(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: CRIME LAB WEAKNESSES FOUND OUT THROUGH EFFORTS OF CANTON MAYOR WILLIAM J. HEALY, II?

LAST UPDATE/REVISION:  02:05PM

He has done it again?

Done what again?

Well, let's put it this way.  Ever hear the expression:  "He stepped in _ _ _ _, but came out smelling like a rose?"

As readers of the SCPR know, a repetitive theme in this blog re:  Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II is that he is the envy of a cat with nine lives because he can get into scrape after scrape after scrape and seemingly come out unscathed way beyond the proverbial nine lives.

It appears that he not only comes out unscathed from having prompted the redefinition and reclassification the Canton-Stark County Crime Lab (CSCCL, Crime Lab, Lab) director position so that he could appoint political pal and former Stark County Chief Deputy Rick Perez as director, but comes out as sort of a heroic figure in bringing to the surface in the process a realization that the Lab needs a major rework.

On Tuesday, the Stark County Council of Governments (SCOG) executive committee met in the mayor's conference room located on the eighth floor in the mayor's suite of offices atop Canton City Hall and a major fallout from the meeting was the revelation that the Stark County Police Chiefs Association (made up of the police departments of Stark County's cities, villages and townships) has decided not to have "new" DNA evidence processed through the Lab because of a 400 day processing time.

Until recent times, the CSCCL has been a treasured asset of Stark County government.  Now that Mayor Healy has opened the proverbial "can of worms" with his tinkering with the leadership of the Lab; it may be that its life is near an end, or, at least, scaled back just to doing firearms and chemistry work.

For those readers who are not up-to-speed on the particulars of Healy's messing with the Crime Lab through his then-safety director Tom Ream and then throwing Ream "under-the-bus" when "all Hell broke loose," here are several links to prior SCPR blogs to help get you current.

•  LINK - Blog of February 11, 2013,
•  LINK - Blog of February 13, 2013,
•  LINK - Blog of February 21, 2013,

Here is a video (from Wednesday's SCPR one-on-one interview) in which Stark County Commissioner and SCOG executive committee chairman Tom Bernabei discusses the "scaling back" possibility.

And here is a video of some of the discussion which occurred at Tuesday's meeting including:

• Canton Safety Director Warren Price on the need to have stable funding of the Crime Lab and Chairman Tom Bernabei on the loss off nearly half of the State of Ohio local government funding revenues (from about $15 million to $8.5 million over three years) resulting in a drop off of Crime Lab funding from $1.3 million annually to $755,000,

• Chairman Bernabei on the history of the revelation of problems at the CSCCL:

• Perry Township Chief of Police Michael T. Pomesky (president of the Stark County Police Chiefs Association - SCPCA) talks about the Association's actions on the the Lab problems:

• Michele Foster, interim Crime Lab Director, on what are the causes of up to 400 days delay in DNA analysis at the CSCCL:

• Warren Price on oversight and governance of the Crime Lab:

• SCOG Executive Committee member Marty Chapman (from Minerva) on the history, governance and finances of the Crime Lab:

• Chief Assistant Prosecutor Jennifer Fitzsimmons on the critical importance of the CSCCL to successful prosecution of criminal cases:

• Chief Pomesky on reasons why the Stark County Police Chiefs' Association is recommending that "new" DNA tests be sent to the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation (BCI):

• Crime Lab Interim Director Foster takes questions from:
• Perry Township trustee Craig Chessler
• on grant that Foster assigned to Mansfield's crime processing unit,
• on the extent of the CSCCL backlog,
• Member Chapman
• on the grant in relation to the CSCCL budget,
• Canton Safety Director Price
• on who is in charge at the Crime Lab:

•  Stark County Sheriff George T. Maier weighs in:
• on the need to have timely crime lab processing so that Stark's policemen can "look citizens in the eye" and keep them informed on the progress of prosecutions,
• on doing due diligence with BCI to ensure that their turnaround times stay timely and that they continue to take direct contact from Stark's police agencies, and
• expecting that BCI will get the job done for Stark's policing and prosecutors:

• Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II spoke to the matter of using BCI as an on-going backup to the CSCCL when backlogs occur:

• Prosecutor John Ferrero advised the committee that his Law Enforcement subcommittee would be coming forth with a plan for reforming crime lab governance in a future meeting:

• Jackson Fiscal Officer Randy Gonzalez was emphatic about the need for SCOG to come out of the crime lab funding and governance crisis unity:

In the final analysis, it does seem that Cantonians do owe Mayor Healy a debt of gratitude for having messed with the operation of the Crime Lab.

For if he had not, a case can be made that the burgeoning backlog problems at the Lab might have gone on for quite a while before being detected.

While he may get some perverse credit for helping identify the problem, like other episodes in his storied fumbling and bumbling at Canton City Hall, he leaves it to others to clean up.

So in the end, is it "thanks, but 'no' thanks, Your Honor?"

Especially if your name is Warren Price and your job titles include:

• chief-of-staff,
• service director,
• safety director, and
• annexation director

Wouldn't you say?

For anyone who doubts the unmitigated gall of William J. Healy, II

• the man who precipitated the surfacing of internal Crime Lab problems (which, by the way, his administration failed to catch early and nip in the bud) with his move to water down the director's qualifications so that he could hire Rick Perez.

