18TH IN SCPR SERIES ON "HOF-VP" - REPOSITORY (HANDMAIDEN OF HOF-VP) TARGETS NORTH CANTON MAYOR DAVID HELD FOR EXPOSING FINANCIAL MACHINATIONS OF HOF VILLAGE LLC?

UPDATED: 5:15 p.m.

On March 18th, 

• as The Stark County Political Report (SCPR, The Report) impliedly predicted in a March 14th blog that it was only a matter of time until The Repository (Stark County''s journalistic version of Hulu Network's "A Handmaiden's Tale" inasmuch as it appears that the newspaper plays the role of being the bully of Stark County elected and appointed officials in behalf of HOF/IRG officialdom.

The Canton Repository

• (Stark County's only countywide newspaper, which of course makes it a "private sector" monopoly) 

through Repository publisher's relative Todd Porter 

• (really a so-so "sports reporter who has been given the title of "special projects editor" 

launched what the SCPR thinks is an all-out political assault on North Canton mayor David Held in response to his exercise of his 1st Amendment Constitutional right of free speech 

A journalistic irony the SCPR thinks when it comes to The Repository's

• Note:  Porter's article is supposedly a primer on obtaining public records from the Canton City Schools/Canton Police Department as a play to America media's annual play to being diligent in guarding the public interest in accordance with National Sunshine Week (March 11—17) celebration

headline which appears to be a cover for the Held attack for opening his mouth on January 9, 2018 at a Strengthening Stark central Stark County elected officials (paralleling the Canton Municipal Court statutory boundaries).

Held believed moderator Mark Samolczyk (president of the Stark Community Foundation who said he had "no dog in this fight") when he in effect assured politically "sensitive" elected officials that they could "let it all hang out" and there would be no retribution.

Not only Held, but Stark County commissioner Janet Creighton bought into the Samolczyk assurances which (i.e. being additionally encouraged by Creighton's lead) was a sign to Held that he could utter his grievances against the Pro Football Hall of Fame (a non-profit) combo with the profit making Stu Lichter's Industrial Realty Group (IRG) coming out as HOF Village, LLC

• and a bunch of other "specially created" companies segregating various aspects of the likely financially unmanageable $1 billon plus "visionary" (according to HOF   CEO/president C. David Baker)

only to find out that Samolczyk's assurances were apparently uttered by him without first getting clearance from The Rep's James Porter, the HOF's Baker, Lichter and, perhaps, Denny Saunier (president of the Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce, CRCOC) .

Held demonstrated that "he really did not get it" speaking out would likely be retributed on him  after talking with Todd Porter in Porter acting for his cousin James finessed Held into agreeing to a March 6th event sponsored by CRCOC (but not a "free" event open to the Stark County general public) telling Held that he Porter would ask him "softball" questions at the event.

By the way, the Canton Regional Chamber Commerce does get $175,000 annually approved by Canton City Council.  Interesting, taxpayer money and yet folks have to pay to attend what is billed as "for the public benefit' events.

A SCPR "hats off" to Ward 9 councilman Frank Morris who during his term has consistently voted against the government subsidy of a private enterprise entity (corporate welfare, anybody?).

Morris is no longer council vice president/majority leader with The Repository endorsing Ward 7 councilman John Mariol when the two vied for the position in late December, 2017, early January, 2018.

Hmm?

To his immense credit, Held declined the offer of "softball" questions and in effect said "bring it on."

To his double up immense credit, Held pretty much repeated his January 9th critiques of the HOF-VP financing troubles.

Upon which Porter abandoned his promised "softball" approach and went after Held.

And now, we have a "one week later" buried in an ostensible "Sunshine Week" article going after Held for having a "big mouth."

In other words, SHUT UP! MAYOR DAVID HELD and THIS IS A WARNING SHOT that if you don't we will play the 800 pound journalistic gorilla which buys ink by the barrel and come after you should you decide to run for re-election in 2019.

As an aside, the SCPR thinks that for the most part The Rep powers that be (and Todd Porter, in particular) wouldn't recognize journalistic sunshine if slogans were pasted all over the walls at 500 Market Avenue, South.

Here are a couple of excerpts from Todd Porter's March 14th piece:

For more than a month all the windows have been replaced in the Hoover Complex by developers for Industrial Realty Group. For years in some case, those windows — large rectangular holes — were replaced with plywood that faced the busiest street in North Canton. Anyone who lives in the city or drives through it — myself included — had to stare at the unsightly plywood.

Until Jan. 25.

That is when the window openings were filled with new windows, and now the front of the Hoover Complex looks whole again.

North Canton Mayor David Held has been vocal in his criticism of slow-moving developers on the project. The mayor needs to be a little careful, however, because without IRG the city’s income tax revenue might not have rebounded to levels before the Hoover Co. closed.  (emphasis added by the SCPR)

As if that were not enough of a warning shot, read this:

Schroer Group lease

One of the anchor tenants in the Hoover Complex, the Schroer Group — recognized as an award-winning operator of Altercare Integrated Health Services, Absolute Health Services, Avalon Foodservice and Leverage Purchasing Group — is nearing the end of its lease. There have been rumors it might leave for a city north of North Canton.

“I’ve talked to the developer about making sure they are taking care of the needs of a tenant,” Held said. “We want them to stay here. There is a lot of time between now and the end of the year.”

Schroer represents a large number of employees with good-paying positions. That means tax revenue for the city.

“If they leave, it would be a significant impact,” Held said.

Held is a vocal mayor. A voice only goes so far. Acting fast to keep a large employer would show leadership. (enlarged  text added by the SCPR for emphasis)

Who can doubt that the segue (really a non-sequitur; not a logical flow that Porter obviously thought it was) from the Hoover project to the Schroer Group matter appears to the SCPR to have been designed to set Held back on his heels because of his Strengthening Stark County/CRCC verbal attack on the financing (or lack thereof) of the $1 billion (Ohio and Stark County taxpayer supported in some measure) C.  David Baker financial nightmare Hall of Fame expansion project.

