MASSILLON'S "DIVIDER-IN-CHIEF" WORKING POLITICAL MAYHEM IN MASSILLON CITY COUNCIL?

UPDATED:  10:30 AM

Scott Graber sent in this clarification of his role in Edward Hampton having filed to run in Ward 4, to wit:

Point of Order: 

[Q]u[i]nessa agreed that it was wise to have Ed file as a backup in case the DoDd 1344.10 did apply to her. 

You can see the date of this clarification from Brig Gen Harris came only on May 1, which was 5 days before filing deadline (May 6 Primary election)
Qu[i]nessa and Edward made the decision and I do not claim anything.  I advised them on what they could do. 

[T]hey did it on their own judgement and initiative, and I would appreciate it if you report it that way sir. 

Scott

UPDATED:  09:45 AM

Traditionally, Labor Day is the first day of intense and purposeful political campaigning.

And this year Labor Day is early: September 2nd.

Beyond the beginning of Campaign Season - 2013, the end of it all is a mere 76 days away.

In Stark County, the question is where within the county will "the most raucous" and "the most 'at-stake'" election contests will be taking place?

For the SCPR's part, the answer is:  the ward races in the city of Massillon.

And the hottest spot in Tigerland is Ward 4.  This ward is the Democrats strongest ward in terms of registration majority.

As readers of this blog know, Massillon Democratic Party politics are the personification of humorist Will Rogers statement:  "I belong to no organized political party, I am a Democrat."

You have:

• the Francis H. Cicchinelli, Jr. Wing of the Massillon Democratic Party,
• the Johnnie A. Maier, Jr. Wing of the Massillon Democratic Party, and
• the John D. Ferrero, Jr Wing of the Massillon Democratic Party

Must be something about the "Junior" factor, no? (lol)  Or, perhaps, something in the water?

The center of the "faction fight" is within the six wards of Masillon.

Only Ward 3 Democratic councilwoman Andrea Scassa is escaping the political mayhem this time around.

And who is the main actor in perpetuating the "faction fights" this election go around?  

For some Massillonians, the provocateur is Maier, Jr. who serves as the city's clerk of courts.

Hence this blog's title suggesting that he is viewed as a "divider-in-chief" in Massillon politics.

The SCPR would not for a nanosecond argue the point.

Interesting in that he does not live in Massillon.  He has lived in Tuscarawas Township for years.

It is more than likely that Maier, Jr. in concert with his political appendage Shane Jackson (who also serves as his clerk of courts chief deputy making a higher salary than Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry) are engaged in an initiative to produce some support on Massillon City Council for the mayor.

Nearly all of the current council opposes - to one degree or another - Catazaro-Perry on controversial issues that come before council.

If this trend continues with the new council to be elected this fall, it is becoming increasingly obvious that Catazaro-Perry will be a "one term and done" mayor.

A focal point of the Maier faction's effort will be in Ward 4.

Back on May 10th, the SCPR broke a story to the effect that the-then relatively newly appointed (February) Quinessa Hampton might be forced out of the November election because of questions of compatibility on her being in the military and a politically-identified (i.e. a Democrat councilperson) public official.

By all accounts, Quinessa has served effectively in her short stint as councilwoman (she recently resigned) and, most importantly, being her own person.

This is what Councilman Milan Chovan says about Quinessa:

It's a shame [her resigning] because I really like working with her.  She thinks for herself.

In light of Hampton's resignation, the Massillon Ward 4 Democratic Central Committee met on August 8th and selected Shaddrick Stinson to succeed her as the ward's councilperson and, of course, to be the Party's standard-bearer in the November 5th election.

The Report does not know precisely who participated in the August 8th selection conclave, but does know that former Massillon mayor Frank Cicchinelli's wife was not among those assembled.

A source indicates to The Report that Stinson appears be the handpicked candidate of Maier, Jr. et al because those (thought to include at least Greer and Townsend) controlling the vote are politically aligned with Maier.

Although Ward 4 is a bastion of Democratic strength according to a SCPR analysis of Ward 4 voters identifying themselves either as a Republican or Democrat, The Report sees that the "unthinkable" might actually happen in Massillon:  a Republican, Jim Triner - who lives in The Legends residential complex of the 4th which is also home to former Massillon mayor and avowed Catazaro-Perry/Maier, Jr. political enemy Frank Cicchinelli -becoming councilman-elect for the 4th.

Triner's precinct (4D) is decidedly Republican.  Moreover, the SCPR thinks that many Democrats in 4D will vote for him this fall.

Can you imagine, for instance, Frank and Joy Cicchinelli voting for Maier ally Stinson?

They have to be thinking that he is a Maier, Jr. stand-in through and through, no?

In what is evolving into a sort of political irony, The Report has received indication that Hampton seemingly believes that the Cicchinellis (at least tangentially) were somehow involved in the military putting pressure on her to withdraw her candidacy for election Ward 4 councilperson as a follow up to her having been appointed.

The Report says "seemingly" because Hampton was told in an April meeting with the mayor that a person (who Hampton did not name) had told Catazaro-Perry that she could not defeat Republican Triner in November.

The Report thinks that the "person" well could have been either Johnnie A. Maier, Jr. or Shane Jackson.

Yours truly is skeptical of any suggestion, if she making it,  that the Cicchinellis had anything to do with the military getting after Hampton for holding a partisan political position.

It is likely that the Maier group originally supported Hampton's appointment (by the Ward 4 central committee in February) but got nervous about the military question and her continued political viability and got squeamish about continuing to support her.

Hampton rejected the mayor's offer of help to keep her on council.   Such was likely "the straw that broke the camel's back" in terms of the mayor and her political support group staying the course with the councilwoman while she endeavored to convince the military that she should be permitted to remain in the military and remain as councilwoman.

For if she failed in her endeavor, Democrats were left with no choice but to get behind Quinessa's husband Edward running as a nonpartisan against Republican Kriner.

By the way, Massillon political gadfly Scott Graber credits himself with having advised Edward Hampton that he could take out and file petitions when his wife's troubles staying in office surfaced.