Take a look at this video in which he scolds the SCOG's executive committee for having discussed what Healy defines (of course, we all know that in his own mind there is nothing that he is not an authority on) having been an inappropriate delving into personnel matters at the Lab.



Yesterday, a day after the big SCOG confab at Canton City Hall, the SCPR sat down with Commissioner Bernabei to harvest his view of where the Canton-Stark County Crime Lab is heading in terms of its continued viability.

With the dropoff of some $6 million in State of Ohio furnished local government funding over the past three years or so, it seems likely at the very least that eventually DNA testing will be dropped from the list of services provided by the Lab.

Here is Bernabei's take on the future:

(VIDEO: COMMISSIONER RICHARD REGULA) WHERE ARE THE FRACKING/FRACKING GENERATED JOBS COMMISSIONER REGULA, MAYOR HEALY?

VIDEO

Stark County Commissioner Richard Regula

on

Stark County Economic Development

March 27, 2013

TOPICS COVERED

• Oil & Gas Industry a Boon to Stark County?
• Spin Off to Alliance
• The Hercules Project.  Will it Fly?
• Steve Coon - The Onesta?
• A Message to Concerned Citizens of Stark
• ODNR:  Can Be Trusted to Protect Environment
• Fuel Cells:  "The Wave of the Future"
• A Summation:  Gibbs Transportation Symposium (03/26/2013)
• Extension of U.S. Route 30 in Ohio

It was tragically amusing (for Stark County) yesterday to read in an editorial in Canton's local newspaper:

While Canton is not the “Utica Capital,” as Mayor William J. Healy II enthusiastically dubbed it in his 2012 State of the City speech, it’s nearby. It is the largest city close to the boom in drilling for oil and natural gas in this region, and the resulting economic growth is more apparent by the day.

Apparently, these editors have bought lock, stock and barrel Healy's ebullience for oil and natural gas drilling as being inevitably "on the mark," if not so much for Stark County.

It could be that in the end the supposed beneficial permanent effect will turn out to be "a hope and a prayer" invoked by desperate politicians (a la Healy) rather than a reality not only in Stark County but perhaps for all the oil and gas producing areas of Ohio

Notice that the editors use the words "economic growth" not "economic boom" (a tempering of prospects?) that some in the oil and gas industry have predicted in recent years, to wit:

Of course 2025 is a ways off.

However, more and more media reports and editorials are surfacing questioning whether or not the oil and gas industry prophesied numbers will get anywhere near the 530,000 jobs in the industry itself and in spin off to the service and manufacturing sectors of the American economy.

Mayor Healy was dealt a huge blow on his plan for Canton to be the Utica shale capital when it was announced on July 16, 2012 that major fracking player Chesapeake Energy LLC of Oklahoma City announced that its Stark County headquarters would be in the 9,200 citizen city of Louisville rather than in The Hall of Fame City.

Even at that, it appears to the SCPR from comments made by Louisville City Manager Tom Ault about "spin off" jobs that neither Louisville nor Stark County is going to be experiencing anything like what is going on with fracking in North Dakota these days.

North Dakota’s economy has outpaced every state since the recession ended in 2009, with the fastest growth in personal income, tax revenue, jobs and home prices, according to Bloomberg Economic Evaluation of States data. Its 3.2 percent December jobless rate compared with 7.8 percent nationwide.  (North Dakota Fracking Boom Leaves Oil Hub a Bust: Muni Credit, Bloomberg.com, Jennifer Oldham, February 26, 2013).

And hopefully Louisville will not become another Williston, North Dakota, to wit:

While the U.S. Census counts about 16,000 residents, Williston says it provides services to more than 38,000, including workers living in temporary camps, hotels, and even vehicles. Keeping up with the load is spurring budget gaps that will deplete rainy-day funds, according to Standard & Poor’s, which cut city debt to BBB+ in December, three steps above junk.

It does not appear that such will be the case.

Just look at what fracking or lack thereof has developed in Stark County proper so far:

 

A report surfaced this weekend that three hotels will be going up in the near future at the intersection of I77 and Faircrest that are expected to provide as many as 140 temporary construction jobs and 75 "permanent?" jobs.

Why the question mark?

Because the so called permanent jobs, the SCPR believes, will only last as long has the occupancy rate justifies them.

Hmm?  

Who are the hotels designed to house?

Itinerant workers associated with the oil and gas industry, no?

Permanent jobs?

Look again at the Williston, North Dakota experience folks.

Reportedly, the hotel developers will be asking Canton for 10 years worth of tax breaks.

Hmm?

Could the hotels end up being a losing proposition for the taxpayers of Canton if council members/the mayor fail to do their "due diligence?"

Indeed!

Across the nation there are pockets of seeming economic success with fracking for natural gas and oil reserves (wet gas) being the impetuous for the gains.  But not nearly as much as hyped.

Take Ohio and this report.

A 1.4% job growth rate growth (2012) does not quite square up with the implied predictions of locals like Mayor Healy and Stark County Commissioner Richard Regula.

Recently, the SCPR sat down with Regula to talk to him about a recent transportation industry job needs symposium hosted at Malone University by 7th District (which includes most of Canton/Stark County) Bob Gibbs (Republican - Holmes County).

However, Regula's enthusiasm for fracking impelled him to veer off topic and extol the potential for Stark County of the production of oil and gas.  He was careful to say that the industry can flourish while paying heed to the likes of Chris Borello and her Concerned Citizens of Stark County for environmental factors that environmentalists focus upon as unwanted tag alongs with this form of economic development.

