(VIDEOS: 3 CITIZENS, SCHULMAN, REAM) CANTONIANS "UP IN ARMS" AT LAST NIGHT'S CITY COUNCIL MEETING OVER RAMPANT CRIME PROBLEM & LACK OF POLICE RESPONSE! ALSO, THOSE 1,000 VXI JOBS: THEIR NOT ALL THEY ARE "CRACKED UP TO BE?"

The Stark County Political Report has come to expect the unexpected at Canton City Council.

Last night was no exception.

The tone at the meeting was a la Howard Beale in the classic movie Network (1976):  "I'm mad as hell and I not going to take this anymore."

The Report highlights three citizens who stepped up to the lectern each with his/her version, more or less, of being mad as hell.

First up, Mike Myers owner of "Your" Pizza Shop, 420 12th St., NW, Canton.  In his presentation, Myers relates the following:

• His business at Cleveland and 12th St NW  (Tom West's Ward 2) was robbed on Sunday, December 2nd,
• He feels like his business is located in a war zone (Myers is a 20 year Army veteran),
• "A week later [after the robbery], and [he] still has not seen a detective,"
• He's had to make calls to people in the Canton Police Department "because nobody is doing anything,"
• "We're not going to get people down [to downtown Canton] until we clean these streets up,"
• Anyone can get on YouTube and hear the exact same lyrics as being descriptive of how the robbery of his business on the 2nd went down,
• "The detectives don't have time for me because I'm just a little guy."

Here is Myers on video:



After Myers spoke, Mayor Healy immediately got up out of his chair and went to talk to Myers as well he should have.

As Cantonians know, when he ran for mayor in 2007, a main theme for him as a political issue during his campaign against incumbent Republican mayor Janet Creighton, was Zero Tolerance of crime in the Hall of Fame City.

Early on in his administration for non-specific reasons there was a dip in crime (at least according to FBI statistics) in Canton.  Of course, being the political opportunist the mayor is, he was quick to claim that the lesser crime numbers were because of his administration's improved policing over what existed in the Creighton administration.

After 2009, there is no mention by Healy on Canton's website about reduced crime in Canton on account of his administration's policing policy.

Now all we hear from the Healy administration on the obvious policing deficit is a series of excuses such as:

• there being a shortage of funds to hire policemen with,
• the loss of 200 beds at the Stark County jail due to the county's financial crisis of 2011 which means that many of those charged with crimes remained on the streets.

But those sound hollow in the light of what Mike Myers and others (including Ward 9 Councilman Frank Morris) are describing about police deficiencies.

Here is another video of Myers meeting with the press after the meeting and after he had talked to the mayor.



At the end of council meeting, Safety Director Thomas Ream made brief remarks on a Repository article which inaccurately stated the number of beds that were lost to area police agencies during Stark County's financial crisis in 2000 and also made a response to Myers' outrage.



Second up, Vicki Boatright owner of BZTAT Studios in the Arts in Stark district of downtown Canton.  Here is the gist of her statement:

• While she agrees with Mayor Healy that Canton has lured VXI and its 1,000 employees to downtown Canton directly across from her business is something to celebrate, there is another less attractive side to the matter, she says.  For example:
• having 1,000 people camped out on her doorstep,
• the employees "are anything but professional and loiter on Fourth Street across from [her] home,"
• "they are extremely loud and disruptive,"
• "they speak in vulgar terms" and she goes on to describe other offensive conduct,
• She makes the point that one cannot have 1,000 people located in a confined area without consequences,
• The consequence is that "there is a large, unruly crowd on Fourth Street every day,"
• She has spoken with management at VXI, with her councilman (Thomas West) and Healy administration employee Derek Gordon (in September); all to no avail,
• She doesn't want the employees gone but she does want their conduct managed so as not to be troublesome to folks like herself,
• She says that the behavior threatens to destroy downtown and perhaps drive other businesses away.

Here is the Boatright video:



Boatright did get a strong statement of empathy and support from Council President Allen Schulman.



But Healy?  Nothing!

Wouldn't want to offend VXI, heh?

Third up,  John Anderson, owner of Anderson's Flowers, 12th & Cleveland NW.  He was present to express concern about the experience of Mike Myers.



One can sense that more and more Cantonians are getting angrier and angrier, madder and madder and what seems to be the Healy administration's ineptitude at getting Canton's mushrooming crime problem under control.

The "politicizing" worm has turned on Healy and now he must "pay the piper" for having made it a political issue back in 2007 through 2009.

Cantonians increasingly are saying that they are mad as hell and they are not going to take it anymore!

The consequences?

Mayor William J. Healy's future political ambitions are in deep, deep trouble?

A CASE OF MISPLACED PRIORITIES?

It could be that Stark Countians are beginning to learn where state Representative Christina Hagan's (Republican - Marlboro) "legislative" heart lies.

Is her heart with people who are much more capable of fending for themselves or is it with folks who are struggling to make ends meet and are getting worked over by the payday lender crowd?

The SCPR notes that in October Hagan rolled out her public relations machine to bring attention to the fact that she was making fixing Ohio's securities laws a top priority.

