(VIDEOS) A CITIZEN HOLDS THE COMMISSIONERS ACCOUNTABLE!

SCPR UPDATE:  (10:30 p.m.)

SCPR Note:  It could be that a person other than the person named in the 11:00 a.m. published e-mail (which The Report  for purposes of differentiation calls as being "the purported sender") actually sent that e-mail.

The SCPR is unsure because the name used is a common name and it just may be co-incidental that the actual sender has the same name as a person who works at the sheriff's department who has the same name.

To err on the side of caution, the SCPR shares with readers the essence of an e-mail received earlier today.

The purported sender's actual words to the SCPR:  I wanted to get in touch with you and let you know that someone is apparently purporting to bee me and writing to you using my name.

The purported sender has this to say about the manner in which George T. Maier has managed the sheriff's department:

I am a Corrections Officer with the Stark County Sheriff’s Office and very proud to be affiliated with this fine organization. I have come to know and respect Sheriff George Maier and am very pleased with the many professional improvements he is making at the Sheriff’s Office. 

The SCPR thanks "the purported sender" for notifying The Report of what could be a misuse of his name and accordingly has published this update to inform SCPR readers of this development and provide the purported e-mail sender space in the SCPR to express his support for Sheriff Maier so that nobody thinks he (the corrections officer) is being critical of Sheriff Maier.

As noted in the 12:40 PM update, which was before the SCPR became aware that of the name misuse (which came in an e-mailed denial at 5:48 and which The Report did not see until returning from a Massillon City Council meeting sometime after 10:00 p.m. tonight), The Report did confirm with another source that allegations in the 11:00 a.m. published e-mail of work done at the sheriff's office are well founded.

UPDATE:  12:40 PM  (corrected 3:14 p.m.)

A second source has confirmed the details set forth in the e-mail below.  The second source tells the SCPR that about $50,000 (corrected upwards from $15,000 [The Report having heard the message as being 15 rather the 50 [the actual number cited]) was spent on the "new duty belts" (aka "gun belts) alone.

New material:  The Report is told that there was absolutely nothing wrong with the "old?" belts.  But that the sheriff wanted the "splash and dash" (i.e. "the basket weave effect" [of the Ohio State Patrol]) for cosmetic purposes.

UPDATED:  11:00 AM (EMAIL TO THE SCPR)

Fantastic reporting on the Sheriff getting a free pass. Where has the money gone?

Well...

- New flooring in the old Sheriff's Residence, ( west side of original building )
- New flooring in employee entrance, complete with huge Sheriff star floor mats
- New flooring in supervisor's office
- New paint job for supervisor's office, complete with 'team colors' black and gold stripes around the ceiling
- New large star decals for just about any flat surface you can think of, proudly displaying the 'George T Maier' part. Doors, walls, windows, you name it.
- New duty belts for all of the deputies, for the sole purpose of having his preferred basket weave, versus the plain black they were wearing.
- Personal assistants like Derrick Loy. What exactly does he do anyways, we sure don't know.
- Signage signage signage. If he can put his name on it, it's there.

As far as the inmate capacity promise, I don't see it going to the full 501 any time soon. Today we are at 417, roughly the same as year ago.

We thought we were getting a new, good Sheriff. We got another politician instead.

 VIDEOS

 COMMISSIONER CREIGHTON

ON

NOT DODGING QUESTIONS

==================================

COMMSSIONERS

IN ACTION

WITH

CITIZEN WHO IS NOT ACCEPTING

"NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY"

STANCE 

ON ISSUE 29 PROMISES 

The Stark County budget is not "entertaining" and therefore it is difficult for the media to get the everyday citizen into examining, understanding and questioning the make up of the budget.

What's more is that to get citizens to challenge the county appropriators (i.e. the Stark County commissioners) to account for appropriations that appear to be having very little or any effect on the quality of  various Stark County departmental operations.

 Here are LINKS to the week long series that the SCRP did several weeks ago on the county budget.

1. Volume 1
2. Volume 2 
3. Volume 3 
4. Volume 4
5. Volume 5 
6. Volume 6 
7. Q&A, Commissioners Comments

The Report is happy to see that one Stark Countian took the trouble as a responsible citizen to go through the series and get a grip on numbers.

Rather than publish the citizen's entire e-mail "en bloc," the SCPR chooses to take it point-by-point.

The core of the citizen analysis of the budget numbers is what has Stark County Democratic Party appointed sheriff George T. Maier doing with the millions more in taxpayer dollars that the commissioners have appropriated to Maier over and above what Sheriff Tim Swanson had to work with back in 2010, 2011 and 2012.

EMAIL POINT ONE (in bold italic)


Thank you for your coverage of the County Budget.

Thank you SCPR reader for paying attention and studying the nunbers.

EMAIL POINT TWO (in bold italic)

While everyone has been fixated on Maier's Qualifications, no one has paid any attention to his record as Sheriff.  

In Nov. 2011, County officials passed a sales tax with the promise of reopening the jail beds.  

It is April 2015, [sic - correction "April 2014"] 18 mos later and we still don't have the jail at full capacity, the road patrol restored, or the Sheriff's detective bureau reopened.

For the record, the SCPR has gone back to The Report's video archives to retrieve exactly what the commissioners have had to say ("in their own word") about what voters could expect of them if Stark Countians would be gracious enough to pass a new sales tax of 0.5% which they nominated and which appears on the Stark County budget as being the Justice System Sales Tax (JSST).

COMMISSIONER CREIGHTON ON ANSWERING QUESTIONS



As SCPR readers just saw, Commissioner Creighton in her on words says that she dodges no questions.

While the SCPR is pleased to pass the citizen's questions on to the commissioners, The Report's experience is that they (the commissioners) do face up to questions asked.

However, The Report does recall that on March 6, 2013 Stark County citizen Bruce Nordman appeared at a regular Wednesday (1:30 p.m.) commissioners meeting and during "Public Speaks" took the commissioners to task for not keeping county's promise (if the JSST passed, which it did see this LINK).  His specifically target promised had to do with the number of jail beds in use.

As The Report recalls, about 400 beds of the total of 501 were in use on the 6th.

The Report's take is that the commissioners tried to dodge responsibility by blaming various factors under the control of the sheriff (Swanson until February 10, 2013; Maier from Feburary 11, 2013 on) and emphasizing that they the commissioners are only appropriators of JSST revenues.

To his credit, Nordman was not buying.

He certainly understood as Commissioner Creighton (see the video below) said that the commissioners are not the sheriff's boss.

However, he recognized rightly that the commissioners have the "bully pulpit" available to lean on the sheriff to step things up.



Within a very short time after Nordman complained, with what the SCPR attributes to George T. Maier gimmericky, the usage shot up to 450.

Maier explained that he was able to increase the number by 12.5% by doing some manipulating of "trustee" type prissoners.

Apparently, the gimmerickery didn't last.

Interestingly enough, nine (9) months (i.e. late December, 2013) after Nordman queried the commissioners guess what the number of jail bed were in use?

How about 416?

So now you are 18 months out from when money first started coming in from the JSST (July, 2012) and Stark County was at 416 beds?

Hmm?

By the way, it could be higher than 416 now as the exact number is prone to change daily.

But the point - remember - is that the promise was and remains that "all" 501 beds, more or less, are to be in use.

Preferably, the citizen who wrote the SCPR will make an appearance like Nordman has (repetitively) at commissioners' meeting and ask the questions and keep the pressure one.

It does get a little bit dicey when a citizen confronts a public official.

 EMAIL POINT THREE  (in bold italic)

Maier claims he has been unable to open the jail beds due to an inability to hire enough qualified corrections officers and peace officers.  Did he return any of his 17.9 million dollar appropriation from 2013?  If not what did he spend it on?  Swanson was able to fully staff the jail, detective bureau, and road patrol in 2010 with 16.5 million.  Maier assuming he did not return any of his appropriation to the General Fund from last year, managed to spend 1.4 million (8.5%) more than Swanson did in 2010 and still not fully staff the jail, DB, or Road Patrol. 

We have been in a recession since 2010, the cost of living index has not increased more that 8.5% since 2010.  Maier should have easily been able to restore services to the level they were under Swanson in 2010 with 17.9 million.  Now, the commissioners are giving him another 2 million dollar increase to 19.8 million a 50% increase since 2012 and 20% increase since Swanson's all time high spending mark in 2010, a quarter of the year is gone and we still don't have the jail fully open, the road patrol restored, or the detective bureau back.