Moreover, it appears that Graber has been a confidant and political adviser to Quinessa all along.

Isn't that interesting.

The Report is told that Edward is a political unknown within Ward 4.

For political pros like Maier and Jackson, the prospect of losing in Ward 4 would be unbearable.

Look at those numbers (in the above graph) of declarants in precinct 4D: 410 strong! compared to Ward 4's other precincts.

And these "on the higher end of the economic spectrum" voters vote in much greater numbers than those of lower socioeconomic area that constitutes the rest of the 4th.

The SCPR feels that volume of voters and their commitment to actually vote bodes well for Republican Triner.

The Report believes that Edward Hampton will take enough votes away from Stinson in precincts A, B and C to facilitate a Triner win.

Triner will undoubtedly get all of Ward 4's Republican votes, some Democratic votes (e.g. the Cicchinellis and other 4D Democrats) and likely the lion's share of "independent" voters in 4D in enough volume to make it highly possible he wins overall in the ward.

Massillon's Republicans have a double-pronged incentive: to put a Republican in council from this thought to be sure-fire Democratic ward, and to hang an election defeat on the Johnnie A. Maier, Jr. faction of the Massillon Democratic Party.

What happens in precinct 4D could have a huge impact in the make up of Massillon City Council.

Currently, the GOP has a 5 to 4 majority.  A question is, can they maintain it into the 2014/15 term? Winning in Ward 4 would go a long way with the Republicans continuing to control.

The Report's current analysis is that:

• They are likely to win in Wards 2 and 6 because of the personal political strength of Nancy Halter (a former councilwoman a number of years ago) and Ed Lewis IV who The Report believes is being groomed by the Republicans to run for mayor in 2015,
• Note 1:  Yours truly has learned that John Ferrero is supporting Halter for re-election in Ward 2,
• Note 2:  The Report hears that Lewis is being mentored by Republican Stark County commissioner Janet Creighton.  
• Note 3:  Although the registration numbers show a 60/40 majority Democratic, Lewis beat Dave McCune.

• They have a shot at Ward 1 in re-electing Cunningham-Hedderly because the ward has the most voters identified as being Republican of all of Massillon's wards.  
• Note:  The numbers indicate a 51% to 49% registration edge Democratic which is close enough so as to indicate a competitive race,  
• Note:  The problem with Republican Cunningham-Hedderly winning is named Mike Loudiana who was Frank Cicchinelli's service director and previously served on council and thereby has proven vote getting ability,

The formula for the Republicans maintaining their control of Massillon council is to win in 1, 2, 4, 6 coupled with the certainty that they retain Milan Chovan's at-large seat.

With Donnie Peters, Jr. not running for re-election and the Democrats holding a 60/40 party declared registered voters edge, it is virtually certain that the John Ferrero, Jr supported Megan Starrett wins in Ward 5.

There is no doubt in the estimate of the SCPR that former Massillon City Schools superintendent Al Henon will win as council president.  However, that only helps the Republicans if there happens to be a tie in a council vote.

In terms of the political stakes to Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry, the upcoming election offers little solace.

Even if her Maier led support base surprises us all and defeats Halter in Ward 2, Lewis in Ward 6 and elects Stinson in Ward 4, she ends up with a grand total of three reliable votes out of nine and still will be unable push her agenda through council.

All the introduction of three solid votes for Catazaro-Perry will prove is that Massillon's relatively harmonious city council is no more.

Moreover, some Massillonians will undoubtedly think that Johnnie A. Maier, Jr. will have succeeded in becoming Massillon's "Divider-in-Chief!"

CONFIDENCE ABOUNDS IN STARK COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AS THEY SELECT "FUNDAMENTALLLY SOUND" MANAGERS TO DO THE PUBLIC'S BUSINESS

BUT WILL THEY DELIVER IN THEIR SELECTION OF A NEW STARK COUNTY DOG WARDEN?

TOPICS DISCUSSED

A FINAL SOLUTION

FOR

STARK COUNTY DOG POUND PROBLEMS

---------------------------------------------------------------------

THE COMMISSIONERS'

TRACK RECORD

IN

MAKING

NEW MANAGEMENT HIRES

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATED: 8:33 AM

Today and tomorrow the Stark County commissioners will be interviewing candidates to become Stark's next dog warden.

Yawn, no?

As it should be.

Except in Stark, going back maybe as much as ten years, it hasn't been a yawn.

Management of the Stark County Dog Pound (SCDP - Pound) has been one huge problem for a number of prior Stark County boards of commissioners.

Current commissioner Thomas Bernbei told the SCPR last Wednesday that having an effective operating Pound is important and acknowledged that Stark Countians are no different than folks across the nation; they want and expect government to get the job done.

His consternation is abundantly clear that prior commissioners had not been able to get a handle on proper management of the SCDP is amazing in terms of the small part that Pound operations occupies when compared to the overall scope and responsibilities of county government.

Commissioner Janet Creighton cited to the SCPR a number of improvements (not all) that the current board of commissioners have made at the Pound, to wit:

• A new heating, air conditioning and ventilation system,
• The creation of a veterinarian examination/treatment room,
• The introduction of pads into the cages to make walking around in them much more comfortable, 
• Working closely with the dog warden (Reagan Tetreault) from the time they (Bernabei and Creighton were elected in November, 2010) took office to institute needed management and personnel changes

Tetreault resigned (having come on board in May, 2010) effective August 9th.

Creighton credits Tetreault with having stabilized operations at the Pound and having been a driving force to institute better conditions.

SHAPING UP STARK COUNTY'S MANAGEMENT SKILLS, IN GENERAL

Moreover, Creighton sees the selection of a replacement warden as being an opportunity for she and her fellow commissioners to put their concept of leadership qualities in place.

During the time that the SCPR has covered the Stark County commissioners (since March, 2008), yours truly has seen, with the current set of commissioners, a marked upgraded change in the manner in which commissioners evaluate and select management level employees. 

When they interview, they make a point of having someone with "expertise" in the field (e.g. an experienced human resources person when they hired a county human resources lead person) in which an appointment is being contemplated.

