CORRECTION: The second Massillon BOE appointee is Moe Rickett and not Ester Bryant as originally reported.
VIDEOS
LAW DIRECTOR PERRY STERGIOS
AND
COUNCIL
ON
HIS OPINION ON PARKS & RECREATION
THE RELATIVELY CALM PART
OF THE DISCUSSION ON THE
PARKS & RECREATION ISSUE
PARKS & RECREATION MEMBER
JOHN WOLF'S
SOLUTION TO THE
PARKS & RECREATION ISSUE
(GETS INTO IT WITH COUNCILMAN PETERS)
COUNCILMAN LARRY SLAGLE
ON
HIS PLANS
TO RESOLVE
THE PARKS & RECREATION ISSUE
SAFETY DIRECTOR JIM JOHNSON
&
MAYOR KATHY CATAZARO-PERRY
TAKE ON COUNCIL ON THE
STREET LIGHTING ISSUE
COUNCILMAN PAUL MANSON WEIGHS-IN
COUNCILMAN ED LEWIS WEIGHS-IN
COUNCILMAN PAUL MANSON WEIGHS-IN
COUNCILMAN ED LEWIS WEIGHS-IN
Indeed, a few of fireworks banged loud in a spectacular display of political combustion involving:
- Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry,
- interim safety director Jim Johnson,
- Law Director Perry Stergios,
- Councilman Paul Manson (D - at large),
- Councilman Milan Chovan (R - at large),
- Councilman Donnie Peters, Jr (R - Ward 5), and
- Ed Lewis, IV (R - Ward 6) as well as
- Parks and Recreation board member John Wolf
But it took more than the mix of these persons to set things off.
Okay. Exactly what is the "more than?"
Add in two issues:
- What to do about the Parks and Recreation issue of appointing a new director, and
- Who is to blame for Massillon over paying by perhaps as much as $100,000 plus (when early termination fees are included) for street lighting expenses.
THE PARKS AND RECREATION ISSUE
The explosiveness of the meeting all started with (after Parks and Recreation Committee chairman Larry Slagle opened the topic what to do about the Parks and Recreation Board) Director Stergios. Check out this video of Councilman Ed Lewis asking for Stergios for his imput:
Chairman Slagle went on to conduct a discussion of what to do about the seemingly forever controversy in terms of what authority the Parks and Recreation Board (Board) has with respect to:
- controlling its finances (which with an 0.3% income tax levy [1995] and fees takes in about $4 million annually, and
- determining who is to be the Board's director
The SCPR was very impressed with how Slagle kept the discussion on track amidst the outbursts.
It appeared that Slagle's mission was simple. He was intent on gathering information from council members as to their feelings about the aforementioned primary issues and the lingering issue of what to do with the golf course aspect of Board operations. After the meeting, The Report spoke with Slagle as to what is next.
Most of the meeting discussion on Parks and Recreation went smoothly, witness this video:
That is until Parks and Recreation Board member John Wolf (one of two member appointed by the Massillon Board of Education [the other being Moe Rickett]) was invited to speak by Chairman Slagle.
With Wolf came a second round of pre-4th-of-July fireworks.
First, he compared the 30 or so minute council discussion on Parks and Recreation to the Battle of Gettysburg (which, by the way, yours truly is a native of Gettysburg and the Battle of Gettysburg marks the 150 anniversary of "the turning point in the civil war" 1863 conflict next week).
Second, he announced to council that Parks and Recreation Board is to meet on July 12th and that he was confident that the Board would cobble together its idea(s) of what's its authority should be and that he would present it council soon thereafter.
Wolf's plea with council to be patient with the Board while it came up with a resolution expressing its desires set off Donnie Peters, Jr (Ward 5.). Here is the video.
At the end of the day, it appears to the SCPR that Chairman Slagle has the matter of Parks and Recreation in hand and will be the catalyst in solving this long simmering Massillon department of government problem.
Here is Slagle post-meeting sharing how he plans to approach resolving the Parks and Recreation problem:
THE STREET LIGHTING ISSUE
Ward 1 Councilwoman Sarita Cunningham-Hedderly heads up council's public utilities committee.
She has been waiting until Ohio Edison area manager Ray Martinez could make it to a work session to get into an issue that has been bugging council for a couple months now.
It came to light in April, that Massillon was paying about $15,000 more a month in street lighting rates since former Safety Director George T. Maier (now serving as the "appointed" sheriff of Stark pending the outcome of Ohio Supreme Court litigation as to his qualifications to hold office) negotiated a deal in September, 2012 (effective in October) with American Electric Power (AEP) to what he thought at the time (according to administration officials) was a good deal for Massillon and would result in substantial savings to the city over the two year life of the contract.