CITIZEN QUESTIONS

Where is the money going?  (Raises? Promotions? Overtime? New positions to reduce employee workload?)  

CITIZEN SAYS GIVE HIM MONEY MAIER HAS & HE WOULD GET RESLUTS

Give me a budget of nearly 20 million dollars, and 4 million in increases in two years and I can improve office increase morale too.   

 EMAIL POINT FOUR  (in bold italic)

I know Maier won't answer questions from you but where are the Commissioners? 

Yes!  Let the SCPR at Maier.

Of course Maier will not talk with the SCPR.  The Report has repeatedly tried to get him to answer the most basic of questions.  But he knows that there will be no softballs from the Stark County Political Report.

All of which goes to show that "the big, bad sheriff" doesn't have the gumption of Commission Creighton.

She has never dodged a SCPR questions.

Maier has a person pique with the SCPR (i.e. The Report has the audacity to critique him and his brother for their "power politics" way of getting their way") and he takes it out on Stark Countians who have no one but the SCPR in Stark County media to ask the really tough questions.

But he doesn't mind taking taxpayer money every payday!

In response to the citizen's questions, the commissioners need to call the sheriff in to a work session and ask "in your face" questions that they have and demonstrated that the can of certain Stark County officeholders and appointed officials (e.g. the Stark County recorder, the Veterans Service Commission, the Family Court judges, the county coroner and others).

For some reason, Maier, by and large, seems to get a pass.

Commissioner Bernabei seems to be enamored with George T. Maier.  However, it appears to the SCPR he is not willing to take him to task as he certainly did with Canton mayor William J. Healy, II when he was Canton service director.

It happens rarely, but every once-in-awhile Bernabei abandons his usual critical nature and gets totally out-of-character in dealing with county officeholders and appointed officials that he has apparently designated as being on his "one of my 'above criticism'" list.

CITIZEN SEES SAME THING THAT SCPR DOES

If it were any other officeholder, you can bet Commissioner Bernabei would be asking why last year's 8.5% increase from 2010 was not sufficient to restore essential services to 2010 levels.  Commissioner Bernabei (who appears to be Maier's chief spokes person these days) can point to the difficutly finding people, Maier's legal issues, the Supreme Court removing Maier (for a month) etc. but this is all missing the point

CITIZEN:  EXCUSES, EXCUSES, EXCUSES

The excuses may explain the delay in restoring services, (I find it hard to believe that in this economy the Sheriff can't find enough qualified people in over two years) but any delay should also come with a corresponding delay in expenses.  Given that he had not restored the DB, Road Patrol and only restored 1/4 of the promised jail beds in 2013 one would think that he should have returned 1.75 million of the 2 million increase he received in 2013, especially since the Sheriff received a 2 million dollar increase in 2012 to start restoring those services  while virtually every other county department was still being cut.  

With all Maier's other press releases I'm certain if he returned a significant amount of money to the General Fund at the end of the year we would have read in the Repository Sheriff Maier returns $$$$$ to County General Fund.

CITIZEN FOCUSES ON COMMISSIONER CREIGHTON (NO 2014 OPPONENT)

Commissioners Creighton ran two years ago on a platform promising voters that they would restore Sheriff's Department Services.  Two years later she is again on the Ballot and that promise remains unfulfilled.  She and the Commissioners did their part, they not only restored funding to 2010 levels, they increased well beyond any reasonable inflationary index.  Despite the increases the Sheriff hasn't restored services to 2010 levels.  I know she is unopposed, but doesn't she owe it to voters to ask for an explanation if Commissioner Bernabei won't?          

The SCPR has made it clear of the past three and one half (3-1/2) years that The Report is well taken with Commissioner Janet Creighton.

However, it is never good for citizens for a public official to run for reelection unopposed.

It is interesting that former Democratic commissioner Gayle Jackson is reportedly itching to get back as a commissioner but she doesn't have the moxy to run against Creighton.

Jackson is part of the Maier Loyalty Club.  Most of the members of that politically incestuous group want no part of a real political fight.

And Jackson is no exception.

CITIZEN:  THE NUMBERS "DON'T ADD UP" FOR MAIER

Here it is appropriate for the SCPR to once again insert the historical budget numbers.

When Maier took office his office was at 97% of its 2010 funding level.  

Within a month it was increased to 108.5% of the office's 2010 level a 11.5% increase from the prior year. 

He now stands at 120.5% of the office's 20110 level and we still don't have 2010 level services.  2012 is on Swanson and if he were in office one should rightly question why he didn't do more to restore services to 2010 levels, but minus two months 2013 and the first quarter of 2014 are on Maier.  

The Commissioners have given him $4 million in taxpayer money (in addition to the $2 million they gave Swanson) to restore the Sheriff Department's service to 2010 levels and all we have gotten in excuses.  We have spent four million dollars since 2011 (under Swanson and Maier) to increase jail by beds 100.  After the commissioners agreed to another 2 million this year Maier has restored it to 450.  Will it take another 2 million next year to finally get back to the 500 Commissioners promised us in 2011?    

And we have made no progress on restoring road patrol or the detective bureau.

The numbers just don't add up.


The SCPR agrees with this citizen.

Maier and the commissioners need to start providing answers that are the equivalent of keeping promises made in the YES! for SAFETY Issue 29.

The SCPR and the people are watching!

2019 will be here before sooner than county officials think, no?

(VIDEOS) DID "NEW" CITY COUNCILMAN RICHARD HART PUT CITY OF CANTON COUNCIL IN "GRIDLOCK?"

UPDATED:  08:15 AM

VIDEOS

CANTON COUNCIL

DEBATES

LEGALITY OF RULES COMMITTEE MEETING

=======================================

 LAW DIRECTOR

JOSEPH MARTUCCIO

EXPRESSES CONCERNS

ON

MAJORITY LEADER SELECTION

=======================================

COUNCILMAN THOMAS WEST

REQUESTS

ELIGIBLE FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBERS

TO

MAKE

MOTION TO RECONSIDER 

MAJORITY LEADER SELECTION
(IMPUT MARTUCCIO & SCHULMAN)

=======================================

CANTONIANS

SPEAKING UP

ON

"PUBLIC SPEAKS"

=======================================

COUNCILMAN THOMAS WEST

EXPLAINS HIS POSITION

ON MAJORITY LEADER SELECTION PROCESS

While some if not a good part of Canton City Council may have breathed a "sigh of relief" when former Republican councilman Richard Hart was elected councilman-at-large on November 5, 2013; it could turn out to be a disaster for the Hall of Fame City in terms of having a functioning city council, the SCPR thinks.

Everybody assumed that Democrat Roland K. Burns, III would be elected.  But he wasn't and the likely reason The Report thinks is the last minute buzzsaw that Burns ran into days before the election in the publication of a series of articles in the local mainstream media detailing complaints that city of Canton officials had with regard to the maintenance and upkeep of a number of properties his company is owner of in the city.

Had Burns been elected, as expected, he - believed to allied, more or less, with the six councilpersons who were in favor of Frank Morris (D-Ward 5) being the replacement vice president and hence majority leader for David Dougherty (D-Ward 7) likely would have voted for Frank Morris thereby providing 7 votes for Morris and making him the undisputed choice of a majority of council.

Dougherty, the SCPR believes, fell out of favor with the six because of his acerbic manner in dealing with his fellow councilmembers during the last term of council.

Had Dougherty maintained "passable" relations with a majority of council, Frank Morris is unlikely to have emerged as a challenger.

Anyhow, enter Richard Hart.

Nobody knows nor are they ever likely to know the "real" reason Hart decided to abstain last Thursday night from the vote to elect a vice president (majority leader) of Canton's council.

Had he voted for West as it is thought was his original intention, then there would have been a six to six tie.  In his situation, there is a division of thinking as to whether or not council president Allen Schulman could break a tie.  If he can, then Morris wins and council moves on his having attained 7 of 13 votes.

If Schulman is not entitled to break the tie (Councilman Thomas West's position), then a gridlock develops and only "wheelin and dealin" over who knows what period of time will be need to break the deadlock.