Her announced motivation?

To put a stop to the likes of the $200 million investor fraud scheme uncovered about three years ago at the now defunct Fair Finance of Akron (Summit County).

"Fair enough" (no pun intended), but she fails to make the case that her initiative will do anything to stop a repeat by other financial schemers who will undoubtedly surface in the coming months and years in Ohio.

There is nothing preventive in her legislation.  All it does is:

• to provide for fining authority for those who violate state securities law, and
• to empower state government to recoup costs and expenses of investigations launched by state securities officials.

In her press release, she makes no case whatsoever that had her proposed legislation be the law of Ohio, let's say in 2008, that the Fair Finance debacle would not have happened.

Moreover, she is looking out for people who have some ability to protect themselves, that is to say, the investor class.

First, if something is "too good to be true," they should not be investing in the first place, and,

Second, this is discretionary money.  It is not money that the investors are using to live day-to-day.

But as far as Hagan's legislation goes, there is nothing wrong about it.  It seems to be all about self-promotion in a mode of "much ado about nothing."

What her introducing of this bill shows is that she is following a pattern she is obviously hard at work establishing of introducing bills that have very little "umph" to them in terms of "real" benefit to Ohioans but gets her mileage with lazy journalists who take officeholder press releases and publish them with very little, if any, analysis as to their import to the ordinary citizen.

The SCPR thinks that there are "bigger fish to fry" for Ohioans who are defenseless from the interests of powerful financial interests.

However, the class of Ohioans with a pressing need to be protected are from the debtor class.  Not exactly the people that Christina Hagan cares about.

These folks are among the most vulnerable to the predatory practices of some in the financial community and because they are at the bottom end of the Romney-described 47% cannot get the likes of Christina Hagan to look out for them.

More particularly, we are talking about Ohioans who, in order to make it from one day to the next, have the unfortunate need to use the services of payday lenders.

Tom Suddes of the Cleveland Plain Dealer (in yesterday's edition - LINK) provides an example of a deficiency in Ohio law that Ms. Hagan if she cares anything about "the down and out" would address pronto.

And, it is just not Hagan, but also other members of the Stark County delegation (Oelslager, the Ohio Senate - R, the 29th; Ohio House members Schuring - R, 48th; Slesnick D, 49th) to the Ohio General Assembly who ought to fixing the gap in Ohio law that allows some in the financial sector who would, if they can massage the legal loophole charge as much as 235.48% interest to borrowers who are struggling to "put food on the tables" that their children dine at.

Back in 2008, the Ohio General Assembly voted to curb predatory lending practices in Ohio but enacting House Bill 545 which capped the interest level at 28%.

That part of the financial industry spent about $20 million dollars to defeat that measure (LINK).

Guess who voted with those who opposed the 28% cap?

You've got it!

None other than John P. Hagan, father of Christina.  He represented the 50th (a little different configuration) from 2000 through 2008.

What's the saying?  "An apple does not fall far from the tree."  Hmm?

To their credit, Kirk Schuring (then in the Ohio Senate), and Scott Oelslager (then in the Ohio House) and Slesnick voted to impose the 28% cap, which, by the way, is not exactly chicken feed.

So now that we know that Christina Hagan is willing to impose government regulations, should we expect that she knows that the payday lending crowd is trying to use a "seeming" loophole in Ohio's mortgage-loan law to attempt the 235.48% smash-down on everydays struggling to get from week-to-week, that her next bill will be to shore up the mortgage-loan law?

The SCPR says "seeming" loophole in agreement with Suddes because the Ohio Ninth District Court of Appeals (sitting in Akron and covering Summit, Median, Lorain and Wayne counties) ruled 2 to 1 to limit the would-be predators to the 28% caps of House Bill 545 despite the industry's attempt to fit within the loophole of the mortgage-loan law.

Accordingly, the 28% caps is only the "clear" law in four of Ohio's 88 counties.

So Christina Hagan can do Stark Countians, and, indeed all Ohioans, good by getting busy lickety-split to introduce a measure to protect those least able to protect themselves to close that gap in the mortgage-loan law.

Will she do so?

Not likey.

Why not?

First, doing so will take disagreeing with her father in public.

Secondly, she has been the beneficiary of campaign contributions from the payday industry.

So it is likely safe to say that Christina Hagan's concern for shoring up deficiencies in Ohio financial law only runs so deep and it doesn't include the bottom of the run-of-the-mill American/Ohioan 47%.

From her pre-general campaign finance report filed with the Ohio secretary of state:

"DAPPER DAN" CANTON COUNCILMAN JIMMY BABCOCK WEIGHS-IN FOR KIM PEREZ FOR CANTON CITY TREASURER. NO SURPRISE HERE!

Revised and updated at 1:00 PM (re:  Young's living out-of-town status)

The SCPR has known Canton Councilman-at-Large Jimmy Babcock for about ten years.

Generally, one comes up with an initial overall impression of a public figure such as Babcock.  And the impression, either positive or negative, usually contains something substantive.