The Official Newspaper of the Pro Football Hall of Fame, as far as the SCPR can see, has not dug and is not digging to uncover information that might well have indicated and/or continues to indicate "public money" should never have gone into this project and ought to be stopped immediately as being a bad investment.

For Porter to write under a "sunshine theme" is about as hypocritical he and his cousin Rep publisher James Porter can possibly be!

Todd Porter may think he wielded a megaphone in his editorial but what he really did for the discerning, was to reveal himself as wielding a "Shill-A-Phone."

On top of the Todd Porter piece, the SCPR has been told by a source that The Repository locked down its comments on a recent piece for at least two would be commenters to express an opinion on a HOF-VP article.

To boot, the SCPR has it on very good authority that his cousin James is calling and politically threatening some local Stark County officials come their next election cycle.

These guys are for journalistic sunshine?  Ya got to be kidding Todd and Jim, aren't you?

For them, at least on HOF financing matters, the sun is in total eclipse, no?

That's what you get when you have a journalistic enterprise who can play the role of an 800 pound gorilla!

SCPR "GENERAL ELECTION" SERIES (VOL 3) STARK CO "DO WHATEVER IT TAKES" (ETHICS BE DAMNED?) AUDITOR CANDIDATE ALAN HAROLD?

UPDATED:  09:30 AM

Back in the 1990s Bank1One (bought out by JPMorgan Chase in 2004) had a campaign to attract new customers using the slogan "Whatever It Takes."

While Stark County auditor Alan Harold's main preparation to be the county auditor is grounded in having been employed in the bank industry (Huntington Bank), he must have picked up on the Bank1One slogan and filed it away in his mind for future use in a manner in which the slogan generating advertising folks never envisioned when the coined the expression.

For doing "Whatever It Takes" is what The Stark County Political Report (SCPR, The Report) thinks Harold is up to to retain his status as Stark County auditor.

As readers of The Report know, Harold, since he was first elected in 2010 out of political milieu which Stark County civic activist and attorney Craig T. Conley termed as "Zeiglergate" (See prior blog in this series for a refresher on "Zeiglergate"), has been rated by this blog as one of very top quality elected Stark County officials.

But no more.

For with the SCPR, character does count.

As will be detailed in this blog, The Report believes that Harold has a least one serious character defect that need correcting.

Perhaps, over time, he can/will self-correct and approximate what the SCPR thought he—once upon a time—was as a person.

The manifestation of what the SCPR thinks as being a disturbing turn of events that Harold started several months ago when in this blogger's conversation with the auditor, he expressed joy at the prospect of being unopposed for re-election.

In addition to winning in 2010 on the back of Zeiglergate, he was re-elected in 2014 over an opponent who was just a name on a ballot (Jeff Gruber, Canton City Schools' treasurer) in a walk.

Anyone who reads the SCPR knows that a priority for this blog is for public officials to be held accountable by voters every 2/4/6 years re-election cycle (depending on the office sought) in having viable candidates to challenge an incumbent on what they have done or not done that they should have done in the term(s) leading up to them having to justify their re-election.

So the SCRP was totally put off by Harold's joyous anticipation of running unopposed.

This blog has been on record on a number of occasions of pointing out Harold's good qualities but tempered by blogs here and there critiquing what appeared to be problems with his performance as a public official.

From the way Republican Harold has handled the filing of petitions (see copy of the petitions in the
Appendix to this blog) by Massillon Ward 6 Councilwoman Linda Litman (a Democrat),The Report thinks that the voters of Stark County need to send Harold a message.

Even with the serious flaw(s) (at least one at a minimum) that the SCPR thinks Harold's campaign posture reveals about him this time out for re-election, it is unlikely that Litman has the campaign finances, campaign organization and countywide I.D. to actually defeat Harold.

But we shall see.

Her main support, Stark County's unions, which the SCPR is told are furious at the manner in which they believe Harold has dealt with her having filed as a candidate.

It is against this background that the SCPR and others (mostly being fellow Republicans who support his re-election) have been astounded at measures which, though categorically denied by Harold, The Report believes he has undertaken to punish Litman for having the audacity to file petitions to run against him.

This is especially the case with Harold since he asserts that he was similarly (i.e. what he is believed to have initiated against Litman) worked over by, according to Harold, former Stark County treasurer Gary Zeigler when Harold made moves to run against him in 2008.

Harold says it was either withdraw his plan to run or depart employment from Huntington Bank.

Apparently, Zeigler's (let's assume) motivation was to point out that inasmuch as the county treasurer makes decisions on millions of dollars of taxpayer being deposited in interest bearing accounts some of which are with banks with local offices, including, perhaps, Huntington Bank and hence Harold potentially being elected treasurer might be construed as his having a conflict in interest should he have continuing affection for a former employer.

But there are those who think the action that Harold says that Zeigler either himself or through a political proxy (who Harold says was former Stark County auditor Kim Perez) initiated against Harold was not so much an ethical problem seemingly inherent in Harold becoming treasurer (because the county treasurer decides where county taxpayer money will be put on deposit) but, mainly, like Harold himself this time around, the desire not to have to be accountable for how one has performed as an office holder.

The fact of the matter is that Zeigler did run unopposed in 2008 with Harold being compelled by his employer to withdraw.

In hindsight, for Zeigler to be unopposed denied Stark County's voters an opportunity anticipate the highly political Zeigler was not best person to be county treasurer.

In just about five or six months (April 1, 2009) guess what Stark Countans woke up to?

You've got it.

The beginning of the  Craig T. Conley named "Zeiglergate."

Before it was over, Zeigler was worked over by a State of Ohio Auditor's report that Zeigler as treasurer had failed in securing the physical facilities and in strengthening policies, practices and procedures of the auditor's office so as to put in place safeguards against anyone working in the treasury stealing Stark County taxpayer money.

Recently, the SCPR wrote a blog on the release of former chief deputy treasurer Vince Frustaci from federal prison for having stolen about a documented $2.4 million over some five (5) years.

The only question that remains is whether or not Harold would have spotted the weaknesses in the treasury structure to have put pressure on Zeigler to enact preventative/detecting measures so as to have mitigated the duration/depth of the theft?