Among Stark County's government leaders, only Plain Township trustee Louis Giavasis has paid serious attention to potential adverse environmental consequences that may come with fracking.  Over three years ago he was the lead among Stark government officials in proposing a statewide moratorium and in banning it on and under township owned property.

To their credit, some on Canton City Council have been skeptical of Healy's rah-rah for fracking posture.

And maybe the king of Ohio's fracking enthusiasts (Republican Governor John Kasich) is getting worried, to wit:

If you were going to do a really serious study you would look at these things,” she said. “If water is contaminated and fish die, what are the fishermen going to do? If you have parks where people go for peace and quiet, what happens when you turn it into an industrial landscape? If you have an organic dairy and the soil is polluted, what does that mean? These are all valid questions.  (LINK:  Grist.org, Ohio fracking boom has not brought jobs, John Upton, March 22, 2013)

A critically important question has been raised in one recent publication:  

But what if cheap, domestic natural gas isn't actually sustainable? What if rosy claims of fracking our way to energy independence is just an industry pitch that Washington has bought? (LINK)

Here this from the same article:

I've spent thousands of hours working through data and consulting and collaborating with very knowledgeable colleagues, said Art Berman, an oil and gas geologist who heads Labyrinth Consulting, a Houston-based geological consulting firm. Right now, everybody's losing money. And the whole picture is highly tenuous.

Hmm?

Could it be that the likes of Healy and Regula are 21st century Pied-Pipers who could actually be leading Stark County to continued economic development stagnation if not negativity?

Shouldn't Stark Countians be looking long and hard at the leadership of those who are "bananas for those HOT (for now) fracking jobs?

Remember Williston, North Dakota.

Canton, Louisville, and Stark County's taxpayers hardly need to be picking up the the tab for the oil and gas industry, no?

BREAKING NEWS! CANTON SAFETY DIRECTOR THOMAS REAM RESIGNS ACCORDING TO A WELL-PLACED SCPR SOURCE.

 UPDATE:  3:50 PM

 

(NOTE:  The SCPR's scoop has been confirmed by staff report filed minutes ago by the Canton local newspaper)

The SCPR has learned that Canton Safety Director Thomas Ream and Mayor William J. Healy, II have been searching for a "face saving way" (for benefit of Healy, of course) to announce the safety director's resignation for about a week.

The beginning of the end had to be case for Canton Safety Director Tom Ream when in the latter part of February he collaborated with Mayor William J. Healy, II to change the job description for the director of the Canton-Stark County Crime Lab (CSCCL) so that Ream personal and political friend and former Stark County chief deputy Rick Perez could be appointed as director.

Healy is politically close to Perez's brother Kim who is running for Canton auditor in the May Democratic primary.  The mayor has told the SCPR that he endorses Perez in his candidacy which suggests to The Report that Healy was likely in full accord with Ream's desire to appoint Rick Perez as the Canton-Stark County Crime Lab director.

About a week after the appointment and a public hue and cry and a confrontation between Stark County Council of Governments (SCOG) Executive Committee chairman Thomas Bernabei (also president of the Stark County Board of Commissioners) in early March, Mayor Healy obtained Perez's resignation and in the process - in the opinion of the SCPR - threw Director Ream under the bus.

One had to wonder how a professional law enforcement man like Ream could stay on under Healy having been abandoned on a decision that Healy had to be in on up to his ears.

In resigning, Ream has done what a person of professional pride would do under similar circumstances.

This Ream resignation should be a "wake up call" to Healy.

He could be faced with a nearly impossible task of finding a replacement for Ream.

Who among Stark County's law enforcement professionals would want to work for Mayor Healy given his treatment of former safety director Tom Nesbitt and now Ream?

Healy needs to politically mature in a hurry.

The SCPR believes he lost his opportunity to be an effective mayor of Canton in his firing of Tom Bernabei as service director and chief of staff in the first year of his first administration.

Obviously, he did not learn his lesson then.

Not much longer after the Bernabei firing, he made life so uncomfortable for Tom Nesbitt as safety director (whom he brought in from a high law enforcement position in Nebraska) that Nesbitt elected to move on.

Apparently, Healy thinks he can be an effective mayor primarily through public relations initiatives.

But he wrong on that count.

The folks who are suffering under his unenlightened leadership methods are the people of Canton. 

How long are they going to put up with his shenanigans?

HEALY POWER GRAB TO RESULT IN CANTON-STARK CO. CRIME LAB REVIEW?

 UPDATED AT 10:50 AM

The Stark County Political Report is convinced that Canton mayor William J. Healy, II has been plotting a takeover (in terms of his power as chief executive) of the Canton-Stark County Crime Lab.

In the opinion of the SCPR, Mayor William J. Healy, II has an insatiable appetite to be "the-man-in-charge."

For other Stark County political entities attempting to work collaboratively with the Healy administration on:

• 9-1-1 emergency call receiving/dispatch, 
• building code enforcement or 
• health services, 

the bottom line is always going to be - for the mayor -  focused on this question:  Is he going to being in charge at the end of the day?