While The Report does see that there does seem to be a political affinity factor (with Commissioner Creighton) regarding some of those selected as hires (e.g. well known Republicans Brant Luther [he actually worked for Creighton when she was county auditor, and, in fact, succeeded her as auditor as the Stark County GOP appointee] as chief county administrator and Canton Township trustee Chris Nichols as director of management and budget); both appear to be well qualified for their jobs and to be doing high quality work.

But then there is  the recent hire of Angela Cavanaugh as the county's chief building officer who does not appear to have any political connections with any of the commissioners.  And The Report is told that she does not have much, if any, history of being politically involved in her time with Canton.

An argument can be made that it took a large measure of political maturity on the part of Bernabei and Creighton to be in favor of a county Cavanaugh appointment inasmuch as she is currently working for Canton mayor William J. Healy, II. 

She will take office on September 3rd but will continue to work for the mayor for 120 days.

Political maturity?  How's that?

The Report is told that Cavanaugh is loyal to the mayor over and above that of most of his top administrators.  

Of course, it is well known that Bernabei (who he fired as Canton service director/chief-of-staff in January, 2009) and Creighton (who he defeated in her re-election bid in November, 2007 and whom he has criticized as having left the city of Canton in a financial mess) have been avowed political enemies of Healy for years.

So why would somone who is not "on the outs" with the mayor want to leave and why would a pair who are "on the outs" be willing the hire the former?

First, The Report is told that Cavanaugh is spread very thin over a large field of responsibilities with Canton and likes the idea that with Stark County her focus will be narrowed considerably.

Second, there appears to have been for some time now a recognition by the commissioners and by Healy that it is advantageous to both the county and Canton to work out a collaboration between the two entities for the sake of efficiencies and concomitant cost savings.  

However, the kicker has been that Healy would be unwilling to entrust Canton's building department work to the county (by contract or otherwise) unless someone like Cavanaugh was managing the county building department.

The Report does not think that Bernabei and Creighton have all of a sudden become enamored with the mayor.

But yours truly does believe that they care more about providing quality local government to Stark Countians than engaging in political warfare with Healy.

FIXING, ONCE AND FOR ALL, ANY LINGERING PROBLEMS AT THE STARK COUNTY DOG POUND

Brant Luther, in particular, is a key advisor to helping the commissioners select exactly the right person to succeed Tetreault as Stark County's dog warden.

If the commissioners make the correct choice, then the SCDP operation will hum along without the high drama and controversy that has plagued the facility even bleeding into the early days of Tetrault's management.

Believe or not, Commissioner Bernabei thinks that the commissioners have the right person in the job now as interim dog warden but that he is not interested in taking on the job permanently.

That would be former Alliance mayor Toni Middleton.

At 12:01 a.m. on August 10th Middleton became the appointed warden until they select Tetreault's replacement.

Middleton is Alliance's former fire chief (1989 - 1999) and mayor former mayor (2000 - 2008).

Commissioner Bernabei is thoroughly impressed with Middleton and would be in favor of hiring him "in a heartbeat," if the former Alliance chief executive (a Republican) was open to it.

Here is what Luther had to say about Middleton's appointment in a press release.

Not to detract from Middleton's appointment at all, but he does appear to have close political ties to Commissioner Janet Creighton which some might think has something to do with his selection.

For those SCPR readers who want a refresher on the trials and tribulations of the commissioners (present and of yore), here are a few links to past blogs:

• November 28, 2010
• December 13, 2010
• August 21, 2011
• February 7, 2013

The folks being interviewed as potentials for being the new warden are a curious mix.

There are some with prior experience in specifically dealing with canines.  However, there are some who have no such experience whatsoever.

These commissioners are not set on hiring someone with prior dog pound or dog handling experience. The focus is to find a warden who can apply solid and fundamental management skills to the operation of the facility.

Interim director Middleton has no direct experience with running dog pounds.

Nonetheless, the commissioners are confident that given his demonstrated management skills in Alliance over some 20 years, he will do just fine if not exemplary as the interim warden.

The seven to be interviewed include:

(Note:  all resume information is "extracted" from the full resume)

• Sean Toohey who seems to have highly attractive qualifications inasmuch as he is deputy dog warden in Mahoning County.

A key to his becoming warden might hinge on his willingness to relocate to Stark County.

When a Geauga County official with impressive credentials as a potential county administrator replacement for Mike Hanke hedged on committing to relocate to Stark, The Report believes that was the end of any consideration he might have otherwise received for the job.

• Sarah Hansford like Toohey has direct experience in Portage County's dog pound.

• Timothy Harland shares with Hansford and Toohey a direct connection with involvement of care of dogs. If he can convince the commissioners he has the management skills to go along, he could be a prime candidate to be warden.  He is featured on this ZoomInfo.com page.

• John Koval evidently interests at least one of the commissioners because of his past work history in Human Resources.  Over the years of troubles at the Pound, managing the employees and volunteers and their historic antagonism with one another has proved to be a challenge for the succession of wardens.

• John McCutcheon is an especially tough one for the SCPR to figure out as being of interest.  He has impressive credentials as a law enforcement type, but it is interesting that he was a past president of the union representing Summit County's deputy sheriffs.  One has to wonder how it would work out for him as the top manager of the Pound to have to be on the other side of the fence from the unionized Pound employees.  If memory serves yours truly well, it seems that union inspired employee testiness has been a problem.

• Jeff Wright interestingly enough is a former Stark County dog warden.  He also served in animal control in Summit County.  In doing a Google search on Wright, yours truly did hit on this piece which purportedly was put on the Internet ZoomInfo.com.

• Jon Barber is yet another former dog warden.   Like Hansford, Portage County.  How do like that for a co-incidence.   But Hanford is the current warden whereas he goes quite a ways back (nearly 15 years) as to when he was warden in Portage County.  And, as the following extract from his resume shows, Portage County's operation at the time was small.  A LinkedIn page on Barber does not list his warden background but interestingly enough focuses on his work in homeland security and law enforcement.

A CURIOUS OMISSION?

It is interesting to the SCPR that the commissioners did not choose to interview Cynthia Harris as a potential Stark County dog warden.