And, had Huntington Bank not forced his hand into not running; would he as treasurer been able to "in the best financial interests" of Stark County's taxpayers been able to "objectively" decide where to place the county's money?

In the way he is said to be acting on the Litman candidacy, one has to question his ability to rise about personal, subjective interests and make the public interest his priority.

Perhaps Harold would not have the capacities as expected of a candidate as articulated above.

But there was at least a chance that he or (and preferably) some other opponent would have spotted something in how Zeigler ran the office to have made the public aware of the need for immediate structural reform "during the campaign."

If there is no opponent, as with Zeigler in 2008; then there is virtually NO CHANCE for accountability to kick in and thereby lessen any damages to taxpayers because a critique during a campaign prompts immediate structural deficiency reform.

Hopefully, Harold's opponent Litman will do political campaign due diligence and during the campaign come up with some "real" reason(s) why Stark Countians should consider replacing Harold with her.

As pointed out by one Democratic public official that the SCPR has discussed the Litman situation with, Litman running for auditor is not the equivalent of Harold running for treasurer.

The auditor though officially designated as Stark County's chief financial officer has no say whatsoever as to where Stark County funds are invested.

Apparently, the SCPR has learned, nobody making the case on Litman could establish any conflict in interest and had to resort other bases to justify Litman's departure from employment.

From all that The Report knows about her work in the banking world (First Merit before it was acquired by Huntington), she has a record of being an accomplished financial professional.

For this blog, the SCPR made several attempts to contact Litman, but she has ignored this blogger's attempt to engage her on questions:

• regarding her perspective of what The Report thinks was a Harold attempt to dissuade her from filing petitions to run against him, 
• regarding what she sees in current auditor office practices, policies, procedures and programs that need attention and what her approach would be if elected to resolve perceived deficiencies, and
• regarding the financial/supporter(s) viability of her campaign

That she herself appears to want to be unaccountable as a candidate in failing to respond SCPR questions is, perhaps, a warning to Stark County's voters that we may having on our hands in which the preferred way to vote in November might be "none of the above" as The Report wrote about the Healy/Perez Democratic mayoralty primary election ballot in May, 2015.

She is associated with some folks in the Stark County Democratic Party who just want Democrats to hold office for the mere sake of Democratic Party control not because the candidate offers the prospect of doing the job better for the interests of Stark Countians.

The SCPR hears that Harold has a substantial campaign finance "nestegg"  on hand presently to run his campaign on perhaps on the order of his 2014 campaign (see his pre-general campaign finance report below).  Of course, the proof of the pudding will this time around  be his pre-primary campaign finance report to be filed with the Stark County Board of Elections next month a couple weeks before the primary.



Now to get to the heart of the SCPR's beef with Harold.

There are reports that Harold or someone at his bidding contacted Litman's employer Huntington

Bank through Litman's immediate supervisor:

• (alleged to be via former North Canton councilman Dan Griffith, [a former classmate of Harold's at then Mount Union College] said by sources to be Litman's direct supervisor)

and sought to invoke company intervention  in light of language in the Employee handbook (see below) to stop Litman's candidacy against Harold. A source says that Griffith visited Litman at her home to deliver the message that she was terminated.

The Report made inquiry to Griffith as to whether or not he had any role in the Litman matter.

Response?  Silence!

As the SCPR is wont to do, e-mail inquiry was made of Harold as to the veracity of the allegations set forth above:

His initial response:

Marty - ... response

Alan Harold ... Mar 6 at 9:42 PM

To:  Martin Olson

Martin - please see my responses below...

Alan

From: Martin Olson <tramols@att.net>
To: Alan C. Harold  ...
Sent: Monday, March 5, 2018 12:57 PM
Subject: ... and another matter

Second.

SCPR 

I also have information to the effect that you are bragging to others that your political opponent this fall (Linda Litman) has lost her banking job on your initiative and perhaps with the help of a former public official employee of the bank.

Is this information "fake" information or is there truth to it?

HAROLD

Untrue. Any thought/insinuation that I in any direct/indirect way affected the outcome is categorically untrue.  (emphasis added by SCPR)

SCPR

If there is truth to it, please detail your involvement and/or that of any other person who might have had a hand in Ms. Litman not having her job with the bank. 

HAROLD

Ms. Litman is the only one who can answer why she is no longer employed by Huntington.

...

Thank you,

Martin Olson
Stark County Political Report

Categorically untrue! (Harold)

The SCPR is not buying Harold's statement.

In the wake of the e-mail exchange with Harold,  (by the way, Harold stopped communicating with the SCPR when the questions got too probing), The Report doubled down with sources, a number of whom are highly supportive of Harold, who take the position that based on their personal knowledge how Harold reacted to the Litman candidacy they think that the Harold denial is untrue.  One even calls it a outright lie.

In this day and age of having a president that lies with regularity, the SCPR will not stand for it when local officials/public figures are caught lying as The Report believes Harold has been.

In the unlikely event Harold should be defeated in November, he will only have to look at himself for the answer as to why?

Alan Harold is proving to be "his own worst enemy" in the eyes of some of his political peers some of whom are friendly to and are working for his re-election.

As politicians in general are wont to be highly self-confident which has both and upside and a downside, Harold (in the SCPR's view):

• has an infection of ego that does not serve him well,
• as a audacious official, he does not seem to mind "inappropriately" stepping on the toes of other public officials in areas in which he is not in a position though he projects an attitude of thinking himself to be smarter than everybody else in any given room,
• Anecdotally, there is a tale being bandied about regarding Harold as a high school student at Louisville High School being such a take charge person at Louisville that the then principal used to tell others (of course, tongue-in-cheek) that he and Alan Harold were co-principals.  What a hoot, no?
• seems to have a penchant to surrounding himself with employees on he public payrolls who have a historical (e.g. went to college together, have similar Republican Party political views) connection with him,

The Report hears that because of some of the irritating qualities outlined above, he has alienated public officials with who he must work with on a daily basis which, of course, is detrimental to achieving public interests/purposes across Stark County political subdivision government.