As naive as it was for him to think that his administration could revise the job description of the director of the lab and appoint former chief deputy Rick Perez (a long term personal/political pal of Healy safety director Tom Ream) to the post, the mayor does have the all consuming ambition and arrogance of imagined political heft to have thought he could get away with it.

Healy and Ream not only adulterated the qualifications to crime lab director job description; they also removed (as authorized by Ohio law) civil service protection for the position.

In an interesting twist, Healy then threw Ream under the bus when there was a public outcry against the Perez appointment. One can't be sympathetic with Ream.  He had to go into the safety director position knowing who he was dealing with.

In taking civil service protection away from the crime lab directorship, you have a scientific person and her management of a scientific operation subject to the whims of a politician?

And not just any politician, but one named William J. Healy, II?

Wow!  Watch out, no?

The SCPR has written often and LOUDLY that Healy is Stark County's quintessential political power monger.

And he is exceptionally ambitious.  The Report believes he is biding his time for something more powerful and prestigious than being mayor of Canton provides.

Yours truly has learned that Healy recently met with local McDonald's entrepreneur and franchise holder Guy Cucchini (among other well-heeled local businessmen) in an effort to get their support for his prospective run for Ohio secretary of state.

Healy's pitch to Cucchini et al?

"I am one of the finalists that the Ohio Democratic Party is considering for the race?"

Anyone who knows the mayor, surely understands that the mayor is looking forward to the next political gig as a step upward on the stairway to political stardom.

Moving on will put the Canton's troubles behind him leaving the clean up to others.

The Rep's Matt Rink recently wrote and insightful article that documents Healy's philosophically based drive to power (Mayor has power to hire, fire declassified workers, February 17, 2013).

His compulsion to power has never been more manifest and obvious than in the Perez caper.

In secretly (the change appeared out of nowhere during the last week of January of this year) working with Ream to change the director job description to one that Perez (otherwise unqualified because he lacking a science-based college degree) became qualified, Healy may have opened a can of political worms that he may come to regret having opened.

The question now becomes:  can he conjure up a bit more of political Houdini to escape a self-generated problem unscathed?

Healy has been in one political scrape after another after another after another in his five years as mayor.  But because of his obvious rather accomplished "sleight-of-hand" political maneuvering skills, he, like the grand magical master Houdini, escapes as disaster is about to overtake him.

While he appears to avoid personal political disaster, the city of Canton continues its spiral downward.

Not content to limiting his being a drag on Canton, his actions in relation to the crime lab has the potential to adversely affect outside-of-Canton Stark County-based law enforcement capability and, by extension, the safety of all Stark Countians.

But one wouldn't know Canton is in a downward spiral due in large part to his deficient leadership from Healy's continuous spinning of the state of the city to whomever will listen.

In another two to three weeks, "His Magic" will be front and center with his annual State of the City sideshow (reportedly to be held at the Pro Football Hall of Fame facilities).

This year will it feature showing off a "Hail, Mary!" in a quest to divert public attention away from his botched crime lab operation?

While he continues to survive, he does leave wreckage in his wake.

This time could it be the continued existence of the Canton-Stark County Crime Lab (CSCCL)?

For years the SCPR has been hearing about the excellence of the CSCCL.  Nary a critic in sight.  And thought to be a crown jewel in Stark County law enforcement's arsenal of weapons to bring the county's criminals to justice.

But with the revelation of the Healy/Ream political power play and the concomitant scrutiny of the internal workings of the lab that the power grab has brought on, is the lab in jeopardy of becoming history?

Stephanie Ujhelyi of The Alliance Review (February 15th edition) wrote an prize-winning-esque article (in the view of the SCPR) which The Report recently brought to the attention of Stark County Councils of Government (SCOG) executive committee chairman Tom Bernabei.

Bernabei is also president of the Stark County Board of Commissioners.

The Ujhelyi piece appears to have raised his interest in perhaps pursuing a thorough review as to the continued viability of the CSCCL as a SCOG project in the light of marked improvement of the effectiveness, efficiency and the expedition of the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation (BCI) crime lab work an outline of which was sketched out in her report:

• A turnaround time of 20 days on DNA processing, despite a marked increase in volume of testing done,
• forensic biology and DNA combined tests improved from 125.5 to 19.75 days; 
• chemistry from 42.85 to 10.49 days; CODIS [DNA indexing] from 23.86 to 7.83 days; and 
• firearms from 35.33 to 15.73 days.

How was Attorney General Mike DeWine able to dramatically improve the performance of the BCI laboratory division?

Again, according to Ujhelyi:

• DeWine implemented a “three-pronged” approach to improving turnaround: 
• [a]dding 21 scientists to the BCI staff; 
• doubling BCI’s number of DNA testing and combined DNA index systems (CODIS) robots, and 
• establishing a continuous quality improvement process.

Currently, Stark Countians, through state of Ohio local government fund funding of Canton; the Stark County commissioners and Stark County's remaining cities, villages and townships ante up about $1.2 million annually to fund operations of the crime lab.

As mentioned earlier in this blog, the CSCCL has been a point of pride of Stark County law enforcement for its excellence in enhancing the ability of local police departments to quickly obtain highly competent scientific analysis of collected crime scene evidence utilizing the lab's equipment (95% owned by Stark County) and facilities to process the evidence through:

• chemical,
• biological,
• DNA,
• firearms,
• fingerprint,
• polygraph,
• document, and
• trace analysis 

About 33% of SCOG's crime lab funds come from Canton, 33% of them from the Stark County general fund and 33% from the remaining cities, villages and townships that make up the county.