But for the life of The Report the only thing that stands out - even after 10 years - about this son of a former Canton mayor (Charles Babcock:  1958 - 1961) is a pretty irrelevant thing when it comes to evaluating his preparedness for public office: to wit, his impeccable dress, hence the graphic descriptor:  Dapper Dan.

Unless, of course, one counts as "standing-out," his political pedigree.  In addition to his father having served as mayor, his mother, Mary, served as a longtime Canton councilwoman.

Only the latter one (his political heritage) has any connection whatsoever to being a public official.  In the minds of many, being politically connected is a negative; not a positive.

But it appears that his political pedigree has gained him entre into the inner circle of "the good ole boy club," to the degree that it exists in the Stark County organized Democratic Party.

Babcock has run for office several times (including a run for mayor) and was unsuccessful until he finally clicked in the 2011 Democratic primary election.  He had no Republican opponent in the general election.

And as councilman, Babcock has not distinguished himself.  He barely opens his mouth in public sessions.

What comes to mind by way of analogy would be to coin a metaphorical expression that he is "the Clarence Thomas of the Canton City Council."

For those who do not follow national politics and government, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas merely sits by and listens to court arguments (rarely, if ever questioning the lawyers) as excruciatingly important issues of America are being argued.

In November, 2004, Democrat Kim Perez (formerly a Canton city councilman and auditor of Canton) ran for and defeated Republican Brant Luther (who was appointed to replace Janet Creighton when she decided to run for mayor of Canton) for Stark County auditor.

Apparently, one beneficiary of the political spoils that accrue to the winner, was Babcock.  He landed a job with Perez.  Obviously, one expects that Babcock remains closely allied with Perez even after Perez's defeat at the hands of Republican Alan Harold in November, 2010.

Recently, Canton treasurer Bob Schirack announced that he is retiring no later than December 31, 2013.

Perez and Canton councilman Greg Hawk (D - Ward 1) are two early entrants into the field of those who wish to replace Schirack.

The SCPR wrote a blog recently (LINK) touting Canton Chief Deputy Auditor Gary Young as being the most qualified person to become the new Canton treasurer.

Well, little did yours truly know that Councilman Babcock would take offense at The Report's enthusiasm for Young.

Not that yours truly cares one iota what Babcock, and, for that matter, Perez thinks.

So it was interesting that this past Monday right before the beginning of the regular Canton City Council meeting that Babcock would launch into an attack on yours truly.  And, it must be said, somewhat amusing.

"How dare you (implied) for not supporting Perez in his drive to become treasurer.  When you ran for office (in the early 2000s), we came to your fundraiser in Hartville.   We supported you and, now, how quickly you forget!" (paraphrase)

"Gary Young?  He doesn't even live in Canton."

And, of course, the answer to that point is that there isn't any reason why he couldn't relocate to the city of Canton proper.

It is not likely he would do that, The Report understands that.

But he is exactly the kind of guy that should be in charge of  the Canton treasury.

Babcock and others that The Report sees as being a part of the Stark County Democratic Party "good ole network" simply cannot believe that former associations fall by the wayside when one does the work that yours truly has taken up with the Stark County Political Report.

They are consummately caught up in that highly partisan political world they live in.   It is incomprehensible to them that some of us can jettison our partisan hats and look at and analyze the political landscape and political figures from a more or less objective perspective.

To the SCPR, this incident is a prime example of someone who refuses to understand that our political system is not intended to serve political parties and the personal stakes of those who staff them.

Rather our democracy is to serve the well-being of day-in, day-out citizens; not self-serving politicos.

So it was easy for yours truly to abandon involvement as a political partisan when it became obvious that for all too many of elected officials public service gets sacrificed to self-service.

Gary Young, as far as the SCPR is concerned (assuming he would be willing to move into the city) is the person who should - on the merits of his qualifications and job performance as chief deputy auditor for Canton - have the job as treasurer.

Young is much more in tune with public service than self-service.

Perez as Canton treasurer?

Kim Perez is a likable guy, but to The Report he does not have the gravitas to be the head of such an important office.

Republican Alan Harold defeated him in the general election of 2010, the SCPR believes, because the Stark County electorate perceived that he did not do enough in the way of raising alarm bells on signals to him that, perhaps, all was not right in the Stark County treasurer's office.

To The Report, Perez was a public official, in terms of yours truly's perception of his demonstrated approaches to the management of the county auditor's office, who was not fully engaged enough in the particulars of the office to have clear sense of the significance of incongruities of data from the treasury that came into the auditor's office which cried out for deeper analysis and more persistent and vehement action than Perez took.

The gist of the preceding paragraph is that the Perez style of management seems to the SCPR to be a "don't rock the boat" approach.

Alan Harold couldn't be more different in style than Perez.

To The Report, Harold is an excellent blend of characteristics of leadership that are both attentive to the smooth functioning of an office and to standards of strict accountability as to how an office is operated. Moreover, he has shown that he is not afraid to go public in a noisy way when he thinks the circumstances justify same.

Gary Young, in the view of yours truly, would function more like Harold than Perez.