Such situation would be like the one that is currently in place (perhaps, worse) in that there are not 7 votes for Morris, which causes Canton law director concerns as to whether or not council decisions made with the participation of a questionable vice president (majority leader) would be challengeable.

Martuccio is worried that a person or entity affected by legislation passed in the foregoing context might result in the challenged ordinance (or even all such ordinance) be successfully challenged as never having had any validity because of the context of the legislation being passed.

Witness this debate last night among council members as to whether or not it was legal for apparent Majority Leader Morris to have what he was calling a committee meeting on rules changes.

(Note:  As shown on the video, Clerk of Council Cynthia Timberlake indicated to council members and placed on the agenda for last night's meeting [done on Saturday] at Law Director Martuccio's direction that the meeting which, in fact, was held had been canceled)

Some think that somehow Mayor Healy got to Hart and persuaded him that it would be good idea to throw "a monkey wrench" into the organization of council by voting to abstain in the vote for council leadership thereby throwing the whole process into turmoil and possibly to litigation.

Why would Healy want to get involved?

The thinking is that if he does not have a majority on council on "key" issues to him like he pretty much had enjoyed in his first term and so far in his second term, then the more division on council the better.  For if he finds a need to veto legislation, then - with a deeply divided council - it is unlikely that a veto would be overridden.

If litigation ultimately becomes the tack taken in the contest between Councilman Tom West (D-4) and Frank Morris (D-9), it risks a similar fate to that experienced in the contest between interim Stark County sheriff Tim Swanson and the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee selected (Febuary 5, 2013) George T. Maier as its appointee to succeed Sheriff-elect Mike McDonald when he could not take office due to what turned out to be a terminal illness.

The Supreme Court ousted Maier from office on November 6, 2013 saying that he was not qualified under Ohio statutory law to be appointed.

All of which is to say - in the view of many - that the Democrats have put Stark County into a state of  uncertainty and thereby seem to put themselves in negative stead with Stark County voters.

So in an analogous sort of way the question becomes, would some court declare that Morris does not properly hold office?

As far as Democrats jeopardizing their hold on Canton government, such is not a likelihood given their 9 to 1 registration majority.  However,  Cantonians certainly have to have a negative view of what is going on and the chaotic proceedings have to affect their confidence in Canton City Council governance.

The reason for Hart's abstaining is now unimportant.   For the fact of the matter, it appears that a consequence of his having done so has put council in a state of gridlock.

Perhaps, Canton council's fight might be worse the gridlock in Washington.

Worse than?

It could be.  Because Canton is a fight among 11 Democrats presumably with similar political points of view and objectives whereas Washington is about a fight between Republicans and Democrats and their varying viewpoints and objectives.

The addition of the "independent" Hart allowing himself to be put in the position of mucking things up by injecting himself in what is really a fight among Democrats makes no sense at all.

As the SCPR sees it, Hart's injecting himself into the intra-Democratic-Party-fight makes him the key factor in prospect that an "in the courts" fight may materialize among the two factions of Democrats that are now squared off against one another over the majority leader selection process.

Last evening, Canton City Council met to have "a committee meeting" (some preferred to have it called a "work session," to determine whether or not to change council rules for the 2014-15 term of office.

As seen in the first video in this blog, almost "right-off-the-bat," majority leader challenger Councilman Thomas West "challenged" the apparent majority leader Frank Morris.

In the same video, Law Director Joe Martuccio put it best:  "the tension among council members [assembled for the 5:30 p.m. meeting] is palpable," he said.

Martuccio, after the conclusion of the meeting, explained to the SCPR exactly what his concerns are, what he might do, and the timetable for his acting.



As Martuccio said, the tension last night was obvious.

What's more is that the unease permeated the regular council meeting which convened at 7:30 p.m.

In the following video, Councilman West in the "miscellaneous business" portion of the regular meeting, is seen opening up the festering sore of his dissatisfaction of Thursday's meeting with his request that one of the six voting for Morris (or the abstaining member Hart) as nominated by council rules move for reconsideration of Thursday's decision.

(Note:  No one responded to West's request.  Accordingly, the opportunity - again, by the rules of council - is lost.  Also, Law Director Martuccio and council president Allen Schulman are seen weighing in on West's request)



Interestingly enough, he could not get the one vote he needed for a reconsideration of Thursday night's council action of selecting Morris by a 6 to 5 vote with Hart abstaining.

After the meeting, West went into greater detail with SCPR as to what his thinking is on the entire majority leader selection process is.



One would have thought that Hart would have "at least" provided West with the motion he needed.  And there is no doubt that West ally Chris Smith (elected by a 12 - 0 vote on Thursday to become Canton's first African-American "female" leadership person) would have seconded the motion.

But no! Hart could not bring himself to do it.

The Report is told that the six who voted for Morris will change a single vote only "when Hell freezes over."

It appears to the SCPR that a thorough going discussion of the process might satisfy West and Canton may thereby be able to "move on" as West keeps saying he wants to do.

But, while West says that it's the process that is his hang up, one has to wonder whether or not his cure has any gain whatsoever of getting Canton council meeting again.

For if the council members were to accede to West and "reconsider" their vote, then they are left with political wrangling like occurred in the history of American political party conventions in which scores if not more than 100 votes (see "History" at this LINK) had to be taken in order for the delegates to settle on a nominee.

What a spectacle that would be, no?

A really "credibility building" exercise (sarcasm), Council West!

So that is why the SCPR is skeptical that West wants to move on.

It could be that Law Director Martuccio will make a decision that he is firm on his Thursday night opinion that for a majority leader (vice president of council) to be elected, it takes 7 votes of the 12 to do so.

Absent those 7 votes, he says, he may require that each and every piece of legislation to be signed off on by at least 7 affirmative voting members.

He has not made a final determination, but that is where the SCPR thinks he is heading.

And if that's where he ends up, it is hard to see how this whole mess does not end up in the courts and ultimately, if not to start, in the Ohio Supreme Court.

Isn't that great.

• Stark County was in the Ohio Supreme Court (2011) over what turned out to be the-then Stark County treasurer Gary Zeigler's illegal removal from by Stark County commissioners over the commissioners (Bosely, Meeks and Ferguson) [interesting enough, all Democrats]),
• Of course, the ongoing Swanson v. Maier saga currently under way, and
• now, West versus Fisher, Hawk, Mack, Mariol, Morris, Smuckler and Schulman?

No wonder Americans are disgusted with the politicians in government at all levels.

Several Cantonians took to the lectern in the Public Speaks portion of last night's council meeting (Bruce Nordman, Stephanie Sweeney, Leon Cote and Peter DeGiacomo) and had their say.



Organized Republicans and Democrats are really doing splendidly these days from Washington, D.C. all the way down to Canton, Ohio, no?

And meanwhile the peoples' business is not getting done.

There is no doubt to the SCPR that Councilman West is dug in and that he feels besieged by his fellow Democrats on council and the result seems likely to be that nothing gets done in Canton City Council while the intra-party fight goes on.

Swell, really swell!!!

(VIDEOS) WILL CANTON PARKS LEVY ISSUE BE "VICTIMIZED" BY HEALY/NORDMAN FEUD OVER CANTON POLICE & FIRE FUNDING?

UPDATED:  11:30 AM

VIDEO

BRUCE NORDMAN

GROUP 175

ON

GROUP 175 POSITION

ON

CANTON PARKS LEVY
======================
NORDMAN
(FULL VIDEO)
SETTNG FORTH
HISTORY & CURRENT STATUS
OF 
GROUP 175 FIGHT WITH HEALY

One of Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II's goals for his entire nearly six years in office has been and continues be to restructure Canton's parks and recreation over a three-year period so as to make it more efficient and responsive to the needs of Cantonians and, I might add, to many outside-of-Canton Stark Countians who use Canton's parks.

There appears to be no organized opposition to the 4 mill levy to be voted upon by Canton voters next Tuesday.  It is designed to raise about $2.9 million per year and, if passed, would free up about $1.2 million for other general fund applications.

Currently, the Canton park system is run by an independent (of the mayor and city administration) by a Board of Commissioners, to wit:

On the Canton Parks "levy committee" website there is a thorough discussion of what park officials plan to do with the $2.9 million if it becomes available.

And, undoubtedly, there are a number of interests both in and out of Canton government who will be pressuring the Healy administration and Canton City Council to use "the new found money," if it materializes for pet projects.