To boot, more than half of the crime lab's work is done for non-Canton Stark County cities, villages and townships.

Ujhelyi interest got piqued because of an Alliance case, to wit (from her piece):

Alliance city Safety-Service Director W. John Gross had pointed to a 14-month-old “theft by deception” case that remains unresolved, as city police continue to await results from the Canton-Stark County Crime Lab.

According to the report, officers responded in the morning of Nov. 16, 2011 to a downtown antique shop, where the owner reported purchasing coins for $1,800 that turned out to be counterfeit.

Taken into evidence were 80 counterfeit U.S. dollars, a three-ring binder and a handwritten receipt, according to the property report.

Additional supplements stated that Detective Donald Wensel made contact with the crime lab on June 4, 2012; Aug. 30, 2012, and Monday, suspending the investigation earlier this week pending receipt of the fingerprint analysis results.

Bernabei told The Review on Thursday that Foster informed him the silver dollar evidence was processed, and Alliance police should expect a report next week with the findings.

Hmm?

This kind of result from Stark County's prized crime lab?

Well, the SCPR is learning that at least going back to a Canton Safety Director Tom Ream's firing of former director Robert Budgake in January, 2012 (in a Canton city government fiasco in which some 30 or so city retire/rehire employees were fired because of allegations that the rehiring was not lawfully done) and perhaps going back as far as eighteen months, the quality of CSCCL work has been slipping in terms of its backlog.

Moreover, Ujhelyi reports that lab criminalist Michael Short was fired five months after the Budgake firing on allegations that "he had processed multiple gunshot residue cases at the same time" which, of course, raises questions of the quality of work.

On top of all of this, coming full cycle, you have the Healy/Ream political machinations (i.e. revising the job description in bringing Ream pal Perez on board) and thereby possibly jeopardizing the accreditation of the city-county lab in their having eliminated an existing lab director scientific degree requirement so that Perez could qualify.

Like a kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar, Healy was apparently contrite at the quarterly SCOG executive committee meeting of February 13th (LINK to prior SCPR blog) at having caused all the furor in the Perez hiring effective February 5th (which he undid by gaining Perez's resignation on February 12th).

If Bernabei and SCOG follows through with a complete and thorough review of the CSCCL structure and operations (with special emphasis on its effectiveness, efficiencies and expeditiousness), there may be a silver lining to the Healy machiavellian operation.

SCOG did take the immediate step hiring a qualified person to run the lab.  In an impressive but studied reaction to the Healy generated fiasco, SCOG reached out to CSCCL quality control manager Michele Foster to take over the directorship of the lab.

It appears that she will continue under civil service protection at least for 120 days.

It is the SCPR's position that in view of "the Perez affair," SCOG should insist that so long as Healy is mayor of Canton that if the Canton-Stark County Crime Lab is going to continue to exist that the director have civil service protection.

Moreover, the relationship between SCOG and the city of Canton on management of the lab be structured so that there is in place a unanimity between the two entities on any decisions on the hiring, firing, job descriptions and compensation of crime lab employees.

Lastly, the SCPR strongly urges SCOG to pursue a complete and thorough evaluation of the relative merits of the Canton-Stark County Crime Lab compared to the Ohio BCI laboratory division (i.e. an "apples to apples comparison).

Doing so will enable Stark's leadership to make a totally informed decision on which provides the very best in crime scene evidence analysis so that Stark County's citizens have state-of-the-art and first-rate competent support for the prosecution of Stark County-sited criminals.

A big plus about going BCI (which is used by 90% of Ohio's police jurisdictions) is that it is "free" of cost to its local government users.

But as one police official tells the SCPR, the CSCCL has been a very comfortable fit for local police agencies and going to BCI should only be done if there are clear advantages to doing so which outweigh the monetary savings.

The SCPR endorses this point of view.

Most important of all, SCOG owes it to we Stark Countians to give the utmost attention and priority and urgency to ensuring our safety by having a crime lab support system in place that equips the Stark County law enforcement team to put the bad guys and gals away.

WILL CANTON'S MAYOR HEALY CONTINUE TO FRUSTRATE STARK CO. COMMISSIONER PETE FERGUSON ON HIS LEGACY BUILDING EFFORT TO MAKE STARK CO. GOV'T MORE EFFICIENT AND TAXPAYER FRIENDLY?

As Peter Ferguson nears the end of his term as Stark County commissioner, he is going to make one more determined effort to get the cities of Stark County on board with a number of efforts he has underway to merge/consolidate county/city local government functions in order to:

• streamline government services for Stark Countians in order to make them convenient, and
• to make them more efficient and thereby save local government "hard to get" taxpayer dollars.

While the SCPR sees the effort as being a merger/consolidation, Commissioner Ferguson prefers to call it a move towards "shared services."

Because political turfism is rampant in Stark County, the euphemistic "shared services" is not apt to go over with Stark's political subdivisions in being receptive to Ferguson's initiative.

And he has gotten support in approaching his project as a "shared services" concept from the State of Ohio.  A part of Governor Kasich's efficiency in Ohio government initiative is what he calls the "Local Government Innovation Fund" (LGIF).