An alternative to Young (should he not be interested, which is likely) would be Ward 1 Canton City Councilman Greg Hawk. 

Hawk has done a very effective job of scrutinizing some of the poorly thought out financial schemes of the Healy administration.  So much so that it is widely thought that Healy has been behind an effort to make Hawk ex-Councilman Hawk in the form of finding an opponent for him.  And his courageous stand likely cost him the chairmanship of the Canton council's finance committee.

Hawk's weakness is that he has not worked in a government office (except for a brief stint the Massillon clerk of courts office) and therefore would have a steep learning curve in getting acclimated to the job.   He has run his own business but that is not like running a department of government.

In addition to his unimpressive demonstrated history of managing the Stark County auditor's office, yours truly thinks that Perez is way too enmeshed in Stark County Democratic Party "good ole boy" politics to be an attractive candidate for the Canton treasury post.

And, The Report hears, that he has the unflinching support of Canton master politician Mayor William J. Healy, II.

Added to Healy's support is that of the seemingly quintessentially politically dependent James (Jimmy) O. Babcock who seem.

Of course, that makes sense.

Babcock is one of, if not, the most reliable "'yes for anything Healy," on council.

With his outburst against yours truly last Monday,  he indicates that he has taken on a role of being a prime Perez proponent.

If Perez succeeds in becoming Schirak's successor, can we expect political supporter Jimmy Babcock to find his way into employment in the treasurer's office?

Canton, more than ever before, needs leadership that is based on merit; not based on political connections.

It would really be a break for Cantonians if Young were to be interested in the treasury job and someone like Stark County Democratic Party Chairman Randy Gonzalez would get behind him "doing the right thing" for citizens like he did in leading the Democrats to make Republican Alex Zumbar Stark County's treasurer.

This time he would be supporting an eminently qualified Democrat.

And there certainly would be no problem whatsoever for the non-politician Democrat being elected in overwhelmingly Democratic Canton.

One final note.

Babcock cannot be reading SCPR blogs very closely.

If he had been, he would know how utterly idiotic is was for him to think that chastising yours truly would in any way affect how the SCPR is written.

What is going through that man's mind?

(EXTENSIVE VIDEO COVERAGE) EXCITEMENT BUILDING IN CANTON? "THE YOUNG TURK" COUNCILMEN BOND WITH CITIZENS TO "TAKE CANTON BACK" FROM THE THUGS, DRUG DEALERS & NEIGHBORHOOD BLIGHT!

FINAL UPDATE:  NOON (VIDEO:  COUNCILMEN INTERACT WITH CITIZENS)

UPDATE:  9:43 AM (VIDEO:  CITIZEN REACTION TO COMBINED WARDS 5, 7, 8 AND 9 MEETING)

UPDATE:  9:13 AM (VIDEO OF COUNCILMEN PRESENTATION POSTED)

THE BACKGROUND

Perhaps it has not yet dawned on them, but as the Stark County Political Report sees it,  the councilmen of Wards 5, 7, 8 and 9 of Canton City Council (Morris, Mack, Mariol and Fisher, whom The Report has dubbed as being "the young turks") have ignited a community action partnership with their constituents, indeed with all Cantonians, to drive the thugs, drug dealers and neighborhood blight out of the once great city of Canton and to "take Canton back" and refashion it into what it ought to be:  "a healthy, vibrant city" and a healthy place for the 47% to raise and nurture productive families.

A terrific thing about America is its heritage and legacy of being "a land of opportunity" for those who will roll up their sleeves and embrace daunting tasks.

About 75 Cantonians showed up at Canton City Council chambers last night to engage in a dialogue with Fisher, Mack, Mariol and Morris.

And the conversation, the SCPR believes, is an igniting spark that will over time spread the notion that folks can solve their own problems by working in partnership with others (government, the private business sector and community builders) in a thought out plan of action to achieve identified goals.

The SCPR took about one and one half hours of video last night.

What follows is a summary - the "keys" that occurred (documented by the video presented below that The Report has compiled).