And it is not as if he has not been told by supportive, friendly, Republican side of the political divide that he needs to amend his ways.  Apparently, he is not "coachable."

The Report is also told that in the recent undertaking of upgrading the facilities of the auditor's office, Harold initially proposed a $1 million upgrade.

It took the Stark County commissioners' review of Harold's ambition to pare it down to about $500,000.

Republican officials (according to popular political mythology) are supposed to be more fiscally responsible than that.  Apparently, fiscal responsibility is not part of the political DNA of Harold?

The SCPR trusts that Litman and her Democratic friends (chief among are the Local 550 Ironworkers of which her husband is a vice president and Billy Sherer, II [also a Stark County Board of elections Democratic member] will put on a campaign that will compel Harold to become less arrogant, less incorrigible and be open to considering the general taxpaying public for key auditor's office positions when they open up and not look first to "in his personal history" folks to bring into county government and thereby deny the taxpayer public employment opportunities.

Of course, Harold is far from being alone in terms of elected officials bringing "politically/personally" connected in one way, fashion, or manner persons onto the public payroll.

Here is a cite to a prior blog in which it appears that Harold at least in part made a hire on the basis of "personal" connection in making a hire of a chief technology official.

Anybody who reads the SCPR regularly knows, that The Report often stands alone among the Stark County media in publicizing and excoriating such public official behavior.  And the SCPR IS NOT a respecter of persons.  Republican and Democrat alike get exactly the same scrutiny from this blogger.

The Repository raised the issue with Democrat Kim Perez when he became county auditor but has been nowhere to be heard on Republican Harold's shenanigans.  Interesting, no?

It is with great lament for the SCPR to write this blog chatising Harold for his untoward behavior as alleged which this blogger believes about him and calls for him to tell the full story and to make amends.

Alan Harold is a truly bright guy and perhaps the very finest graduate (2009-2010, 23rd class) of the Canton Chamber of Commerce Signature Leadership Stark County program.

For the most part, The Report is unimpressed with graduates (in terms of other than acquire credentials) of the Stephanie Werren run program.

Harold has been an exception.

His apparently having visited upon Litman this election cycle the same type of treatment he got as a would be candidate for treasurer in 2008 is a clear example of unbridled hypocrisy.

Absolutely NOBODY is above being held to accountability and transparency standards by The Stark County Political Report.

Not even Alan Harold!!!

APPENDIX

HAROLD'S  PETITIONS



Note:  Since the petitions can be difficult to decipher, here is a list of most of the signers and decoded by the SCPR:



LITMAN'S PETITIONS



Note:  Since the petitions can be difficult to decipher, here is a list of most of the signers and decoded by the SCPR:

17TH IN A SCPR SERIES ON HOF FINANCIAL PROBLEMS. "THE ROOF IS FALLING-IN AT 2121 HALAS DRIVE?

It appears that "the roof fell in" at the Pro Football Hall of Fame complex at 8:58 a.m. on Friday, March 16th.

No "luck of the Irish" for HOF Village, LLC creditors in avoiding the filing a $5.3 million mortgage lien on forty (40)  parcels of HOF Village LLC properties  (one parcel unidentified, hmm! wonder which one that was?) contained in the mortgage instrument as filed early Friday morning with the Stark County recorder's office.

The recorder's office opens at 8:30 a.m.  Interesting enough, the creditors' representative was at the recorder's office within minutes of it opening.

Obviously, the creditors did not want to file the mortgage.  They just want the rest of the money owed to them.

The Stark County Political Report has learned that the agreement was that the mortgagees listed in the above-graphic had agreed to hold the March 2nd executed mortgage (see the entire mortgage instrument in the appendix to this blog) through March 15th on the promise of mortgagor HOF Village LLC (a joint enterprise of master developer Stu Lichter's IRG Realty and the National Football Museum, Inc [dba as the Pro Football Hall of Fame]).

Moreover, The Report hears that on Friday, post filing of the mortgage, Lichter and HOF CEO/president C. David Baker were holed up at a local eating establishment likely crying in their beer as they had to be concerned about what the filing might to with HOF Village LLC's effort to get approval of an "up to $100 million bridge loan" with the "the first tranche" expected to be $40 million with, perhaps, more to follow.

$40 million?

Why that's just catching up on the "current" indebtedness obligations, isn't it?

Where's the money coming from to pay the short-term (six months to a year) bridge loan that of course will add a least several million in additional debt?

NOT LOOKIN' GOOD FOR THE HOF-VP FOLKS!

Wonder whether or not Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce president Denny Saunier will go up to 2121 Halas Drive and scream at them for not having had a plan and still not having a "viable" plan?

At the first Strengthening Stark meeting, Saunier lectured central Stark County elected officials on their lack of planning skills.

Or is he like so many so called leaders, a double standard guy.  In other words, a thoroughgoing hypocrite who by virtue of his hypocrisy disqualifies himself to chide the general run of Stark County leaders on financial/economic planning even if he fancies himself by virtue of his private sector position as

If Saunier does dress down the Halas Drive folks, then the "insider"Repository publisher James Porter  (remember:  "The Official Newspaper of the Professional Football Hall of Fame)  will have a scoop to pass on to his reporter staff, no?

The aforementioned mortgage filing could be a turning point signaling that the Canton City Schools are at risk of ending up  with a $170 million to $250 million or "not completely finished" high school football stadium to have to pay a likely high level "utility costs" and "maintenance costs" annual amount.

Of course, as C. David Baker says McKinley students, faculty and administrators can take pride in having "the best damn high school football stadium in America, no?"

Is it time to start talking about ginning up a "Support Our Stadium" (SOS) levy?

APPENDIX

"All 23 Pages of the Mortgage Filed at 8:58 A.M./Friday, March 16, 2018

SCPR "GENERAL ELECTION" SERIES (VOL 2): HARBAUGH WOWS 'EM IN TOWN HALL MEETING?

UPDATED:  THURSDAY  MARCH 22, 2018, 12:24 p.m.