As defined by the Ohio Department of Development, the LGIF has been:

... established to provide financial assistance to Ohio political subdivisions for planning and implementing projects that are projected to create more efficient and effective service delivery within a specific discipline of government services for one or more entities. Through this program, the Ohio Department of Development seeks to promote efficiency, collaboration, merger, and shared services among local governments. Projects are also expected to facilitate improved business environments and promote community attraction.

The LGIF program will award up to $100,000 in grant funds per feasibility study, up to $100,000 in loan assistance per entity for demonstration projects, and up to $500,000 in loan assistance for collaborative demonstration projects. Award amounts for applicants with collaborative partners are limited to $100,000 per applicant and $100,000 for each collaborative partner up to $500,000. Grant funds will be awarded biannually and loan funds will be awarded quarterly through a competitive and open selection process.

But even before the LGIF program had come into existence, Commissioner Ferguson and his colleagues have been in diligent and active pursuit of streamlining city/county/village/township local government services (e.g. building departments, health departments, 9-1-1 emergency services, IT services and the like).

A major obstacle to the efficiency effort has been Mayor William J. Healy, II.

From a prior SCPR blog:

Last year he lashed out at Commissioner Pete Ferguson for having the audacity of commissioning former Commissioner Tom Harmon (who helped Bill Smuckler in his mayoralty race against Healy, May, 2011) and other Stark Countians to study the merger of building departments from throughout Stark County into a "one-stop-shopping" agency of government.

• (LINK)  Blog of December 22, 2011 (see Ferguson video),
• (LINK)  Blog of April 11, 2012

Though he only has until December 31st to get something worked out on "shared services," The Report is impressed that Ferguson has not given up on trying to make Stark County government more taxpayer friendly despite Healy pugnaciousness.

As readers of the SCPR know, yours truly has commented ad nauseum, over The Report's near five year existence, the degree to which Healy is a "my way or the highway" type of guy who is the poster child for being a quintessential political bully.

Not to be denied, Commissioner Ferguson has renewed his effort (on building department operations consolidation) to get Healy and his fellow mayors throughout Stark County to sign on to the notion of shared services.

This week he has sent out a letter to the mayors in which he:

• recites the fact that Stark County has received a State of Ohio grant "to carry out a Stark County Building Department Shared Services Feasibility Study,
• which, he says, is designed "to facilitate a focused planning process to help create efficient and effective service delivery ...,"
• asks the mayors to provide certain information (see below) so that the commissioners (working with Bob Nau - executive director of Stark County Regional Planning) can have information sufficient to put out a bid to firms which may be interested in assisting the county in studying the feasibility of getting Stark County's building department functions into a fully shared mode.
• A survey accompanying the letter which request information on:
• building department services currently provided,
• building department historical budget (revenues/expenses) going back 10 years,
• building department permits issued by them over the past 10 years,
• number of personnel working in the political subdivision building department, 
• the technology currently in use by the department (i.e. software, electronic filing, et cetera), and
• whether or not the political subdivision provides "flood plain management services."

Ferguson should know early on as to whether not this study is going anywhere anytime soon.

The baseline question will be whether or not Healy will permit his building department to complete and respond to the survey.

If he does, then there is hope that further study and discussion has any future.

One has to wonder how Healy can refuse.

He claims that Canton is facing at least a $2 million deficit for 2013.

And, he recently suffered a number of defeats in developing offsetting revenue streams at the hands of Canton City Council.

But The Report believes that unless Healy is convinced that he - 'err Canton government - will be in charge of a revamped "shared services" building department, there is no way he will cooperate with Ferguson's effort.

To Healy, it is one thing to save money, but not at the price of his ego remaining intact.

All eyes are now focused on Mayor William J. Healy, II.

And, of course, he likes it that way!

(VIDEO: MAYOR WILLIAM J. HEALY, II AND "THE YOUNG TURKS") HEALY LOSING CONTROL IN CANTON? HOW DOES HE SPIN THIS? NEAR SURE THING THAT POLICE & FIRE CUTS COMING FOR 2013, SAYS HEALY!

Last night at Canton City Council Mayor William J. Healy suffered another damaging political blow.

His "crown jewel" piece of retrenching Canton finances - the installation of Reflex camera traffic control devices - went down in defeat largely at the hands of four new members of council:  Fisher (the 5th), Mariol (the 7th), Mack (the 8th) and Morris (the 9th).

The vote:

NO:  Fisher, Mack, Mariol, Morris, Cirelli, Griffin and Hawk (7).

YES:  Babcock, Cole, Dougherty, Smith and West (5).

This group which the SCPR has respectfully dubbed "the young turks," except 9th Ward Council Frank Morris informed all last night that he is not young at age 45, is getting very skilled at blunting Mayor Healy's control of Canton's government.

As the video below shows, "the young turks" came prepared (with help from veteran council persons Cirelli and Hawk). Witness them ripping into the administration,s Redflex plan:

• A Redflex citation means that citizen has to prove innocence rather that being proven guilty (Fisher and Cirelli),
• Once council approves the safety director negotiating a contract with Redflex, it loses control (Schulman),
• Redflex is an Australian company which means outsourcing (Cirelli),
• Citizens putting pressure on council (Morris),
• Canton becomes a collection agent for Redflex (Mack),
• Canton exposed to "unlimited" liability in case of breach of contract (Schulman).