THE KEYS

• From Councilman Frank Morris (bio LINK), the ninth ward:
• Purpose of meeting - "bringing the communities together."
• "to bring you [the citizens] together to tell us [the councilpersons] what we are supposed to be doing."
•  "to deal with nuisance properties [within the city of Canton]" which are the underlying cause of 90% of the crime which occurs in Canton's neighborhoods,
• to identify solutions to curing the underlying conditions which foster crime in Canton's neighborhoods,
• Introduces the remaining three "young turks" (of the group of four newly elected council men [November, 2011] tabbed by the SCPR as "the young turks) as being the point persons to work with the citizens of Canton to find solutions to the city's crime fostering problems,
• From Councilman Kevin Fisher (bio LINK), the fifth ward:
• What has been done to solve the nuisance/vacant property problem which creates conditions for crime to thrive in?
• Passage of a "Foreclosed Vacant Housing Ordinance,
• the bank title holding entities "to foot the bill," for dealing with depressed properties; not the taxpayers,
• Working out the particulars of getting the law enforced,
• The formation of Canton's land bank designed to target abandoned, dilapidated properties to be torn down,
• Canton could get as much as $4.3 million from state of Ohio/Stark County funding mechanism to tear down Canton's blighted properties,
• Would translate into demolition of some 660 houses (which is more than is on the current demolition list) by the end of 2013 on the condition that Canton can come up with some "creative financing" (e.g. the issuance of a city bond) for its share of a required local match for land bank funds,
• The coming together of "the young turks." How this coalition of newly elected councilmen came about, and,
• Lastly, Fisher leads into the introduction of the question of:  What is next?
• From Councilman John Mariol, (bio LINK) the seventh ward:
• The consequences (in part) of blighted neighborhoods for Cantonians:
• a 29% average property value loss since 2006,
• which represents a $450 million equity loss to citizens,
• about 1,100 homes in Canton need to come down which means that about a total of $7 million to $11 million in funding is needed,
• A goal for Canton has to be to stabilize property values and, indeed, to reverse value decline so that property value increase,
• Ideas on accomplishing the goal?
• the proposed demolition program,
• a program to promote home ownership and get away from Canton being a top-heavy rental property community,
• Canton has a huge inventory of foreclosed homes that need to be put back in productive (maintained) use.  How to do that?
• a downpayment assistance program?
• grants/forgiveable loan program?
• From Councilman Edmond Mack (bio LINK), the eighth ward:
• What can Cantonians do in a partnership way with Canton government "to turn Canton around?"
• take ownership of vacant land (through the Canton/Stark County land bank and Stark County "Interested Purchaser Program,") formerly occupied by blighted properties to maintain them and to put them to productive and creative use,
• be the "eyes and ears" of Canton government in the sense of identifying properties in their neighborhoods which are occupied and in use which are not up to code so that Canton can apply its tough "property maintenance code" to create a paper trail which makes ultimate remediation of problem property doable on a faster time track

VIDEO OF THE YOUNG TURKS' CONSTITUENT PRESENTATION:



 CITIZEN/CONSTITUENT REACTION

Of course, it one thing to present and it is quite another to motivate.

The Report's sense of the aire and tone of the meeting was that the councilmen:

• in describing Canton's problems in terms of it being a dying city, 
• in detailing what they have already started as partial remedies to what ails the Hall of Fame city and in enlisting the participation of citizens in being part of the solution,

made significant inroad towards making everyday Cantonians believers that they working with Canton government can be difference makers in turning Canton around from being a city in free fall to one that is pulling itself up by the bootstraps and putting itself on a upwards trajectory.

Here is a video of interviews done by the SCPR immediately after the combined Wards 5, 7, 8 and 9 meeting with citizens and their reactions/expectation coming out of the meeting:



CITIZEN/COUNCIL INTERACTION

Next, the SCPR presents the full video of the back and forth between Councilmen Fisher, Mack, Mariol and Morris that occurred last night.

Somewhere in the video, Councilman Morris relates to the audience that when he, Fisher, Mack and Mariol first showed up in council as duly elected and sworn-in members, the first advice they got was to be low key, quiet, don't make waves and therefore get reelected.

Sort of like another relatively new and young Canton councilman, that is to say Councilman-at-Large Joe Cole (the SCPR's assessment; not Morris'), no?

Most importantly, Morris states flat-out that he and his three fellows "have a plan, a vision" that Canton has not had to pull the once august city out of the mire of decline into viability and even, perhaps, a once again greatness.

However, these councilmen understand that they cannot do it alone.  That the need everyday citizens to join with them to get all of Canton City Council on board a well thought out "for the good of the citizens - not the politicians" systematic plan of rehabilitation.

In this spirit, the four novice councilmen exchanged viewpoints with their constituents.

An important thing that SCPR readers should focus on in viewing this video is that these councilmen are listening, evaluating and are totally open to changing their viewpoints on what look the specific of the plan of revitalization should take on as Canton city government moves forward in implementing the plan.

Here is that video.  It is "a must see" for anyone who cares about and/or  wants to be a part of the rehabilitation of the once great city of Canton.

NORTH CANTON COUNCIL "BRINGING THE HAMMER DOWN" ON ALL ITS CITIZENS AS A PRETEXT FOR DEALING WITH ONE?

Austin Carr, a former basketball star at Notre Dame and later with the Cleveland Cavaliers, likes to say when a Cavalier slam-dunks the ball through the hoop that the Cav has "brought the hammer down!!!

One has to wonder whether or not former North Canton Councilman Chuck Osborne is feeling like he is experiencing having the hammer brought down on him these days as he continues his civic work as a citizen "check and balance" on the actions of North Canton City Council.

Last week, as reported in the SCPR (LINK), North Canton Council trotted out newly council appointed law director Tim Fox at their regular weekly meeting to administer, in the opinion of The Report, the first hammer blow to Osborne to drive home the point that council was on a path to rein him in.

Council president Jon Snyder went to great pains to emphasize to yours truly that Fox's lecture (The Report's interpretation of Fox's exercise) on the proper rules of decorum for the Public Speaks portion of regular North Canton Council meetings was directed at everyone (including council members) in attendance and was not directed at Osborne.