In 2010, when Todd Bosley, Steve Meeks and Pete Ferguson were Stark County commissioners, it was quite a stir among Stark County Dog Pound Advisory Board (SCDPAB) members (since assigned to oblivion by Commissioners Bernabei, Creighton and Ferguson [in 2012] without formally disbanding the group) when Ms. Harris surfaced as a candidate to possibly be named warden.

One has to wonder whether or not that flap made her a non-starter in terms of making the list for an interview this time around.

To The Report, she appears to have solid credentials (though dated in terms of specific employment) in meeting the dual optimum qualifications (documented management skills and "hands on experience) for the job.  A prime goal of the county's operation of a dog pound is for it to be self-supporting for it is an "enterprise funded" operation.

Note that Harris says that she had Countryside Animal Hospital double its profit within five years which is obviously is more than "breaking even."

No interview.

Hmm?

WILL THE INTERVIEWS PRODUCE A DOG WARDEN?

Perhaps not this go around.

The commissioners are quite pleased to have Middleton in place.

And they are serious indeed in proceeding cautiously in naming a Tetreaut replacement.

They recall all too well what a royal pain it has been for them to get the Pound to the more or less stable state it is currently in.

At the last commissioners meeting, Commissioner Creighton emphatically said that if none of the seven being interview satisfy them, they will not hesitate in the slightest to redo the process.

A point also emphasized by Stark County Chief Administrator Brant Luther.

Stark Countians should be well taken with this current set of commissioners and the manner in which they are building a leadership team for their area of responsibility of Stark County government.

They are "head and shoulders" above any board board that has served within the member of yours truly!

STARK COUNTY "ANTI-FRACKER" CLAIMS "THE REPOSITORY" IS "UNFAIR & IMBALANCED" ON ITS COVERAGE OF FRACKING ISSUES

As Stark County's only countywide newspaper, the SCPR thinks The Repository has a special burden to be fair and balanced in its coverage of controversial issues that surface in our county.

Once such issue in recent years has been the effects of horizontal hydraulic "fracking" implemented by the natural gas and oil industry to find new sources of natural gas and oil and other byproducts from deep underneath the ground surface.

The Report has learned that Stark Countian Chris Borello (Concerned Citizens of Stark County - CCSC) has recently challenged the managing editor of The Rep (Scott Brown) to accord the viewpoint of her group and her allies on the anti-fracking side of the controversy a fair and balanced presentation.

"Fracking," has a strong presence in Stark County.

Canton mayor William J. Healy, II has dubbed Canton as "The Utica Capital" thereby double monikering the Hall of Fame city after the Utica shale formation that underlies part of if not all of Stark County.

Chesapeake Energy (a major national participant in "fracking,") has headquarters in Stark (currently in Canton), but is relocating its prime facility to Louisville here in Stark County.

And, of course, there is a steady increase in the number of horizontally fracked wells dotting the landscape of Stark.

The fairest/most comprehensive short-form definition that The Report has found comes from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) (LINK).

Beginning in December, 2010 the SCPR has endeavored to provide the The Report's readership with information on both sides of the issue.  Here is a Google search (LINK) which will connect readers with a good sense of The Report's coverage of this issue.

Here is what Borello (of Plain Township) wrote Brown:

RE:  Questions concerning Canton Repository's coverage of fracking -re. fairness and balance

Managing Editor, Mr. Scott Brown

Dear Mr. Brown,

Thank you for contacting me after Gayle Beck, Editorial Page Editor, had forwarded on to you my concerns about the Rep's failure to provide fairness and balance in your coverage on this important topic affecting our area.  

Your email to me claimed that you feel that the paper is covering the shale gas drilling in a balanced and fair way, thus you refuted my assertion ( which is shared by many readers,  trust me).  

You trivialized this to merely being my personal  "feelings" which you believe are contrary to what apparently you believe are the true facts.  I would ask that as Managing Editor, you please examine the following few examples nevertheless, and see if you still come to the same conclusion:

*  This spring the paper did an 85 page spread/insert, which for the most part,  appeared to clearly be an effort to broadly promote fracking, accompanied by  huge full page pictures etc. Of course, we assume that you will say, that well, this spread was paid for by multiple (mega bucks) sponsors and had nothing to do with your coverage.  But how does that project the paper's being fair and balanced -  when the public obviously does not have funding to present similarly their "side," thus our valid concerns get drowned out, (just like on TV, where infomercial's run night and day pushing this)?

*  How many typical fracking stories done by the REP in the last six months are considered "pro" for industry, vs. coverage related to the risks posed?  We believe the vast majority are for the industry, if you count them ( please include the page location ie., front page where readers are most likely to see them, vs. buried).

* Case in point:  Your paper ran with a major front page story declaring no problem with fracking and groundwater,  even though it was reiterated in the very last sentence of the article this was based upon preliminary info.!! ....   Yet, shortly after, three different stories broke nationally about US EPA/ the Obama Administration sabotaging  such studies in PA, Wyoming and Texas -  studies  that had indeed showed such linkage....Where was your front page story on this?

*  Below, you will find the news release attached to a letter signed by over 50 people just approx. two weeks ago, including nearly all the environmental groups in Ohio -  including the Ohio Environmental Council, Sierra Club, Food & Water Watch and Ohio Buckeye Council, along with religious based groups and average concerned citizens, no small feat.

This letter was sent to Governor Kasich and other elected officials like Scott Oelslager, simply requesting the State provide SCIENCE BASED ANSWERS concerning the massive disposal of radiation from the shale gas drilling targeting our State, and our Stark area.ur State....

If, as you say, the Canton Repository is covering the shale gas drilling in such a fair balanced manner, please tell us what page your Canton Rep's coverage was on this very important issue, de[a]dly radiation that could affect countless area residents, given that our area landfills are being targeted for disposal of this waste ( which involves the 87 million dollar Canton Waste Water Treatment Plant utilized by the County and North Canton involving their dollars ( via the 12 mile pipe line leachate project to be built from American Landfill to this plant for discharge into the Nimishillen Creek;  along with some 16 injection wells that sit beneath our aquifers located in Stark, receiving untold volumes of radioactive drilling waste water?  