Last night's council action was an outright defeat for the mayor.  In previous council sessions over the summer of '12, council has derailed his proposal to allow oil and gas fracking on city owned land and put on hold his plan to revise city parks administration.   Healy had to retreat on the fracking issue and on his parks reorganization in the face of a near certain loss on a city council vote, if it was allowed to go forward.  Only his proposal to reduce the city income tax credit has passed council and that with Council President Allen Schulman breaking a 6 to 6 tie in Healy's favor.

And had Healy been able to get to 6 to 6 last night, Schulman would have broke in favor of Healy.

But he wasn't and so it appears to the SCPR that the council has pretty much taken control of Canton city government these days.

Healy's world has been crumbling of late and all of it is not all the new majority's doing.  Healy is proving to be quite adept at shooting himself in the foot.

Right now he is embroiled in controversies about:

• his claimed "accidental" use of a Community Improvement Corporation (CIC) credit card for personal expenses,
• his fight with the Canton Law Department over the proper formula for squaring up financially with the 30 city of Canton employees the administration dismissed earlier this year over improper retire/rehire procedures,
• his hiring "out-of-the-blue" a new administrator at a cost of $38,800 during a time he has been claiming that Canton faces a $3.7 million financial shortfall in 2013, and
• also amidst the financial crisis, he is projected as spending perhaps as much as $40,000 on such things as remote control blinds, a smart board (and maybe programming for the board) as well as a camera for his 8th floor office.

Putting together his legislative defeats and his seeming self-destruct mode, it all looks to The Report as if he is losing control.

Of course, anyone who knows anything about Healy knows that whenever something negative happens to him (self-inflicted or not), he always spins it so as to appear to coming out on top.

So if he is losing control in Canton, he will undoubtedly find solace in a point of view that there can be strength, meaning and happiness in an out-of-control world.  And he will embark on a spin campaign that puts him in a positive light in the world he finds himself in the midst of.

Below is an SCPR interview of Mayor Healy (also a few questions by The Rep's Ed Balint) after last night's defeat in which it appears that he is grappling with his falling-apart-world.  Key among the points he makes are:

• Defeat of the Redflex proposal puts a hole in 2013 budget,
• Departments of city government will shortly be told to start planning for 2013 reductions,
• That it now appears (at one time Healy was projecting a $3.7 million 2013 shortfall) that the "real numbers" of shortfall will range between $1.5 million and $2.5 million by the end of December,
• If he as mayor loses $1 in revenues, he loses 70 cents on the dollar for safety (police and fire) since police and fire represents 2/3rds of the city's budget,
• Further cuts (in light of four years of cuts) to the administrative operations of Canton government will make those offices cuts dysfunctional and therefore the look has to be at police and fire, health services, the courts and the like,
• Even if a city income tax proposal is placed on the ballot in May, 2013 and even if it were to pass, it would not help the 2013 budget,
• On the matter of lobbying council to vote for Redflex:
• he spoke with two of the new members of council and made sure they understood that a "no" vote was in effect a vote in favor of cutting city services,
• that he understands that council members are accountable to their constituents but that they needed to put the well being of the city as a whole and the stability of revenue to maintain safety forces above the politics of them getting re-elected,
• council members had indicated in one-on-one discussions that the Redflex proposal (among other proposals) was preferred over a hike in the city income tax,
• The administration still has some tweaking to do on some remaining proposals to generate revenue to present to council the outcome of which will play into the actual 2013 projected deficit,
• Other factors that are a negative on city finances include:
• that casino revenues are to be about one-half that originally projected,
• While he would not say "Redflex is dead forever, it is on life support"
• "The odds are incredibly high" that there will be police/fire reductions for Canton in 2013,
• "The governor's impact on us (the Kasich administration's draconian cuts in local government funding and the elimination of the Ohio estate tax) is greater ... than The Great Recession.

SHOULD CANTONIANS BE WARY OF MAYOR HEALY & HIS TALK ABOUT THE NEED FOR AN INCREASE IN TAXES?

UPDATE:  05/14/2014 at 12:45 p.m.

UPDATE:  05/09/2012 at 11:00 a.m. - President Allen Schulman (Canton City Council) responds to blog.  See comments section at end of blog.

ORIGINAL BLOG

To republish the headline of this blog:  SHOULD CANTONIANS BE WARY OF MAYOR HEALY & HIS TALK ABOUT THE NEED FOR AN INCREASE IN TAXES?

In a word:  YES!

Why?

Consider this background:

Councilwoman-at-Large Mary Cirelli called Healy a liar Monday night during the pre-regular-council-meeting Democratic caucus meeting.

Really?

Indeed!

During the caucus meeting she pressed him on whether the proceeds of a "in the talking stages" safety forces levy would be an add-on to what the safety forces already get.

Cirelli says that Healy said in the context of a lot of double talk that the safety forces would not get "all" the money generated by a safety forces levy.

To her, this was justification for calling the mayor a liar.

Another basis for her being so "out-with-it" in calling Healy a liar has to do with the passage last week of a measure generated by Councilman David Dougherty (majority leader).

Readers of the SCPR will recall that Hall of Fame AFL-CIO president Dan Sciury (LINK here to prior blog which has a video of Sciury speaking) showed up at last week's council meeting to ask council to rescind Dougherty's ordinance that put Canton on a track to invest $25,000 in a "promote Canton"scheme.