LINK to SCPR Harbaugh Town Hall broken down by "short' (mostly in the 2, 3 and 4 minute ranges videos by issue)

SCPR INTERVIEW OF CANDIDATE HARBAUGH

Harbaugh wows them?

Indeed, so The Stark County Political Report thinks!  And he did it by repeating often his campaign theme of "Country over Party."

The SCPR senses that increasingly voter perceived politician blind loyalty to a political party is going to be costly come election time.

The Report sees Harbaugh's Republican opponent Bob Gibbs as a quintessential party loyalist.

There was at least one question Thursday night which probed as to whether or not, if elected, Harbaugh could, over the longer term, sustain his "Country over Party" promise.

The Town Hall meeting  was a packed house at the Canton Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) post located at 1935 Avalon Avenue NE numbering perhaps as many as 100, more or less.

Harbaugh is the certain to be the Democratic Party nominee come November in the Dems quest to unseat certain to be nominated incumbent Republican Bob Gibbs in Ohio's 7th Congressional District which includes most of Stark County.

Stark County is the most populous part of the district.

The Avon, Ohio resident announced he was challenging Gibbs on June 2, 2017 and it appears that it has been "full steam ahead" ever since.

In the first blog in this series, the SCPR described Harbaugh as being a "Dark Horse" candidate.

Recently, The Report had a brief discussion with Stark County commissioner Janet Creighton (a Republican who serves as a campaign official in the Republican Mike DeWine for governor campaign) to the effect that Harbaugh might be a local version of Connor Lamb of Pennsylvania's 18th Congressional District and perhaps Bob Gibbs ought to be looking over his shoulder.

Predictably, Creighton disagreed.

In a little over 7 months we shall see who has the better gauge on Gibbs' vulnerability.

After  last night and seeing the interest that those in attendance had in dialoguing with him,  perhaps, Harbaugh deserves higher billing than someone to watch.

Not sure if it is a good thing or a bad thing, but there were very few Stark County elected official Democrats in attendance.  Canton treasurer and for Stark County auditor Kim Perez introduced Harbaugh to the crowd.  Canton Ward 5 councilman Robert Fisher was present.  In a subsequent blog  The Report will share a video of Fisher endorsing the Harbaugh candidacy.

Among the missing:  Stark County Democratic Party chairman Phil Giavasis and his brother and Stark County clerk of courts Louis Giavasis, who the SCPR sees as being the chief Stark County Democratic Party political operatives who, one would think, ought to have been at last night's event as an indication that Stark's "organized" Democrats are "all-in" for Harbaugh.  For if they are not, it is hard to see how the Democratic congressional aspirant can achieve a Connor Lamb-esque win.

On the other hand, for them to have been present might be viewed by some as them being types of politicians who in their "heart of hearts" (of course, they would never admit so publicly) rank Party interests over Country, State and local community interests because their personal political goals are inextricably tied to the "organized" Stark County Democratic Party.

Harbaugh seemed at ease and confident as he mixed with the Town Hall attendees.

Gibbs is from Holmes county and has been in Congress since 2013.

The Stark County Political Report videotaped the entire Town Hall which is posted at the end of this blog in the appendix section.

Beginning later today, The Report will be excising each question and answer from the complete video posted below into individual video segments so that Stark Countians and other 7th District registered voters  who expect to vote in the general election can get a good grasp on Harbaugh responses to many issues raised by the mostly "ordinary folks" crowd in attendance last night.

Over the next several days, The Report will be editing video clips of Q&As between Harbaugh and those assembled at Canton's VFW hall.

The first clip is the SCPR's post-event interview in which he doggedly stays on message:  COUNTRY OVER PARTY.



The Report did a number of attendee interviews and will present some of them in future updates to this blog.

It will be interesting to see whether or not Congressman Gibbs will duplicate Harbaugh's foray into Stark County so that the SCPR can videotape his interaction with Stark Countians for all to see and evaluate head-to-head in comparing the two so as to be equipmed to make an informed decision as they decide to vote for.

For those readers who want an idea of what to expect, go to the appendix and click on the video and scan through the complete video.

Of course, some readers will want to watch the entire 1 hour and 27 minutes.

APPENDIX:

The Complete Video of Ken Harbaugh Canton, Ohio Town Hall Meeting of March 15, 2018.

16TH IN SCPR "HOF-VP" SERIES: C. DAVID BAKER ET AL GUNNING FOR NORTH CANTON MAYOR DAVID J. HELD?

UPDATED: THURSDAY, MARCH 15 "THE IDES OF MARCH" 09:18 AM

FIRST TIME PUBLISHED SCPR VIDEO INTERVIEW OF NC MAYOR DAVID HELD AFTER DISTURBING "STRENGTHTENING STARK" MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2018

FIRST TIME SCPR PUBLISHED VIDEO OF CANTON REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CEO/PRESIDENT DENNY SAUNIER ON "THE NEED FOR A PLAN" TO REHAB STARK COUNTY

SOURCE SAYS THAT PORT AUTHORITY 

DID NOT DO AN UNCONDITIONAL APPROVAL

OF

CERTIFICATE OF ESTOPPEL & OTHER DOCUMENTS 

AS IMPLIED IN REPORTING

 IN A MARCH 13TH REPOSITORY ARTICLE

(See Explanation Below Graphic)

EXPLANATORY NOTE:  A source who knows exactly what the Port Authority did in yesterday's action by the Port Authority disputes The Repository's claim that the "Stark County Port Authority Tuesday approved documents that will allow developers to secure an up-to $100 million bridge loan for Johnson Controls Hall of Fame Village."

The source said that the documents referenced have been placed "in escrow" and that it is a misinterpretation (or, perhaps, and editorial override) to say that Tuesday action was an "approval" in that approval IS ONLY EFFECTIVE WHEN several conditions have been satisfied to the Port Authority's satisfaction.

And the SCPR has learned that HOF officials are saying that the initial "bridge" loan, if it ever closes, will be for $40 million as a first tranche of rising eventually to $100 million.  Moreover, many Stark Political Subdivision officials are trying to figure out where the HOF folks are going to repay the loan whatever amount it turns out to be, if at all.