This letter wasn't worthy of your paper's coverage?? 

These are just a few of the glaring discrepancies we can cite.  Concerned Citizens sincerely hope that you will write us back addressing the above points fully.

Regards,

Chris Borello for Stark County Concerned Citizens

Unlike The Repository (except for its editorial function), the SCPR does take positions on issues that crop up in Stark County.

On "fracking" yours truly's position is that like it or not, "fracking" is a reality and it is the function of government at all levels to protect our drinking water and other environmental concerns and that the industry itself must be made to have adequate resources (insurance, bonds, emergency procedures and the like) on hand and at the ready to deal with the consequences of problems when they occur.

Notice:  Not "if" they occur, but WHEN they occur.

Remember "Deep Water, Horizon;" the industry said that that drilling operation was safe, too.

Notwithstanding the SCPR taking a position on any particular issue, yours truly always makes available to those who differ with The Report's stance all the space on this blog they need to explain their take on the issue.

Since The Repository itself has not shared with Stark Countians that some of its readers do not think that the newspaper presents the "fracking" issue in the a fair and balance way, The Report provides this forum for Borello et al to get their viewpoint out to the Stark County public.

At the end of this blog, the SCPR reprints the press release and the letter accompanying it to Governor John Kasich.

It appears that the discussion between Borello and Brown via e-mail may still be underway.

In the latest version of the back and forth Brown is quoted as saying that The Rep cannot publish a ProPublica piece because of copyright concerns.

Well, Borello is trying to clear away those concerns.  A test of the impact of her initiative will be (if she clears away The Rep's copyright concerns) whether or not the ProPublica piece gets reported upon, and, perhaps editorialized on.

While the SCPR does not adopt the positions of the Concerned Citizens of Stark County and friends nor those of the oil and natural gas industry, yours truly supports the CCSC et al's quest to have their case presented in the media.

Anyone who is attuned to commercial media is well aware that the oil and natural gas industry spends mega bucks in placing creatively constructed ads on America's television and radio outlets.

Only on the Internet is there anything near citizens having access to fair and balanced information on the issue.

Often though, in an Internet search, one has to wade through to read/view/hear highly biased presentations (from both sides) and then try to figure out the truth of the matter in comparing one set of assertions against the other.

For its captive audience (i.e. The Rep being Stark County's only countywide newspaper), the paper needs to do better reporting the local aspects of whether or not actual "fracking" within the county is harming the environment and the extent to which local government officials are or are not protecting citizens from claimed harmful effects (either actual or potential) from "fracking" and "fracking" related activities within Stark.

For beginners, The Repository needs to publish the dialogue back and forth between Beck/Brown and Borello on the issue of fairness/balance of Stark County's only countywide newspaper's reporting policy.

Secondly, Brown needs to state clearly to the reading public whether or not Borello's complaints have found a nesting place at The Rep in that he and his fellows will give special scrutiny to the fairness/balance issue on "fracking" to get Borello to the point that she can agree that The Repository has responded sufficiently to her complaint that she is willing to say that the newspaper provides fairness/balance on the issue.

Like it or not, since The Repository is Stark County's only "countywide newspaper of record," it is essential that its readers - once a decision to cover a particular issue is made - get fair and balanced coverage.

Those of us who want to be fully informed on a variety of local issues that come to the fore on a daily basis should be pleased that Borello and friends are pushing the issue of fairness and balance with "the powers that be" at The Rep.

As promised, those readers who want to see the press release and letter to the governor in full, here goes:

---------------------------------------------------------

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:                                  
Contact:  Chris Borello, 330-499-5207

Today an urgent appeal is being made to Gov. John Kasich signed by concerned citizens and groups from around the State, regarding the massive disposal of inherently radioactive shale drilling wastes through various means - including injection, land filling, spraying on roads and discharging to surface waters.   We are asking the Governor to personally direct his agencies to be responsive to key technical questions listed in the letter that have inexplicably gone unanswered related to Ohio's handling of these long-lived radioactive materials.  The letter's organizer, long time grassroots childrens' health activist, Chris Borello of Stark County said:..., "Proper testing and management of this radiation is critical in protecting workers and communities from exposures to this radiation.  According to experts, the kind of radiation found in the shale drilling wastes, Radium 226, is particularly dangerous, more so than some nuclear wastes, they say, not only because the Radium is water soluble, but because of the way it is metabolized in the body.  Radium is bone-seeking, thus if ingested it can cause blood cancers, like Leukemia.  The Radon Gas emitted can cause lung cancers.  Therefore, it is essential that these shale drilling wastes are not only properly tested, following what is known to be "best science," but then isolated virtually forever from the public and environment.  Citizens are deeply worried that the State is failing to err on the side of caution because of the gas drilling " frenzy," and the extreme political pressures obviously involved.  Given Ohio is being used as this industry's economical "toilet bowl" for disposal of this  toxic and carcinogenic  radioactive waste stream, the public deserves answers and protection, putting Ohioans' health first, over short term profits".......

Ohio Governor John Kasich
Riffe Center, 30th Floor
77 South High Street
Columbus, Ohio 43215-6117
c/o Mr. Craig Butler, Environmental Liaison       cc: ODNR, OEPA, ODH, OAG, media, public
Subject:  Disposal of radioactive shale drilling wastes in Ohio

Dear Governor Kasich,

In a recent letter to your constituents, (find below) you asserted that Ohio is developing a comprehensive plan to address the very serious concerns related to the presence of long-lived carcinogenic radiation/radium known to be inherently present in the shale drilling waste stream.  This radiation-laden waste is being disposed in our state in vast quantities through various means:  injection, land filling, spraying on roads and discharge via waste water treatment plants into surface waters.  To garner public trust and credibility, it is imperative that your various agencies act in a transparent and forthcoming manner, given the potential risks posed to public health, worker safety and to the environment for many years to come, long after the drilling boom has gone bust.   Unfortunately, when concerned citizens have attempted to hold the agencies scientifically accountable, seeking concrete answers to even the most basic questions, those answers have not been provided to date regarding the following particularly crucial points:

For Ohio EPA Director Scott Nally:

OEPA has failed to respond to questions repeatedly posed seeking whether, in fact, OEPA has authority over TENORM radiation in drilling wastes specifically generated at waste water treatment facilities - i.e,  "sludges" (as it appears it does under ORC 3701:1-43-07, Exemptions, Section J").  We ask that you please direct Ohio EPA to answer the following:

a) Confirm or deny OEPA has this authority.  b)  If OEPA indeed does have this jurisdiction over treatment plant /recycling of sludges for TENORM,  we then  request that OEPA provide us with all technical specifics the agency has issued/or plans to issue to landfill operators, waste generators and others,  regarding what precisely OEPA is requiring to ensure there is "proper" compliance testing for the radium/uranium series, thus demonstrating the State will ultimately conduct proper management of waste potentially containing elevated levels of these sludges.  (KEY: PA is reporting up to 500 times greater levels of radiation in this waste specifically due to this specific act of "treatment/recycling" ).

For ODNR's Chief Rick Simmers:

ODNR has failed to respond to reasonable questions and concerns regarding the reported disturbing usage of handheld radiation detectors/scanners being used at the Patriot/Warren facility, reportedly for each load.   NOTE: According to radiation experts, this handheld detector cannot properly detect the radium of concern in water, unless the levels are very seriously high and grossly out of compliance.

* If handheld scanners are not adequate for proper compliance monitoring, please direct ODNR to provide citizens with a scientifically supportable explanation that can be peer reviewed, as to precisely how the State can possibly ascertain whether what is being discharged to Ohio surface waters is not exceeding the 5 pico curie limit for radiation and/ or in violation of the Clean Water Act.

For ODH Chief Michael Snee:

* To corroborate what has already been publicly asserted, please direct Ohio Dept. of Health's Bureau of Radiation Protection to confirm, in writing, that "best practices" related to radiation testing will be adhered to:

a) ODH confirming that the State will require truly scientifically "representative sampling" be conducted for each load prior to disposal

b)  ODH will adhere to the same testing standard the agency had previous established when sampling the Ohio Utica Shales for radium: I.e, ODH will require each sample be held in an air tight container at a lab 21 days prior to analysis, to allow for full equilibrium of the radium's gamma daughters, thus ensuring accurate assessment of the gamma emitters at a certified laboratory.

Finally and perhaps most importantly, please request that one or more of the three above-mentioned agencies scientifically justify to citizens why Ohio has deliberately chosen to opt for the weaker, less protective definition/criteria regarding which drilling wastes constitute TENORM ( technically enhanced naturally occurring radiation) VS. NORM wastes.  This arbitrary decision made by the State now allows a larger percentage of this highly dangerous, long lived radiation to be disposed in Ohio without any proper accountability or monitoring.  It is our understanding that Ohio's less protective stance on TENORM is contrary to what the US EPA, the National Academy of Sciences and others have defined.  Reportedly, even the State of Pennsylvania considers drill cuttings to be TENORM, whereas Ohio does not.  Please explain how ignoring large quantities of radiation dumped into Ohio is consistent with your goal of protecting public health and carrying out a "comprehensive" management of these radioactive wastes from drilling.  Moreover, please explain how allowing elevated levels of radiation to be "down blended with dirt" and then dumped into Ohio's solid waste landfills is consistent with proper management, given that these Ohio landfills are not designed to become Low Level Rad Waste Sites.  Given the water solubility of radium in these wastes, this radiation could migrate through a site and enter groundwater or be collected into a landfill leachate collection system, with ultimate discharge from a city waste water plant into the surface waters of the State.  In addition, what liability or risks are posed to workers involved with such down blending practices?

The below concerned individuals and groups from around Ohio believe the above questions and concerns are critically important in protecting public health, safety and welfare,  and deserve complete answers from the State.   We therefore request your immediate personal attention to this letter to ensure the public is provided this information in an expeditious manner.

Sincerely,  

Chris Borello, Stark County Concerned Citizens/CCLT, Uniontown
Kathie Jones, Sandra Bilek,  Concerned Citiznes of Medina County
Buckeye Forest Council
Patti & David Gorcheff, North Lima
Prof. James T. O'Reilly, College of Medicine, MPH Faculty, University of Cincinnati
Trudee Weatherby, Youngstown
Jed Thorp, Chapter Manager, Ohio Sierra Club, Columbus
John Williams, McDonald
Walter E. (Ted) Auch, PhD, Cleveland State University Faculty
Julia Fuhrman-Davis, Beaver Twp.
Vanessa Pesec, President, NEOGAP, Concord Twp.
Debra Debozy, Boardman
Greg Pace, Guernsey County Citizens Support On Drilling Issues
Joe Sirgo, Plain Twp.
Alice Marusiak, Stow, Summit Co.
Kari Matsko, Director, People's Oil & Gas Collaborative, Ohio
Jean Engle, Youngstown
Alison Auciello, Organizer, Food and Water Watch, Cincinnati
Sue Garver, Canton
Fresh Water Accountability Project
Lea Harper, Grand Rapids
Jodi Stoyak, Liberty Twp. Trustee, Trumbull County
Lynn Anderson, Youngstown
Heather Cantino, Steering Committee Member, Athens County Fracking Action Network
Diana Shaheen, Boardman
Renee Bogue, Stark County Concerned Citizens; Stark-Summit Concerned Citizens Coalition
Jenny Morgan, concerned citizen, Westerville, Franklin County
Mary C. Khumprakob, Youngstown
Elizabeth Dixon, Uniontown
Tony Paone, Plain Twp., Stark County
Judith A. & Raymond G.Vershum, Canfield
Marguerite Felice, Youngstown
Maria Montanez, Youngstown
Andrea Moore, Lowellville
Mary Greer, Concerned Citizens Ohio;Shalerville/coordinator;STAND UP OHIO/adjunct member; Ohio Organizing Collaborative/adjunct member
Heather Vahila, Lake Mohawk Property Owners Association
Jack & Joni Richards, Waynesburg, Sandy Twp.
Gwen B. Fischer, Professor Emerita Psychology Dept. Hiram College
Stan Fischer, Hiram Twp., Portage County
Elyse Hirsch, Stow Ohio, Stark- Summit Coalition
George Elias, Youngstown, Frackfree Mahoning, FANCy
Dr. Raymond Beirsdorfer, Professor of Geological & Environmental Sciences, YSU
Susie Beirsdorfer, Frackfree Mahoning
Dan & Beverly Seiple, North Canton
Lori Babbey, Concerned Citizens Ohio, Portage County
Melanie Roll, concerned citizen, North Canton

(VIDEOS) AN AMAZING TURN OF EVENTS THIS WEEK WHICH POSSIBLY INURE TO THE BENEFIT OF STARK CO. GOV'T COLLABORATION!