One interest that has already surfaced is one named Group 175 formed by Vassar Park (located in Ward 9 - Councilman Frank Morris, III) residents Bruce Nordman and Bruce Brewer (president of the Vassar Park Neighborhood Association).



Earlier this year, this collection of Cantonians prevailed on Councilman Morris to sponsor an "informal resolution" wherein council goes on record as putting the Healy administration on notice that should the park levy pass, the resulting new infusion of $1.2 into the general fund is to go towards beefing up Canton's safety forces (police and fire) numbers.

The measure passed unanimously.

The goal of Group 175 is to get the police force up to 175 strong (now about 150) and the fire department to 175 strong (now about 140).

Because the mayor is proceeding cautiously (acceding only to step increases of 12 new hires for the police and fire departments; likely over the next year)  and not committing to Group 175's goals within the foreseeable future, Group 175 is taking a "hands off" approach in terms of supporting the levy.

Parks director Derek Gordon has tried to get Group 175's endorsement but has failed to corral it due to Healy's refusal to commit to the 175 with a timetable certain satisfactory to Norman, Brewer, et al.

For a full presentation on the history and the current status of Group 175's ongoing fight with Mayor Healy, the SCPR presents the following videotaped October 30, 2013 interview with Nordman that provides all the details:



To the SCPR, should the park issue fail, in terms of cobbling the available financing together to fund Group 175's goals; it seems that the loss of the $1.2 million would severely damage the prospect that the Healy administration would have the financial wherewithal to get to the 175 policemen and firemen level.

However, The Report suspects that in the mind of the Group 175 folks, there is this plan to seize the day should the parks levy fail and generate a citizen initiative for an income tax increase specifically designated as being for police and fire operations only.

Such a levy (if for a reasonable amount) probably will be relatively easy to pass.

County officials were surprised when in November, 2011 they were able to pass a 0.5% countywide sales tax increase on the promise that the $22 million, more or less, that it generates would be dedicated to spending for "law enforcement purposes 'only.'"

It passed by a surprisingly comfortable margin.

Nordman will not admit to the SCPR that a "for police and fire manpower only" tax issue is in Group 175's future and therefore the group sits on their collective hands on the parks issue.

A dedicated "for police and fire ONLY" levy would be the surest past for Group 175 to ensure that Canton achieves and maintains the 175 police and fire staffing level, no?

Reading between the lines, it seems to the SCPR that Group 175 does not trust Mayor Healy to energetically and with purpose to work with them to find funds (including the $1.2 million) from various sources to get Canton's police and fire to 175 in force each.

While the SCPR above all understands the "lack of trust of Healy," it does appear that his plan for restructuring makes sense and should be supported by Canton voters.

Councilwoman-at-Large Mary Cirelli opposed the plan when the levy issue was up for a council vote because 4 mills, she says, generates too much money.  She would support it at 2 mills or $1.45 million.

Councilman Edmond Mack (Ward 9) also voted "no" because, he says, that the 4 mills is too expensive for what Ward 9 residents will get out of it.

Nearly all city officials (including 11 of the 13 councilpersons) are supporting the parks levy.

Impressive is the list that promoters of the levy have come up with in terms of contributors to the levy campaign, to wit:

In the pre-general report filed on October 24th, the levy committee shows that it has raised some $23,000.

But in the end, the levy's passage or failure could boil down to the "silence" of Group 175.

But have they thought of this possible consequence should the parks levy fail?

Given this is a "pet project" of Mayor Healy and if he is convinced that the failure came at the hands of Groups 175's "silence," won't he prove to be much more resistant to their achieving their goal any time soon?

(VIDEOS) HEALY & NORDMAN CONTINUE TO "DUKE IT OUT" OVER CANTON SAFETY FORCES: A TEST OF WILLS?

VIDEOS

HEALY/NORDMAN "BLOW-OUT"

JUNE 17, 2013

(AN ENCORE PRESENTATION)

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

NORDMAN (PUBLIC SPEAKS)

AUGUST 26, 2013

SAYS CITY RANKS 62 OF 100 WORSE CRIME CITIES

NORDMAN (SCPR INTERVIEW)

AUGUST 26, 2013

REVIEWS PROGRESS TOWARDS GETTING TO 175"

REACTS TO COUNCILMAN WEST 

ON 

"STAY OUT OF WARD 2"

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

ADDRESSES SHERIFF MAIER'S

FAILURE TO GET

STARK COUNTY JAIL TO

501 BEDS

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

Canton mayor William J. Healy, II "may have met his match" in his face-off with Canton citizen extraordinaire Bruce Nordman of the Vassar Park area of Canton.

Face-off?

Indeed!

For those who haven't seen it, it is an absolute must to see the SCPR video on Nordman and Healy screaming at one another over the issue.



Months ago in an appearance at Canton City Council (Council) and using the Public Speaks forum provided for on Council's agenda, Nordman started demanding that Canton officials beef up police force strength to 175 officers.

He came armed with data he collected from Canton records showing a correlation between the number of arrests and the number of police officers on the CPD staff.

Nordman pointed out that the "Zero Tolerance" mayor of Canton had let police strength slip since his taking office on January 1, 2008 and strongly implied that rather than solve the crime problem in Canton, the mayor's inattention to the slippage of law enforcers on the streets of Canton is part of the rampant crime problem that currently besieges the Hall of Fame city.

After an absence of a couple of Council meetings, perhaps, some thought that Nordman had given up his fight with William J. Healy, II.

Nordman had, "after all was said and done," gotten Council to agree to pass a non-binding resolution committing the city to apply current general fund monies (a little over $1 million) spent on Canton's parks to beefing up Canton's safety forces (mainly police) if Canton voters pass a proposed four mill levy dedicated to the parks on November's ballot.

It might be reasonable to think that for what can be done right now, Nordman is at "Mission Accomplished," no?

To think that Nordman would go away on such a modest achievement is not to know Bruce Nordman.

He was "back with a vengeance" at Council this past Monday.

Here he addresses Council (at the Public Speaks portion of the meeting) with his primary point being that Canton ranks #62 of the top 100 crime ridden city in all of America.  Of course, he attributes the ranking to the dropoff in numbers of police officers patrolling Canton's streets.



A major, major point that Nordman makes that the Healy administration has never debunked (in the SCPR's assessment) is that because of the Canton Police Department's (CPD) staffing problems, a large part of the Canton crime goes unreported simply due to the fact that the department cannot physically deal with the volume of actual crime.

The "unreported factor" makes official reports (emanating from the FBI or wherever) suspect.

One such report probably is closer to the truth than claimed either by the city administration or its critics.  It shows that the crime rate - overall - has not changed much.  This report shows a "slight" tick downwards, but which is likely not statistically signifcant.

By any measure, Canton's crime rate is way above the Ohio average and the U.S. level and therefore by definition is totally unacceptable.

The question becomes:  What is Canton doing wrong in controlling crime?

The answer, according to Nordman and his Group 175 :  Too few police officers staffing the CPD.

Group 175 under Nordman's leadership is determined to get Canton police force up from its 150 officers to 175.

Healy apparently feels Canton crime is at "tolerable" levels (undoubtedly, he wishes that Canton was crime free) and therefore does not want to put more money into safety force personnel increases.

Nordman did do somewhat of a shift at Monday's meeting in his bring the staffing of the Canton Fire Department into the equation for remedying the total deficiency in safety force involvement in Canton which means not only police but also the fire department and EMS operations.

Some Cantonians believe that the Healy administration was to force Canton out of the ambulance business and compel those in need to use private ambulance service.

Still others believe that Healy has made a political football out of the Canton Fire Department because the union which represents firefighters (IAFF [249]) endorsed his opponent (Republican Chip Conde) in 2011 and did not endorse Healy political favorites Kim Perez (certain to be Canton's next treasurer) and Councilman Joe Cole (who lost in a record breaking, in terms of campaign monies spent, effort to unseat fellow Democrat Frank Morris in Ward 9.

A number of Healy detractors insist that Healy plays political games with the safety of Cantonians in the staffing of Canton's fire stations.

Healy, of course, outright denies that such is the case.

The question of staffing Canton's law enforcement and emergency forces, the SCPR thinks, comes down to which as among Mayor William J. Healy, II and citizen Bruce Nordman has the greater will power.