The SCPR was skeptical of Snyder's claim when made and there has been a development since the meeting of November 26th that heightens The Report's skepticism.

Apparently, some on North Canton Council got anew-exercised about chronic critic Osborne (going back at least 10 years) upon reading in area media that Canal Fulton had been sued by Canal Fulton community activist Michael Mouse for what he claims to have been violations of his person and rights (First Amendment) by certain Canal Fulton council, fire and police officials.

In hindsight, the SCPR is beginning to wonder whether or not council's run through a number of law directors in recent years doesn't have something to do (at least in-part) with former directors' seeming inability to aid them in developing legal strategies to mute Osborne's civic activism.

Like such is an appropriate goal for legislative councils in democratic America?

And, of course, the current director (Fox) has had first hand experience (from a council perspective) in having to deal with Osborne.

Having "shared in their pain," could it be that Fox has Osborne under special scrutiny all to the delight of council members?

Now to the additional development heightening the SCPR's skepticism of Snyder's claim.

On or about November 20th, Osborne sent out a "public records" request to various Stark County municipalities (including North Canton) like this one to Massillon:

To which Massillon responded thusly:

In Massillon, an administrative clerk for council responds and fulfills Osborne's request.

But North Canton?

Not so simple.

From North Canton, Osborne gets a response from Fox:

Hmm?

"[Does] not appear," "If you wish to restate your declaration into a request for reasonably identifiable records ... ."

Hmm?, again.

So Fox chooses to make "a federal case" out of a simple request for information?

Citizens can get on-file "written" records but not information that exists "electronic" form somewhere within the bowels of North Canton government?

How unimpressive that Fox would take the time to pen such a response (which, of course, is an "opportunity cost" to be doing other more productive work [in the opinion of yours truly] for the taxpayers of North Canton.

Hmm? a third time.

Osborne tells The Report that he will play the game with Fox and council and he will refashion his request to deal with Fox's obvious and marked effort to be difficult.  For Osborne there is nothing new about this technique.  He says it has been ongoing for years with various North Canton officials.

The SCPR has not known much about Tim Fox other than his published bio.

Having talked to him "off camera" (at his insistence) after the November 26th council meeting, The Report is getting the impression that he is imperious sort of guy.

In that conversation, he out-of-the-blue volunteered to yours truly:  "I am a tough person."

Wow!  What brought that on? A mirror-image of what yours truly has heard from at least one North Canton councilperson.  Interesting, no?  

And, to boot, such is a strange attitude for public officials who are, in our democratic system, to be open, accessible, transparent and communicative, no?

Fox went on describe his role for council as being a kind of shelter from having to take tough positions on dealing with citizens of North Canton in the context of talking about the rules for Public Speaks.

Councilpersons are elected officials and they have to walk a fine line between keeping order and decorum at public meetings on the one hand and not being brusque, perhaps even rude and insulting, on the other in enforcing rules of procedure.

The Report believes that Fox has gotten the idea from council members that a primary function for North Canton legal counsel is to be "the cop on the beat" and thereby help them avoid the messy business of managing democratic forums.

And The Report takes the position that if the "cop on the beat" assessment accurately portrays council's attitude; council is making a huge mistake in terms:

• of chilling the exercise by citizens of the U.S. Constitution First Amendment Right and, of course, 
• of placing roadblocks in the way of the  expectation that many in the public have that citizens will endeavor to become as informed as possible before taking civic action.

So what profit was there to the democratic integrity of North Canton governmental processes for Fox to be difficult with Osborne in his quest to be a fully informed decision?

Sorry, Council President Jon Sndyer, but the SCPR believes Fox is taking his cues from council and, accordingly, council is making Osborne (based on the recent evidence cited taken in the historical context of Osborne/law director/council relationships) a special case.

The Report further thinks that North Canton's using the Canal Fulton situation as a justification for reformulating the ground rules for public interaction with council is more pretext than squaring up with real concerns.

From the SCPR's perspective, there are few in any of the current lot of North Canton councilpersons who have or have had (for those who have been around for a while) the skills to deal with the likes of a Chuck Osborne.

While Daryl Revoldt was council president, he demonstrated that he was willing to engage/embrace the messiness of democratic institutions and managed to maintain control notwithstanding a number of run-ins with Osborne.

Shucks!  On one occasion he had Osborne removed from council chambers when he felt that he had gotten out-of-hand.  

Did he like having to do so?  Of course, not.  But was Osborne welcome back at the next meeting of council to participate in accordance with the rules administered judiciously and generously at the hand of the skilled former council president.

Revoldt was not interested in sacrificing our treasured right to redress grievances of government in the context of First Amendment expression because of a temporary disruption or discomfort.

It appears to the SCPR that North Canton Council is embarked on a course of action that is not consistent with America's democratic-republican values.  

It appears that council is trying to systematize procedures of democracy and thereby corral Osborne.

But democracy is person-to-person, citizen to government, and government bureaucratization of channels of communication stifle citizen participation and involvement.