But he thought wrong.
How's that?
It appears to the SCPR that on the surface of the consideration, Massillon was getting a better deal from AEP than it was from Ohio Edison (OE).
However, because of the rules of Ohio's Public Utility Commissions (PUCO) on rates (called tariffs by the PUCO) that allowed OE to issue credits to Massillon, the fact of the matter turned out to be that existing OE contract, notwithstanding the seeming better AEP rate, was much the better deal for Massillon on street lighting.
However, because of the rules of Ohio's Public Utility Commissions (PUCO) on rates (called tariffs by the PUCO) that allowed OE to issue credits to Massillon, the fact of the matter turned out to be that existing OE contract, notwithstanding the seeming better AEP rate, was much the better deal for Massillon on street lighting.
What came out of council's discussion last night was that Maier failed to get back to OE's Martinez and let him know that Massillon was thinking about switching to AEP and that the failure is the core reason why Massillon got nailed for about $15,000 a month more in street lighting costs (January through May).
To add insult to injury, when the lights came on (no pun intended) with Maier replacement and interim Safety Director Jim Johnson in April (in consultation with Martinez) that Massilon had made a costly mistake in negotiating the switch to AEP, it was only some splendid work by Martinez that got Massilon back on track with OE.
In other words, the Catazaro-Perry administration looked like a bunch of fumblers and bumblers.
And there was nothing Martinez could do to make that embarrassment to vanity part of the administration's problem go away.
In other words, the Catazaro-Perry administration looked like a bunch of fumblers and bumblers.
And there was nothing Martinez could do to make that embarrassment to vanity part of the administration's problem go away.
What came to light at last night's meeting (likely the first that council knew about it) is that in addition to paying AEP a higher rate for street lighting, Massillon had to pay OE/First Energy Solutions (FES) a termination fee of $150 for what one source tells the SCPR is some 100 or so Massillon accounts held by OE/FES or combination thereof.
It appears, but nobody seemed to know for sure, that AEP must have waived a $16,000 early termination fee when Massilon switched back to Ohio Edison for street lighting.
Somebody had to eat "humble pie" to pull that one off, no?
Somebody had to eat "humble pie" to pull that one off, no?
"Nobody seemed to know" (from the administration standpoint) was at the heart of the matter of the resulting fireworks-esque discussions that took place between Mayor Catazaro-Perry, Safety Director Johnson from the administration side, and Massillon council led by Councilpersons Manson, Chovan and Lewis.
A note: Councilman Donnie Peters, Jr. took the tack that the matter is over and done with and the council persistent questioning was unavailing.
The SCPR sees the street lighting brouhaha as a proxy for the overall issue between the administration and many if not most of council that the adminstrators and councilpersons do not trust each other.
The video (on the street lighting discussion) at the end of this blog amply demonstrates the deep, deep distrust that exists between the administration and council.
It is hard to see how Massillon gets it fiscal affairs straightened out in such a climate.
The key problem, as The Report sees it, is that the tone of the administration (not communicating with council) comes from the clerk of courts office and Clerk Johnnie A. Maier, Jr. and his chief deputy Shane Jackson.
He and his sidekick (as well as other Massillon officialdom adherents to the Maier power model) seem hellbent on beating down any opposition to their plan and vision for Massillon.
Unless and until Mayor Catazaro-Perry separates from the Maier political machine, she is destined to be a one-term-mayor and will likely be remembered as a monumental failure as the city's chief executive after the 24 reign of Frank Cichinelli as mayor.
While Cicchinelli may have brought troubles onto himself which provided the Maier forces an opportunity to pounce on him, his 24 years had to have been - by and large - a very good time for Massillon.
Those days are long gone as Massillon now faces the prospect of being placed in fiscal watch or emergency ironically at the initiative of Mayor Catazaro-Perry herself.
While Cicchinelli may have brought troubles onto himself which provided the Maier forces an opportunity to pounce on him, his 24 years had to have been - by and large - a very good time for Massillon.
Those days are long gone as Massillon now faces the prospect of being placed in fiscal watch or emergency ironically at the initiative of Mayor Catazaro-Perry herself.
At one time in her political career, yours truly thought she had a very bright future.
But that all vanished when she threw in "lock, stock and barrel" as the political appendage to the former Stark County Democratic Party chairman.
In doing so, she has lost her individual political identity and is largely seen as the window dressing of a de facto Maier administration.
In doing so, she has lost her individual political identity and is largely seen as the window dressing of a de facto Maier administration.
Here is the full video of the street lighting fiasco discussion including sharp exchanges between Safety Director Johnson and the mayor with council members:
Weighing in on the night's fireworks were Councilman Manson:
and
Councilman Lewis:
No comments:
Post a Comment