While The Report believes that Healy has an ego that surpasses most politicians, it may well be that in "simply a citizen" Bruce Nordman, Healy has "met his match" and more.

The Report did an interview with Nordman after Monday night's Council meeting.

Readers should watch this video in order to get an full and unfettered appreciation of Nordman's determination to force the mayor to do his group's will in beefing up Canton's police and fire departments.



There are not too many Stark Countians (mostly public officials) that engage Mayor Healy that The Report thinks can out-maneuver, out-finesse, and out-power Canton's Master of Manipulation.

While Nordman is not a finesser, he is quite skilled in political maneuvering and certainly demonstrates (see the Healy/Nordman confrontation of June 17, 2013 above) that he has a personal power side to him that is very much the equal of Healy.

The SCPR's experience with Healy is that:

• He first tries to sweet talk one to accepting his spin. 
• If that doesn't work he gives the cold shoulder. 
• His final approach is to start yelling and screaming and getting downright ugly.

Nordman is a "what you see is what you get" type of guy.

If yours truly were a betting man, the bet would be on Bruce Nordman on whether or not Canton gets to the 175 CPD force level.

Undoubtedly, in the eyes of the polished New York University Stern School of Business MBA guy, to get bested by the brusque Bruce Nordman will be taken as the ultimate in humiliation.

It should quite apparent to anyone who has any sort of handle on him, that William J. Healy, II:

• Really does think that he is smarter that the rest of the world.
• Thinks he can stay one step ahead of the rest of us (by whatever means).
• Is supremely confident that In the end the result is always going to be:  William J. Healy, II: "thy will be done."

It is impressive to the SCPR that Bruce Nordman and his compatriot Group 175ers are persisting in putting "the test of wills" question in doubt.

A "test of wills" that the SCPR believes Nordman et al will eventually prevail on.

WARREN PRICE OUT AS CANTON'S SAFETY DIRECTOR?

UPDATED:  11:45 AM - 07/17/2013

A source tells the SCPR that Price has agreed to stay on as safety director through the end of 2013 at Healy's insistence.

However, The Report has learned that Healy is already sending out administration emissaries contacting possible possible replacement candidates.

As the mayor seems to be a highly whimsical person, who knows when Price will actually move on.

A reader has written yours truly to say that Price is not likely to run against Healy in 2015.  The reader says that Commissioner Tom Bernabei is being targeted to run.

It is hard for The Report to believe that Bernabei would entertain entreaties that he run for mayor of Canton.

ORIGINAL BLOG

It may be stunning news to some Cantonians/Stark Countians, but not to the Stark County Political Report.

The Report is getting indication from multiple sources that Mayor William J. Healy, II's "Jack of All Trades" - Warren Price plans on leaving the beleaguered mayor's administration within 90 days.

Price was not present at last night's council meeting.

And the SCPR is told that "the straw that broke the camel's back" is Healy's playing policeman at Trinity Place on July 2nd.

In a blog of July 8th (LINK), The Report opinionated that the incident was one more example in a string of incidents in his 5-1/2 years in office that the mayor is a "Mister Do-It-All," who, when it suits his political needs, does what he has to for what he perceives as being in his personal political interests.

In the July 8 SCPR blog, yours truly revealed a highly reliable source had shared that Price had been looking for new personal opportunities even before the Trinity Place incident.

While the likes of Ream, Price, Williams and others who serve (or have served) at the pleasure of the mayor may think they are in charge of the particular bailiwicks of their offices, the reality is that to think so is to engage in an illusion.

In time "the light comes on" and disaffection for the mayor sets in.

Consequently, a number of city officials have had their fill of Healy and his intermeddling and undermining and have moved on.

If Price carries through with his reported planned departure, his leaving will leave a gap that may prove to be the proverbial "nail in the coffin" which ends Healy as a viable Stark County politician.

Price's plan, the SCPR, is told is to go into the private practice of law reportedly either with Canton City Council President Allen Schulman (Schulman and Associates, a well known and highly regarded personal injury oriented law firm) or former Alliance city government ally Steve Okey.

Last evening yours truly asked Schulman whether or not Price was going to join Schulman and Associates.

His response?

Predictably:  "no comment."

Beyond Price's speculated leaving of the Healy administration, there is the prospect that Price may be a candidate to unseat the mayor in the Democratic primary that will be coming up in May, 2015 - less than two years away.

We do know that Price has a political side to him. That is, "interested" in running for office.  In 2007, the ran a very respectable race against Republican Toni Middleton (the-then incumbent mayor of The Carnation City), to wit:

Last night Bruce Nordman told The Report that he and his Group 175 are "all-in" in putting together an effort to have Price take on Healy.

Nordman and his Vassar Park centered allies are engaged in a protracted battle with Healy on their insistence that the monies are in city coffers to beef up the city's police force to 175 officers strong.

The SCPR has been impressed with Price and has written (LINK) that Canton would be far better off with a Warren Price-esque person as mayor.

From all yours truly can determine in the many conversations with local political figures about the state of political affairs in Canton city government, Price is viewed as a steady, stable, listening, receptive, get-the-job done type that may not have the political pizzaz of a Healy but who would likely be "what the doctor orders" in terms of bringing Canton out of his economic and social (i.e. the crime problem) despair.

The first of the "parting of the ways" was the firing of the then Canton service director/chief-of-staff but now Stark County commissioner Tom Bernabei (D - Canton) on January 26, 2009.  A little over a year after Healy took office on having defeated Republican Janet Crieghton (also a current sitting Stark County commissioner) in the November, 2007 elections.

At the time preceding the Bernabei firing, the SCPR was hearing story after story after story about how the mayor would do some bizarre things that prompted Bernabei to sit him down and lecture him as if Hizzhonor was a six year old needing correction and redirection.

Bernabei's firing was a stunner but it should not have been.

If nothing else, Healy has a ton of ego and over the longer term he does not brook tongue lashings from anybody.  So while it may have appeared to Bernabei that he could redeem the mayor from "the error of his ways," such is an illusion.  It may take awhile, but Healy will "do whatever it takes" to satisfy his ego needs.  Such is especially the case when he has the actual political power to do so.

Not all that long after Bernabei's firing, seeing the handwriting on the wall; Healy's first safety director Tom Nesbitt (whom Healy recruited from Nebraska where he held an important position with the Nebraska Highway Patrol) quit.

Nesbitt, like Bernabei, was viewed by locals as a highly competent director whom Healy could ill-afford to lose if his administration was to have any chance whatsoever to dig itself out of the economic and "crime rate out-of-control" doldrums.

He, like Bernabei, was a strong leader which this headstrong mayor could not abide.

The SCPR is prone to believe that Warren Price is at the end of the day pretty much his own person in the mold of Bernabei and Nesbitt.

Hence the talk he is leaving.

Reportedly, he wanted to leave within two weeks of the the Trinity Place story breaking.  But the mayor is said to have begged him to stay on for longer and hence the 90 days.

Since his hiring on January 27, 2009, he seems to have been much more patient with the mayor than either Bernabei or Nesbitt.

And he has filled multiple needs (annexation director, chief of staff [March, 2010] and - his last stop - safety director [mere days ago]).

While his salary has climbed from $70,000 to over $100,000 in his multiple roles as service director and chief-of-staff (his initial hire), annexation director and finally as safety director (Healy having thrown Ream "under the bus" in the Canton-Stark County Crime Lab flap (LINK), it appears to the SCPR that the 30% increase over less that five years service is justified.

With Price's conjectured departure, the political parade of William J. Healy, II is definitely being rained upon.

And the rainmaker - with his incident, after incident, after incident on ad infinitum - is?

Hizzonor William J. Healy, II.

Healy for the sake of his personal political survival probably ought to be spending the next 90 days trying to get Warren Price to change his mind, no?

(VIDEO) WILL CANTON COUNCIL BOW TO DEMANDS OF GROUP 175 ON WAY TO FUND ADDITION OF 25 CANTON POLICE OFFICERS?

It is appearing more and more that Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II's plan to reorganize the city parks and recreation operation (with a November ballot 4 mill levy being a key ingredient) might well fall victim to his ongoing battle with Bruce Nordman of Group 175.

Some local political observers think the levy will fail with no formal opposition.