As we all know, as my mother would often say to us Olson kids:  "There is many a slip between the cup and the lip."

This adage is especially true with the Hall of Fame LLC folks.  As noted in The Repository referenced account of the meeting, there have been untold delays while Hall of Fame, LLC gets its act together.

There seems to be as much chaos in terms of dealing with primarily Stark County government officialdom as in the administrative offices of the HOF as in the office located at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, D.C.

ORIGINAL BLOG

Pro Football Hall of Fame "Public Enemy No. 1" North Canton mayor David J. Held?

Of late David Held has been a "profile in 'political' courage" in questioning the accountability and viability of the Canton located Pro Football Hall of Fame expansion project (HOF-VP, announced in 2014) in a series of public meetings/events.

You can bet your bottom dollar that the cheerleading Canton Repository (i.e. the self-style OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER OF THE PRO FOOTBALL HALL OF FAME) publisher James Porter and his allies are gunning for Mayor Held in terms of his continue on as the mayor of North Canton come the 2019 elections.

Originally, the SCPR opined that former Repository executive editor David Kaminski (as a member of the Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce theam) might be a part of a Porter driven political vendetta against Held and other Stark County political subdivision officials who are questioning how the HOF-VP is proceeding.

Kaminski, The Report is told, recently left the Chamber and there is some speculation that he may have done so because of disillusionment with how development of the project is being managed.

Accordingly, it is seems more likely that the Chamber official who may be coordinating with Porter is Denny Saunier.

Saunier got up and spoke as the final contributor to the Strengthening Stark meeting of January 9th which the SCPR captured on video.  An irony of Saunier's remarks is about his admonition of the need for a plan for re-energizing Stark County.

Ironic because the Chamber as an all-in supporter of the HOF-VP apparently has been ineffective in getting HOF CEO/president C. David Baker, who probably now earns upwards of three quarters of a million dollars compensation every year, to have had a sustainable financial plan before raising the hopes and expectations of Stark Countians with the 2014 blockbuster announcement of what is now a $1 billion plus HOF expansion project.

The SCPR video of Saunier's comments:



Just a tad hypocritical, no?

Held, who learned the hard way in dealing with master manager Stu Lichter on North Canton's Hoover Project, that Lichter is a man who makes promises galore but delivers sparsely and then only on the goading of a few mini-courageous public officials who are not nearly as aggressive with Lichter, and, in the case of the HOF-VP C. David Baker.

After years of dealing with Lichter on the Hoover thing, Held has first hand experience with Lichter and therefore is an authority that other Stark County officials ought to be paying close attention to.

Here is David Held with his incisive questioning which had to shake up the Strengthening Stark/HOF-VP folks and hopefully all of the Stark County elected officials in attendance.  (3:52)



After the Strengthening Stark meeting, the SCPR interviewed Held in order to get amplification on this "stirring the waters" commentary that focused on the HOF-VP aspect of Strengthening Stark with is not so subtle allegation suggesting that the HOF village financial packaged or lack thereof was built on shifting sand.



The SCPR has been in Hawaii for the past two months but nonetheless has managed to keep Stark Countians abreast of the tottering ship of state HOF-VP.

A few meetings of the Stark County Port Authority and the Canton City Schools Board of Education have taken place with regard to the desire of Baker et al of the HOF-VP (including its cheerleading private sector allies who want to raid the public trough of taxpayer funding) and scant progress has been made by HOF-VP and Friends in convincing the Port Authority and Canton's schools to grant the HOF certificates of estoppel so that the HOF folks can possibly? get a $100 million bridge loan.

Of course, a bridge loan (if a financial institution is foolish enough to grant one based on being told by Baker et al they think they can get even greater funding of the project out of public dollars) has to be paid back along with some $5 million in interest, more or less.

Over the past week or so a number of Port Authority and CCS BOE meetings have been scheduled only to be abruptly cancelled.

Canton schools' BOE has scheduled a "work session" for next Wednesday presumably to talk with constituents of the schools as to whether or not the BOE granting a certificate will jeopardize the financial stability of the schools going forward.

Mayor Held is to be credited for causing others in Stark County's political subdivisions to back off and persisting in due diligence before acting on the certificate of estoppel requests.

His effort has Baker et al pulling their hair out.

Consequently, in less than two years (November, 2019) you got to believe that Baker, Porter, Kaminski and Saunier will be out for political blood and it could be that Held's greatest barrier to re-election is not his opponent but rather Baker and friends.

The SCPR has already learned that another Stark County elected official has been threatened with political retribution by James Porter.

Maybe Porter, Baker and their ilk might get a taste of their own medicine in the sense that maybe, just maybe they will become the objects of public scorn because of their effort to get the public treasury to bail out what appears to be an ill-conceived and most certainly ill prepared (i.e. having an actual financial plan for funding the expansion in place before turning one shovel of dirt) expansion vision.

And that's exactly what some Stark County officials have bought into.

C. David Baker phantasmagoric dream that he has been and continues to push Stark County taxpayers to fund.

If the HOF-VP was completely and wholly a private sector plan, GOD'S SPEED!!!

We now know that it is not and before one more dollar of public money goes into the project Stark's elected and appointed officials have a fiduciary responsibility to do their due diligence and pretty much be able to guarantee that infusing additional public money into the HOF-VP will "return in spades" dividends to the investing Stark County tax paying public.

SCPR "COUNTDOWN TO PRIMARY" (VOL 7) WHY IS MIKE GIBBONS HELPING RENACCI WIN THE REPUBLICAN U.S. SENATE PRIMARY?

UPDATED:  MARCH 12, 2018 2:05 PM

MARCH 12, 2018

10TH ANNIVERSARY OF SCPR
(3344 BLOGS POSTED)

AS OF 12/31/2017 FEC REPORT

NOT ONE SINGLE STARK COUNTIAN

HAS CONTRIBUTED TO THE

GIBBONS CAMPAIGN

Before getting into today's blog, here is my wife and my "farewell to Hawaii" photo as we will be departing for "frigid" northeast Ohio tomorrow evening after having been in Hawaii for two months.