There is no doubt to the SCPR that Citizen Osborne can be a proverbial "pain in the _ss."  But such is what one has to be at times when pursuing civic causes.

There is no doubt that council is smarting from Osborne having lucked on to an issue which resonated with the North Canton voting public.  By North Canton's initiative ordinance procedure, he convinced about 80% of voting North Cantonians at last month's general election that the taxpayers should not be paying (for future councils, being part-time) for members' health care benefits.

Now, from council's perspective, this is serious stuff.  

His citizen activism is getting into their pocketbooks.

Now they have to figure out a way to raise salaries ($4,800 per year) to offset the loss in benefits, no?

That could prove politically difficult to do.

So The Report believes that what appears to be "bringing the hammer down" could well be grounded in some comeuppance.

The Report has gone round and round with Osborne a number few times.  In fact, he has been the subject of several critical blogs.  But it never occurs to yours truly that he should be discouraged in his civic pursuits.

While the SCPR has and will continue to take exception to Osborne (like yours truly does with nearly everyone (at one time or another) in the course of writing this political blog, Chuck Osborne and all his ilk make a very important contributions to the health and well-being of our democratic institutions.

Accordingly, North Canton Council needs to in the name of promoting democratic values to back off of what seems to the SCPR to be a resurgent "bring the hammer down" mentality.

(A "DO NOT MISS" VIDEO) CANTON SERVICE DIRECTOR "TO MAKE A POINT" DRINKS RUST COLORED DRINKING WATER THAT CAME OUT OF A 41ST STREET CANTON HOME SPIGOT!

For the nearly five years that yours truly has published the Stark County Political Report, the "unexpected" has become the "expected."

Back on September, 2010, the SCPR camera captured Minerva Councilman Phil Davison going bananas for the Republican Party in his presentation to the Stark GOP executive committee in his quest to become the party's nominee to replace the-then former Stark County Treasurer Gary Zeigler (whom the Ohio Supreme Court found later to have been unconstitutionally removed from office by the sitting Stark County commissioners).

As we all know, that video when "viral" on the Internet.

Being the "committed to a free press" organization it is, the Stark GOP (through sending an emissary to the SCPR, yours truly believes) tried to get the Davison video suppressed (fat chance of that happening) and then later "banned" the SCPR from bring the SCPR camera to local party "public" events.

But here the question is:  whether or not the SCPR captured another video worthy of going viral?

Perhaps.

Last night at Canton City Council, Councilwoman Mary Cirelli brought to the attention of Canton Service Director and Chief of Staff Warren Price a incident in which she experienced what many of us would think to be at least in a cosmetic sense "undrinkable water."

Here is a video of Cirelli's description of how she came on her "undrinkable water" find:



Inasmuch as Canton Water Department Superintendent Tyler Converse was not present at the meeting, Councilwoman Cirelli (who brought a bottle of the discolored water with her to the council meeting) asked Price to bring the issue of Canton's water quality to Converse's attention and, to boot, to pass on the bottle of water to him.

Not only did Price promise to do so, he one-upped what Cirelli requested and to everyone's astonishment took a swig of the unappetizing water.

Here is that "do not miss" video:



To his credit, Price in addition to engaging in some "tasteful" humor in dealing with Cirelli's concern went beyond the fact of the "discolored water" to explain in a thumbnail fashion Canton's relatively long history of having been plagued by discolored but drinkable water and what he plans to do in remediating the problem with a "real" fix.

As Price explains in "the rest of the story" included this blog at the end, this problem has been around decades in Canton in various pockets of the city.

What would be done in the past (this is a classic example of how governments do not "really" fix problems, they apply band-aids), is for city workers to flush lines periodically which, of course, would clear up the water for temporary periods of time.

Well, this "band-aid approach" to fixing problems is costly and in the winter time was not doable because the flushed water would freeze and present safety hazards to those driving through affected neighborhoods.

For the SCPR's part, Warren Price may be the most conscientious and thorough (in terms of finding real solutions) of all of Canton's appointed city officials.

It is a guy like Price and a few others in the Healy administration that enables Canton to get by.

He is not the consummate politician that his boss is.

While he may not have the charisma that Healy has, Price strikes the SCPR as a "blue-collar" sort of guy who does not try to mesmerize one with "splash-and-dash" style that Mr. Cosmopolitan Mayor Healy embraces but who merely gets the job done and done in a competent, realistic, and thorough manner.

On thinking about it, Price should have been on the SCPR's Thanksgiving Day list of local officials to be thankful for, a status that Price seems deserving of.

And, Mayor Healy, should daily thank Price and the few others in his administration for a job well done and thereby keep Hizzonher's head above - can I say it? - water.

Oh! that a guy like Warren Price were mayor of Canton rather than William J. Healy, II.

For those readers who care about a public official owning up to a problem and going about fashioning a realistic remedy, here is the "rest of the story" on Canton's discolored water problem:

STARK COUNTY STAGNATES BECAUSE WE HAVE NO "BULLY PULPIT" LEADERS?