So it stands to reason that if there is organized opposition in the form of a competing levy for beefing up Canton's police force, then its failure appears to be a certainty.

Witness this video from yesterday's Stark County commissioners' regular meeting and the appearance of Nordman during the Public Speaks portion of the meeting.



As stated above, a key to Healy's plan is to get Cantonians to agree via the ballot on November 5th to add 4 mills to their property tax bills to take funding of Canton's parks and recreation out of the city's general fund and replace it with the approximately $1 million generated by a dedicated levy.

Nordman, who lives in Vassar Park, told Stark County commissioners yesterday that he plans on asking Canton City Council President Allen Schulman to place on council's agenda for Monday an informal resolution committing council - contingent on the parks and recreation issue passing - promising some $1.3 million in general fund monies needed in order to upgrade Canton's police force to 175 strong which means that some 25 officers will need to be added to the force.

The thinking is that if the Canton general fund is relieved of financing parks and recreation, then it will have the money to meet Group 175's demand.

If the resolution is not placed before council or if council votes it down, Nordman says Group 175 plans to submit an legislative initiative to Canton voters by the filing deadline (August 7th) in the form of a "police specific" levy to pay for the Group 175 demanded upgrade in numbers of Canton police officers.

While Canton's parks and recreation department will continue to operate if the levy fails, it will not operate at a robust and adequately capitalized rate that the proposed 4 mill levy would provide for.  So in that sense, the SCPR believes the facilities, programs and operations are at risk in the tug-o-war between Group 175 and Healy.

Healy was so concerned about Group 175 opposition that he sent Parks and Recreation Director Derek Gordon to meet with Nordman et al in order to finesse the activist group into supporting the levy.

But the effort failed.

Witness the following video which the SCPR captured on June 17th.  The Report captured about 45 minutes of a total 1 hour 10 minute post-council-meeting "argumentive brawl" between Nordman and Healy.



So why is Nordman taking this matter to the Stark County commissioners?

• REASON #1 - He says to keep the commissioners informed about his effort to make Stark County and its "crown jewel city" (which also happens to be the county seat) a safe community which is attractive for business and families to locate in.
• Nordman first appeared before commissioners on March 6, 2013 (LINK to SCPR blog on his appearance) and presented a challenge to them to find a way to expedite the increased use of the available beds (501) at the Stark County jail.
• Group 175 sees the jail's bed utilization factor as one of a number to help lessen Stark County's and Canton's crime problem.
• One of the historical reasons that Mayor Healy has given for not doing better in alleviating crime in Canton was the reduction of county jail bed utilization to some 300 beds during the county's recent financial crisis.
• Nordman cited the passage of a countywide "law enforcement specific" levy that Stark Countians passed in November, 2011 but still not fully implemented in March, 2013,
• The commissioners' initial reaction was lukewarm at best but perforce of Nordman's insistence, they rallied to his cause and brought interim Sheriff George T. Maier into a commissioners' meeting to explain how and on what timetable he would get the jail up to 501 inmates.
• In fact, Maier found a way to add 50 beds immediately in response to Group 175's persistence.
• Maier has said that one reason he has not brought the jail up to its full 501 bed capability is because he cannot find qualified corrections officers.
• Group 175 stepped up to the plate and put together a "job fair," designed to draw in military veterans, which was held in late April of this year and which provided a number of potential new hires.  Maier then decided to strike out on his own in setting up additional such events in a "thanks, but no thanks" to Nordman's offer to help organize future hiring events.

• REASON #2 - (A SCPR conjecture).  Nordman knows the negative personal history between Commissioner Janet Creighton (whom Healy defeated for reelection as mayor of Canton in November, 2007) and Commissioner Tom Bernabei (whom Healy fired as his service director/chief of staff on January 26, 2009).
• Creighton and Bernabei may be the most highly respected public officials in all of Stark County.
• Being the savvy guy he is, he knows that he will get a sympathetic ear from the commissioners in his overall drive to make Stark County and Canton a safer community.
• Undoubtedly, Healy bristles at Nordman's taking what appears to be a Canton situation to the county commissioners.
• And if the political "bad blood" helps Nordman and Group 175 push the mayor into hiring 25 new police officers, he has to be thinking "good for Canton and good for Stark County."

The question now becomes:  Will Nordman's game plan work?

The SCPR is skeptical.

It is likely to be a close call as to whether or not Canton City Council will agree to pass an informal resolution if Schulman engineers having it put before council.  And The Report believes even getting the matter before council is problematical.

Presumably we will know by the end of council's meeting of July 15th whether or not the demanded resolution is in the offing.

This matter of adding 25 police officers has now come down to being a matter of who has the stronger political will and strength (vis-a-vis council) between Healy and Nordman and his Group 175.

The Report believes that the mayor has the heft (Babcock, Cole, Dougherty, Griffin, Smith and West) with council to get to a 6 to 6 tie.  Such a scenario would leave it in tie-breaker Schulman's hands.

Which way will Schulman go, if it comes down to his exercising his tie-breaker role?

It is anybody's guess. 

If the resolution track does not work, then the only alternative is via an "initiative petition" as spelled out by Ohio Revised Code Section 731.28 (LINK).

The SCPR wonders whether or not there is enough time (to meet the August 7 deadline) for Group 175 to collect nearly 2,000 valid voter signatures, present the petitions to the Canton auditor (presumably on or about July 16) which after 10 days of the submission is to transmit them to the Stark County Board of Elections which has up to 10 days to certify the required number of valid signatures (10% of Cantonians voting in the Kasich/Strickland race of 2010).

The Report believes that failing the informal council resolution route, a successful effort to get a "for police only" levy on the ballot would be the death knell for the parks and recreation levy.

Canton officials have tried to talk Group 175 into waiting until the Spring, 2014 to push for a police levy.

But to no avail.

Healy and Nordman are very determined individuals and it appears that their differences may doom the parks and recreation levy.

Add to the Healy/Nordman (Group 175) rift:

• the fact that the Ohio Legislature has taken away the 12.5% rollback on property taxes, and 
• has disqualified future homestead exemptions for those with $30,000 and over in income from qualifying for the exemption.

It is hard to see how a parks and recreation levy passes even if for some reason the Group 175 folks cannot meet the petition filing deadline.

Remember, some folks think that the levy will not pass even with no formal opposition.

Monday's council meeting could be full of drama.

Of course, there is nothing unusual about that, no?

(VIDEOS) CANTON MAYOR HEALY & GROUP 175 VASSAR PARK RESIDENT BRUCE NORDMAN "DUKE IT OUT" AFTER LAST NIGHT'S CITY COUNCIL MEETING

VIDEOS

HEALY/NORDMAN FACE OFF 03/25/2013

NORDMAN BLASTS MAYOR 06/17/2013

HEALY/NORDMAN BARE KNUCKLE BRAWL

06/17/2013

Updated at 03:45 PM.

Since March of this year, Bruce Nordman, a resident of Councilman Frank Morris, III's Ward 9, (an area of Canton known as Vassar Park), has been pressing the city to bring the Canton Police Department (CPD) up to 175 officers.

Here is a video of a March 25 exchange between Nordman and Healy.



And here is a LINK to a SCPR blog of April 1, 2013 which provides much of the background to the "bare knuckle brawl" (figuratively speaking, of course) which erupted between Nordman and the mayor after Canton City Council meeting last night.

One supplement to the information contained in that link, though.

Whereas at the time Nordman was claiming the beef-up could cost Canton some $825,000 in March; it turns out (and Nordman uses the higher number in current presentations) is really about $1.3 million.

The heart of the fight between Nordman and Healy has always been about whether or not Canton has the money to get up to the Nordman "demanded" 175 Canton Police Officers.

Nordman's main argument has been that the mayor seems to find money for his pet projects, he can't seem to come up with the dollars needed to bring up the CPD.

Mayor Healy counters with "everything but the kitchen sink" (in classic Healy fashion) in rebutting Nordman.

As readers of the SCPR know, yours truly has been particularly hard on Healy because The Report believes (a la former president Bill Clinton) that one never gets the best of Hizzhonor as long as he gets air to breathe and his vocal cords vibrate.

Remember Clinton's "Well, that depends on what is is?" caper in his deposition in the Monica Lewinsky case.  And there were others before that.  But Clinton slipped out of each and every one of them to become what?  Yes, "the comeback kid."