VIDEOS

MAYOR HEALY ON CRIME LAB ISSUE

STARK COUNTY COMMISSIONER TOM BERNABEI

ON

NEW STARK COUNTY BUILDING DEPARTMENT HIRE

The week of August 12th in the year of our Lord 2013 could go down as one of the most momentous in modern Stark County times.

It seems that real momentum could be underway to make Stark County local government less costly, more efficient, of a higher quality in terms of service to citizens and done more speedily.

In the immediate moment, it appears to the SCPR that the break through towards achieving a heightened cooperation among Stark County government entities was evident in a statement (see letter below) which Canton mayor William J. Healy, II read at Tuesday's Stark County Council of Governments (SCOG) Executive Committee meeting.

However, The Report believes that real break in undoing the bottleneck, which yours truly identifies as being the mayor, was born in March of this year when Healy overstepped his bounds in trying to rework the scheme of the operation of the Canton-Stark County Crime Lab (CSCCL - Crime Lab) in having its operating document changed to allow for a director without scientific credentials to be appointed.

Once the change was made, then he sprang like a jackrabbit coming out of the brush and appointed a political crony Rick Perez (a former chief deputy in the Stark County sheriff's department under Tim Swanson) to the position.

County and township officials (who, by and large, make up SCOG) were caught unawares.  But when it dawned on them what Healy had done, they recovered quickly and reacted by demanding that the appointment be rescinded.

At Healy's request, Perez quickly resigned the position.

For face-saving sake, Healy blamed his safety director Tom Ream for the "over-the-top" move.  But the SCPR is not buying and takes the position that Healy threw Ream "under-the-bus."  Shortly after the incident, Ream announced his retirement as safety director.

Ever since, under the leadership of Stark County Commissioner Tom Bernabei (chairman of the SCOG executive committee), SCOG has worked to restructure the CSCCL in a manner that will reflect the reality that most of the financing, use and equipment of the Crime Lab belonged to SCOG.

A major remedial step occurred Tuesday with the reading by Healy of his statement.

In addition to reading his statement, Healy (as seen on the video below) carried on with more talk of Canton and the county working collaboratively by suggesting strongly that Canton was interested in discussing the details of the city joining with the county in a five year effort (actually 20 years for prime proponent and Jackson Township fiscal officer Randy Gonzalez) to put together a rehabbed countywide centralized emergency (fire, police and EMS) 9-1-1 call receiving and dispatch agency of county government.



Yours truly could peripherally see Gonzalez as Healy dropped the bombshell about his willingness to have Canton participate as a full partner in a reworked county system.

What did The Report hear and see?

A gasp and an huge smile donning the face of Gonzalez, that's what.

In 2011, it was thought by Gonzalez and Joseph Concatto (project manager for the rehabbed 9-1-1 system) that it was merely a matter of putting "the icing on the cake" in terms of getting a "state-of-the-art" system together and in place except for Nimishillen Township's CenCom.

Here is a LINK to a prior SCPR blog which explains why CenCom will remain outside of the county system in the immediate future.

But before the ink dried on a letter written by Canton officials to the effect that they were on board with bringing the Canton Communications Center into alignment with the Stark County sheriff's dispatch center as a key and critical factor in the implementation of a centralized countywide system, word spread like wildfire that Healy was off-the-reservation and that consequently the 9-1-1 rehab might be on its deathbed.

Of late, Warren Price in his role as a key Healy administration official (most recently as safety director [succeeding Ream]) became a huge conciliatory factor in bringing Canton and the county together on the CSCCL matter and the 9-1-1 project.

With his sudden resignation mere weeks ago (his last day with the administration is August 31st), many of us wondered whether or not Healy would - once again - be off the reservation.

So now readers should understand the context of Gonzalez's gasp and smile when Healy spoke up affirming Price's work and direction as described by The Report above.

A third thing that happened this week which bodes well for collaboration between Canton and perhaps Alliance, Massillon, North Canton and Canal Fulton was the hiring away by Stark County of Canton's chief building officer (Angela Cavanaugh) to run the county's building department.

At yesterday's Stark County commissioners' regular weekly meeting, Commissioner Bernabei expressed optimism that a consequence of the Cavanaugh hiring that Canton and Stark County can forge a cooperative and collaborative alliance in the form of the Stark County department contracting with Canton to provide building department services.



Some may think that Mayor Healy has had a religious-esque "born-again" experience.  But the SCRP is not among those thinking such.

The Report's take is that more and more Healy is understanding that his time is running out in getting in one scrape after another and by virtue of his considerable political skills being able to escape unscathed.

Moreover, the SCPR believes that there are financial factors which weigh-in also.

Especially on the 9-1-1 matter.

Canton's dispatching equipment and software is approaching being out-of-date if not already so.  To replace its CAD (Computer Aided Dispatch) system would run the city anywhere from $1 million to $2 million (including annual maintenance).  Hence the financial motivation for now being willing to join a countywide system.

Angela Cavanaugh was running the city's building department for  about $118,000 (including benefits) a year. And, it appears she was itching to leave.

With the county looking for a new building official, Cavanaugh took advantage of the opportunity to jump ship at Canton.

The Report believes that in financial terms she has pretty much made a lateral move from Canton to Stark County. However, it is said that she had much larger responsibilities in terms of volume and focus of her work than she will have with Stark County.

