried to persuade his fellow legislators to place a constitutional provision (supposedly to fix or go a long ways towards fixing the unconstitutional funding of Ohio schools as found by the Ohio Supreme Court in the DeRolfe case).

At the time, the SCPR said it had absolutely no chance to go anywhere even if the OGA embraced it as one of John Boccieri's best political friends was none other than Governor Ted Strickland.  So, as for much of Kirk Schuring's legislative career, the effort was "political posturing, pure and simple."

On more mundane legislative matters (almost of the housekeeping variety) a oft used refrain that Schuring's constituents was likely to hear on their requests that he get legislation passed was:  "I'm working on it."

The SCPR has been a victim of Schuring in this regard.  The Report requested that Schuring get the OGA to amend campaign finance law to require local candidates to report the vocation/employer of contributors of more than $100.  Currently, only those deemed to be statewide candidates are required to do so.  The "local" exemption allows big local fundraisers like Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II to go out and get plenty of the $100 plus contributions and the public has no idea - in most instances - who these contributors are.

Well, after an initial flurry of activity and reports of rosy expectations, Schuring produced absolutely nothing.  At the time, yours truly was a constituent of Schuring because he was in the Senate.  Now that he no longer represents, forget it Martin!  Is that it?

The Report is not alone.  In doing the work of the SCPR, yours truly has heard many of Schuring's constituents (both in and out of government) say "well, you know, I asked Senator/Representative Schuring to get - such and such - passed and he tells me:  'I'm working on it.'"

On March 23rd of this year, the Stark County commissioners invited the Stark County legislative delegation into discuss working on ridding the county of "unfunded" mandates that seemed to be those that for the most part made no sense on being part of the Ohio Revised Code.

Representative Schuring took the lead on the request (the list compiled and articulated upon by Stark Court of Common Pleas Judge Tayrn Heath) and supposedly went to work on the list of 22 items).

A couple of weeks ago, The Report checked with county commissioners and Judge Heath and guess how many items on the list were taken care of?  One!

The Report contacted Representative Schuring and guess, just guess what he told yours truly?

You've got it!   He said "I'm working on it."

The SCPR has the list in hand and this is notice to Representative Schuring that someone is watching as to whether or not he gets this list taken care of.

The Stark County Political Report will not give him a pass.

Another person worth watching on this matter is Stark County Commissioner Janet Creighton.

So far in to her term as commissioner (almost six months now), she has impressed The Report that when she asks for things to get done she keeps track of her requests and publicly holds "the doer/doers" accountable.

The question is:  will she do so with Representative Schuring?

Here is a list of bills which Representative Schuring has sponsored in this legislative term.  They are all languishing in committee except for one which seems to be moving, to wit:  getting a license plate design for the Massillon Tigers.  Wow!

(VIDEOS 3: CIRELLI GRILLING HEALY, CARCIONE ON SAFETY, MORRIS ON SAFETY) ISSUE: IS MAYOR HEALY BY HIS STAFFING DECISIONS MAKING "UNACCEPTABLE" CHOICES IN PRIORITIZING CITY SPENDING?

At Monday night Canton City Council meeting the president of the Canton Firefighters union raised his voice in protest of the Healy administration's failure to take any of the money from $1.2 million in increased city income tax collections for fire and ambulance safety.

Here is a video of Carcione speaking:



Carcione was followed up by (to be councilman - 9th Ward) Frank Morris III who spoke to the issue.  A little over a week ago Frank's relative died as a consequence of stab wounds received in an altercation at a location about one tenth of a mile from Canton fire station 8.  However, due to cutbacks in staffing of fire stations, station 8 was closed at the time and a Canton policeman loaded the victim in his cruiser (after learning that there would be a delay of getting an ambulance to the scene) and transported him to the hospital where he died.

Here is a video of Morris speaking:



Mayor Healy gave a vigorous defense of his administration's staffing of police, fire and emergency personnel. Moreover, he defended his perceived need to raise the pay of key members (managerial types) of his administrative teams. Here is a video of the Cirelli/Healy exchange:




In analyzing the politics of the back and forth between the firefighters union and their allies on council and Mayor Healy (and Safety Director Ream), the key consideration is how the Canton voter wills side up on the controversy.

Do they expect and demand that Mayor Healy to the impossible? If he can't/dosen't, will they punish him in November when he goes up against Republican A.R. "Chip" Conde. If he senses that there is political "hay to be made," will Conde try to exploit the emotional factor to his favor irrespective of the whether or not Healy makes a persuasive case of the merits of the action he is taking?

The Healy camp is already campaigning, but it appears that Conde has yet to take the wraps off his campaign. Unless he gets up and moving in a big way what little chance the SCPR thinks he has will evaporate very, very quickly!