Has President Barack Obama finally figured it out?

Perhaps?

If he is going to get his "it" (raising taxes on the richest 2% of Americans, while maintaining current tax rates for the middle class), he going to have to do something other than negotiate with "the Beltway politicians."

Because he emphasized this issue above all others in his recent win over Mitt Romney, he believes he has a mandate from the American voters to get his campaign's main issue enacted into law.

But he knows that the legislative politicos in Washington are highly skilled and adept at taking a matter with the clear support of the American people and remaking it unrecognizable or filibustering it out of existence.

So, the president is back out on the campaign trail pushing for manifested public support directed at Congress to move it towards passing his tax increase/expenditure plan as he has proposed it.

Last Friday, Obama showed up a Pennsylvania toy factory apparently continuing his campaign to rally supportive Americans to inundate Congress with telephone calls, faxes, face-to-faces in support of the president's proposal.

The president is practicing "the art of the bully pulpit:"  

A bully pulpit is a position sufficiently conspicuous to provide an opportunity to speak out and be listened to.

This term was coined by President Theodore Roosevelt, who referred to the White House as a "bully pulpit", by which he meant a terrific platform from which to advocate an agenda.  (Wikipedia)

At the presidential level of politics and government, the art has a history.

But, by and large, not at the local government.

At the state level, how can one forget Governor James Rhodes and his constant preaching that his agenda was "jobs and progress."

As one who lived through the Rhodes administrations, it seems that practically every time he gave a speech or was interviewed, in one way, shape or form, he worked in his "jobs and progress" theme in his back and forth with the Ohio people.

But he has been the only one at the state level that yours truly can recall as having employed a form of "the bully pulpit."

At the Stark County level the SCPR cannot give any example of a local politician or public figure who has the charisma and drive vis-a-vis the people to attain being a compelling voice that people listen to.

The closest The Report can come to anything resembling a bully pulpit-esque crusade is the 20 year or so effort by Jackson Township fiscal officer Randy Gonzalez to get a "state of the art" 9-1-1 emergency call/dispatch program up-and-running in Stark County.

After years of evangelizing for an improved 9-1-1 (which a September 25, 2007 Stark County Council of Governments' commissioned report termed as "broken) in 2008, it appeared that Gonzalez had caught a break.

As it turns out ill-advisedly, in 2008 a (the-then) commissioner Todd Bosley (a surprising victor over incumbent commissioner Richard Regula in 2006) figured that picking up on rehabbing 9-1-1 was his path to Stark County political stardom and a future that seemingly would have no limits.

He got behind a plan to fund a 9-1-1 in which he convinced his fellow commissioners Tom Harmon and Jane Vignos "to impose" a 0.5% sales tax on Stark Countians which these commissioners  approved on December 30, 2008.

It was like manna from heaven for the long-suffering 9-1-1 advocate Gonzalez.

But as we know now, the "imposed" part of the financing of the 9-1-1 was not a smart idea inasmuch as less than a year later (the November election, 2009) Stark County voters overwhelmingly rejected having the tax imposed.

As a consequence of the ill-fated Bosley drive to get money for improving 9-1-1 (the tax also included monies for the Stark County general fund, a fact that was not emphasized by Bosley et al), Gonzalez was closer to realizing his dream that one day Stark County will in fact have "a state-of-the-art" 9-1-1 system.

His major barrier these days towards achieving his 9-1-1 goal is Stark County's premier political bully, namely, Mayor William J. Healy, II of Canton.

To his credit, Gonzalez is sticking to his advocacy and in doing so has achieved, in the view of the SCPR, a glimmer of approximating using the "bully pulpit effect" to achieve his objective.

But emphasize "glimmer."

Gonzalez as head of the Stark County Democratic Party primarily works in "out-of-the-public-view" circles.

He only achieve shades of the "bully pulpit effect" because as a political figure he does not capture the imagination of the Stark County public.

Day-in, day-out citizens getting activated, motivated, and besieging elected officials are the key ingredient to compelling the politicos to do what they are not otherwise disposed to do.

They are not his constituents.

His support, to the extent he has any, comes from a smattering of elected  Democrats and those public officials/employees across Stark County who believe in his project largely out of self interest (i.e. police, fire and EMS types).

Bosley could possibly have been that "persuade the public voice,"  but he had the fatal political flaw being seen as more a manipulator of the people for his personal political interests rather than being perceived as "a man of the people" genuinely looking out for the well-being and interests of Stark Countians.

Stark County really does not have any elected official or other public figure that commands the attention of the electorate.

We have no E.F. Hutton that everyone listens to.

The SCPR believes that if the county is to emerge from doldrums and oblivion that it currently rests in (the 2011 sales tax increase is just a "treading" financial water measure), someone is going to have:

• to emerge who has:
• good ideas,
• effective communication skills (i.e. ability to use "bully pulpit" skills), and
• projects an authentic, genuine concern for everyday Stark Countians,
• to advance a worthy cause (e.g. a comprehensive economic development plan) that captures the imagination of electorate.

Will that person please step forward with a cause for the betterment of Stark County?