The SCPR's take on Healy is that he is every bit as accomplished as the former president as slipping the noose before it strikes it fatal blow. The only seeming difference is the level of government involved.

If he can make his frantic political ambition work for him, Healy may yet achieve a very high level in American political/government circles.

We all need to remember that Clinton was once counted among "the political dead, " only to wiggle out of his self-inflicted bind to move on to bigger and better things.

The Report thinks - in terms of political eeliness - Healy has Clinton-esque talent.

Nobody should underestimate William J. Healy, II.

Stark County has never seen the likes of this consummate political being.

So such is what Nordman is up against.

The SCPR has a lot of admiration for Nordman and his civic activism.  But The Report believes that he and his Group 175 is no match for the mayor.

Last night Nordman appeared at council on what seems to have been triggered by Parks and Recreation Director Derek Gordon's request to Group 175, through Nordman, that Group 175 come out in support of November's Parks and Recreation levy.

Here is Nordman's response given during the Public Speaks portion of the council meeting.



Looking at Healy during Nordman's presentation, one could easily see that Healy was "pi_ _ ed."

Some of the best Canton City Council meetings have not be the meetings themselves, but rather the fireworks that sometimes take place after the meetings.

On December 21, 2009 council president Alan Schulman got into it with Mayor Healy (post-council-meeting) (LINK) over Healy's insistence on retaining Adam Herman as his communications director.

While Herman eventually did leave Canton's employ, it does appear that Healy has mollified Schulman who pretty much anymore support Administration positions on various controversies between council and the mayor.

Last night was somewhat an exception in that Schulman (in a tie-breaker role) voted with the anti-administration position (i.e. no retroactive pay) as to whether or not currently enrolled police cadets will be paid retroactively to January 1, 2013 at the increased pay rate (from $26,000 per annum to $31,000) for cadets.

Moreover, last night was a classic post-council-meeting confrontation between the mayor and Nordman.

The Report was busy videotaping Ward 8 Councilman Edmond Mack and Councilwoman-at-Large Mary Cirelli (on their having voted "no" in support of a resolution of councilmanic support of the upcoming November vote on Canton's Parks and Recreation levy), when, during the Cirelli interview, a citizen tapped yours truly on the arm to alert that something noteworthy was going on elsewhere.

It took a nanosecond to figure out that Healy and Nordman were involved in a seeming "bare knuckle brawl" near the lectern position in council chambers.

So the SCPR hustled over to the site to catch the action.

What follows below is most of the face off.

Yours truly was a little late in arriving to catch the actual beginning and as the 9:30 p.m. hour arrived (council meeting probably ended about 8:30 p.m.) the SCPR video camera ran out of recording space.

This video runs 45 minutes.



While the SCPR normally does not put this much video up in a blog, for those of readers who take it in will get a direct and frank view of Healy at his oily finest.

In the end, the SCPR expects Healy to pull his political magic and talk Group 175 into supporting the Parks and Recreation levy.

While Nordman may think he has a commitment from Healy to bring the CPD up to 175 within the next year or so, the SCPR thinks that the only think Mayor William J. Healy, II is truly committed to is his own political aggrandizement.

The Report will not be surprised to learn in coming weeks that Nordman et al have succumbed to Healy's mesmerizing political charms.

We shall see!

(VIDEOS: SCHURING, HEALY & NORDMAN) SCHURING AND SLESNICK "FINALLY" MAKE IT TO COUNCIL TO TALK THE STATE GOV'T FUNDING ISSUE.

TODAY'S STORIES

(UPDATED:  08:15 AM)

Schuring & Slesnick Show Up

at Canton City Hall to Talk

Local Gov't Fund Reduction

(also:  Schuring video talk about meetup)
 

*********************************

 Vassar Park Resident

Bruce Nordman

Says

"No More Excuses" Mayor Healy

On Police Force Numbers

Funding Reduction Notwithstanding

(also:  video  Healy/Nordman exchange) 

  *********************************

SLESNICK

ANNOUNCES

HE IS MOVING

TO

THAT

"CITY UP NORTH"

TO RUN IN 2014 FOR

STATE REP!

Okay!   So it's April 1st.  On the Slesnick part of the headline:  Happy April Fools Day!!!

After weeks of trying, Canton City Council's president Allen Schulman's effort to get members of the Stark County delegation to the Ohio General Assembly (OGA) is bearing fruit.

Last Thursday, the SCPR was at a North Canton sponsored event (solving the Zimber Ditch flooding problem) held at the North Canton Civic Center and had the blessing of encountering state Rep. J. Kirk Schuring.

On greeting the good state representative, the first thing yours truly asked of him:  "When are you going to show up in Canton?"

This would be in response to Schulman's request (make about six weeks ago) that he and his fellows (Hagan, Oelslager and Slesnick) do so for the purpose of explaining what you are doing or not doing to solve the local government funding crisis which is ravaging most of if not all of Stark County's school districts, townships, villages, cities, and, indeed, the county government itself?

As Gomer Pyle (Jim Nabors) circa (1964 - 1969:  "Gomer Pyle - U.S.M.C.) used to say:  "Sur-prise, sur-prise, sur-prise!"

Schuring knocked yours truly's socks off in saying:  "I met with several members of Canton City Council today (Schulman and Councilman Jim Griffin as well as a few other Canton officials (Finance Director DiRuzza and Annexation/Service/Safety Director Warren Price).

Though he would not reveal much about the conversation (by the way, he did say that the representative representing Canton proper; namely, Stephen Slesnick) was also present, he did leave The Report with a nugget of information:  He (Schuring) is going to introduce legislation on Tuesday that apparently has something to do with the deficit funding matter.

Again, he would not specify.  He only said that he would leave revealing the specifics to Canton authorities and in a provocative way teased:  "stay tuned!"

Here is the Schuring video wherein he talks about meeting with Canton officials.



The SCPR has gotten in touch with President Schulman and here is what he had to say in an reply email to The Report;

From: allen schulman
Subject: Re: Schuring & Slesnick meeting today
To: "Martin Olson" <tramols@att.net>
Date: Friday, March 29, 2013, 9:36 AM

Good morning Martin!

To answer your inquiry, we did meet with Representatives Schuring
and Slesnick yesterday.

Member Griffin, Director Price, Director DiRuzza and I were present to conduct an informal session to understand what was being done in Columbus to help struggling urban areas like our own.

The meeting was informative and candid.

While I will share my views at a  later date, it is probably best to let the General Assembly Representatives speak for themselves.

It does appear that these State Representatives understand and [are] concerned about the serious impact on urban centers from the various cuts to local communities.

Personally, I believe that there may be a response from Columbus, albeit on a limited basis.

At this point, any additional funding would be welcome. However, it is clear that a significant change in philosophy is required before local communities are restored to their previous funding levels. State Republican leadership believes that local government is bloated and inefficient. That view is not borne out by the facts. Nevertheless, I will continue to speak out against these destructive funding cuts and the terrible cost to local communities like Canton that are  the result of misguided policies driven more by ideology than sound public
policy.

I hope that answers your questions. ... .

Allen

It had to be gratifying for Schulman and his fellow Canton city officials to see Representative Slesnick (a Canton Democrat) in Canton.  However, not all was "peaches and cream."  For the snub of Canton officialdom at the hand of state Representative Christina Hagan and state Senator Scott "I'm too busy" Oelslager continues.

As mentioned above, Slesnick was present also.  But clearly "as second fiddle" to Schuring.  Being a Democrat in the supermajority Republican controlled Ohio General Assembly he is little more than a wallflower on the ornate walls of the House chamber.

Slesnick's presence had to be bittersweet inasmuch as last Monday night Slesnick was in Akron for an Akron Budget Town Hall meeting.  He couldn't even send a legislative aide to his home district.  Hmm?

His snub of the hometown is almost enough to start a rumor that he must be planning to move from the Hall of Fame city to the Rubber Capital to start a new political career.

But that couldn't be true.

For in Akron the name Slesnick would not have near the political oomph that it does in Canton.

He desperately needs the family name Slesnick if he is to be a political success.

Stephen is in his own right is so colorless and boring and therefore unimpressive to the extent he could not generate enough personality to get elected dog catcher outside his home digs, no?