Readers will note the "jackets," it was a little cool this morning at 71 degrees on a spot near Waikiki Beach.  With temperatures at 40 degrees in Uniontown as this blog is being written, no doubt we will be putting the parkas on once we disembark the plane.

TODAY'S BLOG

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Mike Gibbons of Cleveland tipped his hand last week that he himself thinks he is on the losing side of his challenge of U.S. Representative James Renacci for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate (currently held by Democrat Sherrod Brown) when he jumped all over some "cherry picked" remarks that Renacci made to a group of Northeast Hamilton County Republicans recently.

(Standard YouTube License) (LINK)

There has to be more to this story.  Of course the Gibbons campaign does not provide the full context of Renacci's remarks.  He sarcastically attributes "telling the truth" to Renacci while apparently trafficking in a "partial" truth himself.

The SCPR thinks it is a good thing that Renacci is ranked 46th in his current congressional history of having some ability to work with other Republicans and some Democrats in crafting/sponsoring legislation.

Much of the general public disgust with congresspersons is that way too many of them including Ohio 7th district (which includes most of Stark County) are way, way, way too partisan.  Reflect a moment on Republican Bob Gibbs ranking.  Absolutely disgraceful, no?

The Report takes Gibbons' "cherry picking" on Renacci to be a de facto admission by Gibbons that he knows he is way behind in this race and the "Renacci is a Democrat" line is a political Hail Mary inasmuch as we are now inside 60 days until the primary election and less than that until "early" voting begins.

If anyone doubts that Renacci has earned credentials as card carrying Republican, take a look at this graphic.

Looking at Renacci's placement in the congressional Republican grouping, he is smack dab in the middle and a top tier (probably second tier) Republican congressional leader.

From what The Stark County Political Report reads about Gibbons' political positions, if her were in Congress he would be on the right wing fringes ideology-wise and like bringing up the bottom on the "leadership" factor.

So why would Republicans cotton to him in the primary on May 8th?

Answer: They won't.  It will be Renacci versus Brown.  Brown has no Democratic Party primary opposition.

On a wealthy relative scale of the richest to the poorest (still not poor by average person standards), as already state Renacci is  one of Congress' richest whereas Brown is one of the Senate's poorest.

Originally in this election cycle, Renacci of Wadsworth decided not to run for re-election to the U.S. House of Representatives (the 16th district which includes north/northwest Stark county where he has been serving since January, 2011) to run for governor.

Well, that was a non-starter.  There was no way he was going to be a viable statewide candidate against the likes of Attorney General Mike DeWine, Secretary of State Jon Husted and Lieutenant Governor Mary Taylor.

As luck would have it, the far and away Republican shoe-in to run against Brown for a second time was Ohio treasurer Josh Mandel shocked the political world in dropping out of the Senate race on January 5th of this year.

That left Clevelander Mike Gibbons as the heir-apparent (announced in May, 2017) to the GOP Senate nomination.

Not so quick.

Knowing he was not going to be the GOP nominee for governor, Congressman Renacci jumped all over the Mandel withdrawal and by January 11th was "all-in" for the GOP Senate nomination.

Gibbons big problem is that though a big time Republican donor, he has never run for office and therefore nobody knows him.

Renacci is not exactly a household name across all of Ohio but he has better name ID than Gibbons and he is very, very, very wealthy.  Reportedly, he is among THE RICHEST congresspersons in all of Congress.

Gibbons has a few bucks of his own but is not in Renacci's league.

To the SCPR's way of thinking, that Gibbons is trying to match or exceed Renacci in being pro-Trump is a battle Gibbons cannot win.

Much like his foolish, politically ridiculous "Renacci 'at heart' is a Democrat" ploy.

With the prospect of a "Blue Wave" kicking in for the general election, the "who is more like Trump" positioning by Gibbons and Renacci is likely to backfire hugely.

Who is providing campaign advice to this guy?

So the Republican primary battle is not about who connects with everyday people.

Both Republicans have more money than they know what to do with and are up somewhere in the elitist-rich stratosphere.

Most of us struggle to get from day to day.

The November general election will about connectivity to day-in day-out Ohioans which should be ADVANTAGE incumbent Sherrod Brown.

Adequate campaign funds does not seem to be a problem for either of the Republicans and certainly not for Senator Brown.

Stark County could be a "swing district" battleground between Republicans Renacci and Gibbons.

Who are the Stark Countians "individually" contributing to Renacci?

Who are the Stark Countians "individually" contributing to Gibbons?

Would you believe ZERO?

Believe it or not, nary one Stark Countian is recorded as having contributed to the Gibbons campaign.

Ohio's eight largest county and NO contributors meaning perhaps NO Gibbons organization in Stark County.

Now that'a a campaign to win statewide in Ohio, no?

GENERAL ELECTION SERIES (VOL 1) AUGUST 4, 2014: THE BEGINNING OF THE END FOR "AUDITOR" ALAN HAROLD?

THE SETH PETERSON SAGA

It could be that the "hottest" race in Stark County in this year's general election could be between incumbent Republican Alan Harold and Democratic challenger and Massillon Ward 6 councilwoman Linda Litman.

As depicted above, Harold might well be in a precarious position in retaining his post as the elected Stark County editor.

Since 2003 when now Stark County commissioner Janet Creighton resigned the office she had held for years (1991—2003) to take over as mayor of Canton, the auditor's office has been a political war zone between Stark County's "organized" Democrats and Republicans.

Current Stark County Brant Luther was appointed by the Republicans to replace Creighton.  But he was unable to hold the office losing to then Canton auditor Kim Perez in 2004.  Luther was Creighton's "right-hand-man" for part of her stint as county auditor.

As expanded upon below, Perez got caught in a political buzzsaw which local attorney and civic activist Craig T. Conley labeled as being "Zeiglergate" which provided current auditor Alan Harold (a Republican) an opportunity that he took full advantage of to reclaim the seat for the Republicans

It might be that a series of recent goof-ups by Harold (which will be the focus of this series) will provide Democrats a way back into controlling the office at the hand of Massillon councilwoman Linda Litman whose resume includes extensive experience in the financial world (e.g. First Merit Bank, now Huntington Bank).