Of course, yours truly thinks that nearly everybody who works for the mayor wants to be elsewhere because of his constant intermeddling with them doing their job because, in The Report's assessment, he overestimates his own abilities.

For good reason, local government officials who have had to deal with William J. Healy, II do not speak candidly in public about their frustration in having to deal with this mayor of our county seat in addition to being Stark's largest city.

The SCPR interprets what yours truly has heard from many quarters across the city and county that he is generally viewed as being an obstacle; a veritable bottleneck - if you will.

However, they still have to try to work with him.

Moreover, The Report increasingly is seeing Mayor Healy as a man being "on-the-run."

While he has demonstrated a teflon quality about him much like former president William Jefferson Clinton, there are signs that the teflon is wearing precious thin these days.

Yours truly thinks the only possibility for him to stay in elective office is for him to try to become a fixture as the mayor of Canton.

Canton with its 9 to 1 Democratic majority should be an easy venue for Healy to reign as the chief executive for years to come.

But is it?

The SCPR calculates that with the results that are sure to come with November's Canton City Council election, the mayor will be in a 7 to 5 minority on key issue votes when the new council takes office.

If such proves to be the case, then look for him to be in even more battles and confrontation beginning with the new council taking office in January, 2014.  As things stand with the current council, he has had to modify or withdraw quite a number of his legislative proposals because he realized that the votes were not there for passage.

We now know that the Stark County Republican Party has "given up the ghost" in Canton politics.  It was astonishing to see former 8th Ward councilman Mark Butterworth run this year to regain the seat he lost to Democrat Edmond Mack in 2011.

The Report is already projecting a relatively easy win for Mack in the eighth.

Facing a 7 to 5 deficit in the council serving in the 2014/2015 cycle, what should Healy expect next?

The Report believes that the "handwriting is on the wall."

Those seven anti-Healy's will likely band together to lead a concerted effort to find a viable challenger to Healy in May 2015.

Though The Report thinks William J. Healy, II is "on-the-run," nobody should expect that he will not "stand his ground" in the 2015 Democratic Party primary election.

For where else is there for him to go?

There is no way he could survive politically in a competitive voting jurisdiction.

The good thing for Stark County of his being "on-the-run" is that this modality and its inherent political vulnerability presents a opportunity for Stark's county, city, village and township governments to move forward in realizing cost savings and greater efficiency, quality of government services, and speed of service to the benefit of Stark Countians.

WHO WOULD WANT TO WORK FOR CANTON MAYOR WILLIAM J. HEALY, II?

UPDATE:  08/14/2014 - 6:00 PM

(VIDEO)  

STARK COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VOTE TO HIRE ANGELA CAVANAUGH AWAY FROM CANTON NOTWITHSTANDING MAYOR HEALY'S DENIAL OF SAME



ORIGINAL BLOG

The Stark County Political Report has learned that the Stark County commissioners today (barring a last minute hitch) will hire Canton building official and plans examiner Angela Cavanaugh to oversee Stark County's building department.

Immediately prior to yesterday's meeting of the Stark County Council of Governments (SCOG) executive committee, Healy lashed out at yours truly for having erroneously reported Cavanaugh's imminent departure for the county job.

Notwithstanding Healy's denial, The Report stands by the report of Cavanaugh's pending departure from the Healy administration.

It has to be more than a bit galling for Canton mayor William J. Healy, II to lose yet another one of his top officials in a very short span of time because, in this particular situation, the official is going to work for Healy's chief political antagonists.

See this excerpt from her resume a copy of which was obtained by The Report from the Stark County commissioners:

Note that during her time with Akron, Cavanaugh had been hired by Healy's predecessor (Janet Creighton).

Cavanaugh has these further resume elaborated qualifications:

Two of the three commissioners have had a highly adversarial relationship with Healy; namely, former Canton mayor Janet Creighton and former Canton service director and chief-of-staff Thomas Bernabei.

Healy defeated the Republican Creighton in November 2007 in her bid for re-election.  After she left office, Healy has repeatedly trashed Creighton in saying that she left city hall in a terrible mess.

When Healy took office in January, 2008 one of his first hires was former Canton law director and former city councilman Bernabei.

However, the mayor was unable to abide Bernabei's strong hand of leadership and fired him on January 26, 2009.

Healy's best bet at being a successful mayor would have been to have kept Bernabei and the likes of former Safety Director Tom Nesbitt and the recently resigned Safety Director Warren Price on board with his administration.

As far as the SCPR is concerned, Healy continues to slide Canton into a deeper and deeper hole from which - when he is no longer mayor - it will take years and years to recover from.

A clue that Healy was having trouble retaining Cavanaugh surfaced on last night city council meeting agenda under the communications section.  As seen in the graphic above, Warren Price (whose last day with the Healy administration is slated to be August 31st) was on the agenda shown to be requesting legislation to give Cavanaugh a 3% pay increase.

A Canton councilperson tells The Report that Cavanaugh was last making $118,000 (benefits included) with Canton. So a 3% raise would have amounted to about $3,000 annually.   That the raise request was withdrawn says one of two things.  Either Cavanaugh was not going to be staying; raise or not. Alternatively, the votes were not there on council for the raise to pass.

Giving pay raises seems to be the only way that Healy can stop the flood of exits from his sinking ship administration.

Back in May, Healy had to offer Finance Director Joseph DiRuzza (who formerly worked for Kim Perez when Perez was Stark County auditor) a 14.5% pay raise to keep DiRuzza from "jumping ship" for Portage County.

No doubt that Cavanaugh will find working for the commissioners to be a much more productive environment than working for the beleaguered William J. Healy, II.

It is the citizens of Canton that are being buffeted by and, in the opinion of yours truly, harmed by the topsy-turvy world of its mayor.

There appears to be a mass exit going on from the administration of William J. Healy, II.

Given all the controversy that has surrounded the mayor almost from day one of his taking office, there is very little guessing at to why that might be, no?

It seems that no one wants to be working for the mayor these days.

For to do so is more and more taking on trappings of trying to do so is to be embarked on "Mission Impossible!"