The SCPR was not the only one caught by sur-prise on Slesnick and Schuring showing up.

Yours truly inquired of Councilpersons Cirelli, Fisher, Mariol and Morris and was told the meeting was news to them but it was welcome news.

The Stark County Political Report agrees with Vassar Park resident Burce Nordman who has been working feverishly to help Canton and Stark County government to solve the county's/the city's crime problem.

He says that Canton needs to solve its perceived and REAL crime problem if it is going once again to become the shining jewel of a city it once was (producing President William McKinley).

Mayor William Healy, notwithstanding his political campaign (2007, 2011) rhetoric of "zero tolerance of crime in Canton", has utterly failed as a matter of substance to make any headway on reducing crime.

Now that Nordman and his Vassar Park friends are putting the heat on to increase the police force from 150 policemen to 175 policemen, Healy is crying that State of Ohio government cuts of approximately $6.5 million in recent years prevent his administration from putting more police on the streets.

Witness this video exchange (last week council meeting) between Nordman and Healy:



Before this latest political gambit, Healy was blaming the county financial crisis and the defunding of the sheriff's department which forced a reduction in the use of county jail beds in use from 501 to about 300 as a reason why his claimed reduction of  crime in Canton (a claim which is clearly open to dispute) has leveled off if not increased by his own numbers.

We have all come to know the mayor as being a veritable artist of political spin.  Accordingly, it is difficult to give him any credibility for anything he says.

While there is documented credibility to his claim that the State of Ohio has balanced its budget on the backs of local government, he undermines the significance of the impact on Canton city government by his seemingly spendthrift ways in hiring new folks for the mayor's office, to wit:

• William Bartos, communications director at $58,500 on 02/05/2013
• Michelle Chyatte, management assistant at $38,800 on 08/14/2012, and
• Ashley Wright, research and referral assistant at $26,000 on 11/12/2012

Also, he has legislation in the works to increase (at his whim, meaning that some will get no raise while others get more than the overall percentage of raises) non-bargaining employees at 2% of the current total salaries of this classification of employees.

And that is not all.

He has found $3 millon of capital funds at risk from what the SCPR believes to be a very shaky Hercules Project.

There is another $360,000 for a questionable in terms of real effectiveness of a "shotspotter flex" program passed by council or March 18th of this year.  Consider these other expenditures (LINK to September 17, 2012 blog):

• $13,895.00 for remote control blinds in the mayor's 8th floor of city hall office,
• $12,673.00 for a big-screen "smart board-esque TV" and another
• $14,995 for camera and programing for the smart board

Also, there is the matter of pay increases that the mayor is contemplating to Finance Director DiRuzza (from $62,450 when he hired in two years ago to his present $68,399 to soon-to-be $80,000 [about $17,500 in increases in two years]) and to Warren Price (service director, safety director, chief-of-staff and annexation director) who gets about $33,000 in increases in four years.

So between DiRuzza and Price the city will be paying $50,000 a year more in 2013 than in 2009.

And there is more to the story.

Other city officials (including city council members) have gotten raises that builds upon the $50,000 more that DiRuzza and Price likely will soon be getting.

And, of course, Healy is - as pointed above - is asking for another 2% of the cumulative non-bargaining unit salary base for additional raises.  The cost?  Probably about $120,000.  Hmm?  (Note:  the SCPR calculates the 2013 contemplated raises to be approximately $120,000 based on the 2011 $198,000 3.2%-based figure)

The SCPR has learned from a councilman that some on council are insisting that the law department  amend language to the effect that Healy cannot concentrate the raises on certain administration favored employees and also that council itself would not again participate in a previous round of raises as occurred in July, 2011.

In June of 2011 council lifted a freeze on pay increases which resulted in a 3.2% increase that amounted to about $198,000 total in increases passed out to various city non-bargaining unit employees.
 
These expenditures show that the mayor can dig up money for what he deems to be important but then poor mouths it when it comes to what the citizens of Canton want.

What do they want?

More policemen patrolling their neighborhoods.

The cost?

Beefing up to 175 officers as Group 175 wants will be about $825,000 a year according to figures developed by Nordman.

Healy said in the video above that it would cost Canton most if not all of the money ($6.5 million over six or seven years) to fund police expansion.

Quite a disparity between $825,000 and $6.5 million, no?

Undoubtedly, the difference is that the mayor is looking at sustainability over a period of years whereas Nordman is looking at a one year cost factor.

It also points out how slick Healy is when he starts talking numbers.

If called on it, he would backtrack immediately and correct the apples and oranges comparison sleight of hand that might not be that apparent to the casual observer.

So lets add up the numbers:

Does anyone believe that the expense numbers in the spreadsheet above constitute the ONLY discretionary expenditures during the 2009 - through 2012 time period?

If so, then yours truly want to talk to you about you perhaps buying some Florida swamp land.

The SCPR is convinced that Nordman et al is a political force that Healy has not reckoned with before in terms of being intelligent, dynamic, researched, persistent, enduring while non-belligerent as a civic action effort.

And he will find that out if he does not already know it now when he meets them on April 16th.

Political spin and finesses will not work with these folks!

The Report believes that in the end Nordman's 175 Group (the number of Canton policemen they are insisting upon patrolling the streets of Canton) will be the number that Canton's officials will find the financial wherewithal to support.

And of course, if Stark County Democratic Party chairman Randy Gonzalez will get off his duff and pick up on the vulnerability that the likes of Oeslager, Schuring and Hagan (all Stark County Republicans) might be facing for their support of the gargantuan State of Ohio local government funding cuts (which is contributing to local tax increases and/or less ditch repairs, road/street repairs/resurfacing; less park hours [Jackson] and the like) in the 2014 elections and field "real" candidates that have a "real" chance to run "really" competitive campaigns, then Stark County (indeed, all Ohio political subdivisions) might experience a reversal of the State of Ohio apparent abandonment of local government.

The same for Republican Stark County chair Jeff Matthews in finding viable opposition to Democrat Stephen Slesnick.

All four of them stand by and watch the State of Ohio accumulate upwards of $2 billion dollars in surplus while school districts, townships, villages, and cities have to ask for local tax increases or that citizens accept less in local government services.

Stark Countians should be besieging Gonzalez and Matthews to find more than token candidates to take the Stark County legislative incumbents on and thereby provoke a change in Columbus.

It is a credit to Canton City Council President Allen Schulman who has gotten this ball rolling.

It is a credit that Vassar Park resident Bruce Nordman has seized the initiative to make Canton a safer place which business/industry/commerce might one day seek out as a desirable place to be.

Representative Schuring may be in the process of redeeming himself now that it is being driven home to him that Stark Countians are saying in increasing numbers that enough is enough in terms of State of Ohio local government funding cuts.

If he actually does something, the SCPR will be laudatory of his action in future blogs.

Now all one can do is assume disingenuousness.

He could be pulling a Healy and making it look like he is taking action while in reality all that being said and "apparently" done is nothing more than appearance and in the end more garbage for the political dumpster.

Such is why everyday citizens are becoming more and more cynical of, disenchanted and disaffected with elected officials.

But maybe not,

Perhaps he has seen the light and will take some political risks with his own political party for the benefit of Stark Countians.

The core of his district is Jackson Township.  Because of State of Ohio cuts, the township's parks are at risk in terms of scope of use to township residents and in terms of keeping up with maintenance and repair with no money for capital improvements.

The SCPR will be watching and a growing body of Stark Countians are watching to see whether Schuring will stand up for Stark's local governments.

Oelslager and Hagan have signified by their refusal to meet with local government officials over their participation in the reduction of state monies to:

•  all of Stark County's political subdivisions in the case of Oelslager (he represents all but the western fringe of the county),
• Alliance, East Canton, East Sparta, Louisville, Magnolia, Minerva, Nimishillen Township, Marlboro Township, Pike Township, Lake Township, part of Plain Township, Osnaburg Township and Sandy Township in the case of Christina Hagan

that it is their political party and its ideology of strangling government at all levels over the everyday needs of their districts' citizens.

Their decision has been made.

If their constituents re-elect them in 2014, then the SCPR does not want to hear them complain.

The SCPR retort will be:  Buck up Oelsalger and Hagan (and perhaps Schuring constituents - as said above, "we shall see") constituents.  You have made your choice for less government - now live with it!