Later on in this series, the SCPR will be sharing with readers the outrage that has been expressed by some leading Stark County Democratic officials who perceive Harold as "not playing fair" with the Democratic candidate trying to unseat him.

It is a growing Stark County Political Report perception that Alan Harold as county auditor has been his own worst enemy in doing a number of things as auditor that has brought The Report to downgrade him from his long held perch as one of this blogger's top tier Stark County elected officials.

The Report has not updated an evaluation of Stark County elected officials lately, but readers can be certain that Harold has fallen of the list which he once attained a #2 ranking, to wit:

Today's volume deals with (as a "first" example of his being "his own worst enemy") his hire of college pal Seth Peterson as his chief of information technology.

Harold, elected initially in 2010 in an environment in which Democrat incumbent Kim Perez (now Canton city treasurer) was, among other things (see below) apparently thought by Stark Countians to have been too politically close to Stark County treasurer Gary Zeigler when on April 1, 2009 news broke that Zeigler's chief deputy treasurer Vince Frustaci was suspected of having stolen Stark County taxpayer money and, rightly or wrongly, Zeigler and Perez were seemingly perceived by the Stark County voting public:

• (in Zeigler's case) of not having done enough in having secured the county treasury physical facilities/policy/practice-wise to have prevented the eventual Frustaci pleaded guilty to theft, and
• (in Perez's case) of not having acted on irregularities in data/information coming from the treasury from Frustaci so as to have alerted officials so that the theft might possibly have been ended earlier in the 2003—2008 ($2.46 million).

Zeigler reached an agreement with Stark County commissioners amid many "legal" twists and turns in October, 2011 to retire/resign.

Perez was defeated by an Alan Harold who was politically in the right place at the right time.

Harold was re-elected in November, 2014 when opposed by Canton City Schools treasurer Jeff Gruber who, as the SCPR recollects, did not actively campaign.

On August 4, 2014 Stark County auditor Alan Harold hired as his chief information technology officer one Seth Peterson at some $122,000, more or less,

Okay.

So?

Well, Peterson, a personal friend of Harold's dating back to their days as students at then Mount Union College.  Witness these e-mail exchange between The Stark County Political Report and Harold a couple of days ago:

SCPR:  Moreover, I am told (which surprised me because you didn't volunteer it when I asked you why the hire of Peterson?) that you were a roommate of Peterson's at Mount Union. 

Is this allegation true or untrue?

Note:  The Report is incorrect in Harold not having provided his history with Peterson in prior conversations (see this LINK)

Harold:  Untrue.

SCPR:  As a follow up, if you were not a roommate of Peterson's at Mount Union, did you have any connection with him at Mount Union or post-Mount Union whatsoever before his hiring by the Stark County auditor's office?

Harold:  Yes

SCPR:  If so, please detail that/those connection(s).

Harold:  I met Seth at Mount Union and considered him a friend.  

We lost touch through the years after college and reconnected when he had called me in +/-2012 to inquire about a job posting in another unit of local government. 

One conversation led to another, several on-site interviews were held with various staff that led to a job offer, though he declined to work for the county due to his commitment to his job at the time. 

 When that specific project ended, we re-engaged and he joined our staff.  He was well-qualified for the job and certainly had the requisite experience.  

I remain disappointed by the events surrounding his departure and believe reasonable employers would have reached the same conclusions that I did. (emphasis added)

Hiring one's personal friends or political pals has a long human history as being a move that is fraught with perils especially when the hiring puts that friend/pal in a public service position.

The Report thinks Harold made a monumental mistake (as said so at the time) in not promoting Anita Henderson to the top spot.

Everybody the SCPR talks to about Henderson gives her rave reviews.  And, this blogger has covered quite a few Stark County commissioner meetings in which it was apparent that Henderson knew her stuff.

One tends not to properly vet a friend/pal as one would if contemplating hiring a total stranger.

Henderson's cmployment date:  June 14, 1987.  Over 30 years.  Wow!

Talk about a sure thing in terms of reliability to do the job as it should be done in all aspects of doing the job of being the top information/technology person Anita Henderson appears to be about a good as it gets in knowing what you're getting in an employee, no?

Disappointed in Peterson?

This from a Repository report of June 2, 2016:

[A female technology sector employee] had received a warning letter in March, which among other things, said she was spending too much time away from her desk and in the office of a male information technology employee.

Multiple SCPR sources say that the "male information technology employee" was Seth Peterson.

Both Peterson and the female employee departed employment with the auditor's office on or about May 4, 2016.

It appears that Harold did what he should have done in asking Peterson and the female employee to resign their employment with the auditor's office.

And he did the appropriate thing in not offering Peterson any severance pay.

The troubling thing about the resignations is that Harold did pay the female employee $9,142 in settlement money.

Settlement for what?

That is a question that Auditor Harold so far has refused to answer.

He did provide the SCPR with a copy (at his initiative) of her filing a claim for unemployment compensation showing that she had been denied.

If anything, the unemployment compensation denial buttresses the SCPR's position that paying the employee $9,142 was unwarranted unless Harold provides compelling justification for having done so.

He is not entitled to pay out in his official capacity taxpayer money without a forthcoming explanation as to why.

Here is a guy who refused to allow Gary Zeigler

• when he was restored to the position of Stark County treasurer in 2010 by the Ohio Supreme Court 
• because the-then Stark County commissioners did not afford Zeigler "due process of law" in terminating him as treasurer 

to use Stark County government facilities when he returned to the treasurer's office on being restored by the court BECAUSE Zeigler could not get a bond issued him.

So why is it now okay for Harold (according to The Rep's Tim Botos' June 2nd report) to pay out $9,142 together with an approximate $40,000 more to other dismissed/resigned employees without chapter and verse explanation?

So far, Harold, who usually answers the SCPR's questions, is mum on this one.

To boot, Harold had agreements written (undoubtedly, he would say "on advice of counsel") which included these clauses:

The SCPR thinks that the above-clauses are not so much designed to protect Stark County government but rather to protect Harold's perception of his personal interests.