Sciury was upset that the work was being contracted with a North Carolina based company (non-local, of course, and non-union) which he felt confident would be including promotional materials made in China, perhaps even Canton, China.

Under the shepherding of Councilman-at-Large Joe Cole (with Majority Leader Dougherty monitoring), the legislation had gotten passed the preceding week as an "emergency" matter.  Cole gave a number of reasons to his fellow council members as to why they needed to "rush to judgment" on the vote.

None of them (chiefly, for the youth of Canton), in the assessment of yours truly, hold water.

So what's the rush? 

Of course, we all know (except for the 10 other than Cole members of council) from life's experience that anytime one is being rushed along - watch out!

Apparently, Healy, Cole and Dougherty think the ordinance holds something politically good for them and accordingly they have to rush it along.

To her discredit, even Cirelli got hoodwinked. She doesn't know who she dealing with by now?

Before the vote, Cirelli says she talked to Healy about her concerns that the ordinance would connect Canton, Ohio city government to buying goods manufactured in, perhaps, Canton, China.

He promised her in no uncertain terms that if it came out (like he didn't already know) that non-USA produced goods were to be part of the contract:  "I will veto the legislation!"

Well, the veto never happened.

In a SCPR post-April 30th meeting videotaped press conference type interview with Cole, he all but absolutely conceded that Canton, Ohio under the contract would be very likely buying goods manufactured in China.

Healy's response to Cirelli (last week after the Sciury appearance) and a week after the 11 to 1 vote for the out-of-state; out-of-country buy (only 5th Ward Councilman Kevin Fisher voting no):

"Oh, I must have forgot!"

As the SCPR has written prodigiously over the last four years, Mayor Healy thinks everybody else is totally stupid whom he can politically use and abuse at-will.

When he gets caught, he gets angry.

To Cirelli according to Cirelli:  (paraphrase) "I never said any of that.  You are a f_ _ _ _ _ _ liar.  And don't you ever come to me for anything ever again!"

Indeed, Cantonians should be very wary of the mayor and any tax increase proposal he comes up with.

The Report believes that Healy could well be in the process of concocting "a bait and switch" to bamboozle council and the Canton electorate with.

With the "Canton, China" escapade in mind, it does not appear that more than a couple councilpersons have the inclination and/or the capability of analyzing proposed tax increase legislation to ferret out the loopholes that Healy is likely devising.

And, as the SCPR full well knows, the mayor of Canton is one of the most accomplished finessers that Canton and Stark County has ever seen.

Only council president Allen Schulman matches up ably against Healy.  But he is only rarely inclined to do so.  One has to wonder why.

Though he denies that it was his intention, Schulman did bounce around Healy surrogate David Dougherty on "the buy China matter" Monday night. 

A number of area politicians are telling The Report that there is no way Healy can get a tax issue passed.

Apparently, they do not know Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II very well.

In the view of the SCPR, no Stark County politician has the "bait & switch" and overall scheming skills of Healy.

Don't count him out!

WHICH POLITICAL PARTY IS THE CAPTIVE OF THE OIL & GAS INDUSTRY?

Plain Township Trustee Louis Giavasis likes to argue that fracking (the process of forcing rock embedded natural gas to the surface) is not a Republican or Democratic issue.

And he does have some compelling points to his argument.

But when one "follows the money," it is abundantly clear that by and large it is Republican Party public officials who the oil and gas industry thinks is its best best to win the battle between the industry and environmentalists who constitute the anti-fracking movement.

The Giavasis side of the argument is ladened with some heavy hitter Democrats.

Right here in Stark County probably the foremost Democratic proponent for the oil and gas industry is Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II.  In his State of the City address earlier this year he took the step of putting the fame of Canton being the The Utica Capital (the Utica shale formation from which most of the natural gas is to be extracted) right alongside Canton being the site of the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

The SCPR has learned that Healy is out and about touting his "Utica Capital" spiel.

Healy is frothing at the mouth at the prospect of an estimate that some 65,000 jobs producing some $3.3 billion in employee income (many of which are said to be in the $50,000 per annum range) will be coming to Ohio by 2014.

However, one local union official told The Report yesterday that he is not sure all that many jobs (especially union) will be coming to Canton and the greater Stark County.  He said that he has a feeling from discussions he has had with Baker Hughes (set to bring about 700 oilfield services jobs to Massillon) that many of the workers will come from out of Ohio.

You can be sure that Democratic Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry is supporting fracking as did her predecessor Frank Cicchinelli.

At the congressional level, soon to be a U.S. House of Representative for part of Stark County (the Alliance area) Tim Ryan (Democrat - Youngstown) is a huge supporter of the oil and gas industry and fracking notwithstanding the fact his home area has be plagued with a recent splurge of earthquakes thought to be caused by the operation of injection wells (which are used to dispose of fracking waste water) in the area.


On the Republican side the foremost facilitator and advocate for fracking is 50th Ohio House District state Rep. Christina Hagan.  Recently, the Cleveland Plain Deal published a piece showing her among the top three state officials receiving campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry having received a documented $7,500 from March of 2011 when she was appointed to the House.

The Hagan contributions are part of a $600,000 layout by the oil and gas lobbyists to Ohio some 32 legislators of which 29 are Republicans.

The SCPR has received a report that Republican Plain Township Trustee was overheard at a local exercising facility as referring to some Stark County anti-frackers (i.e. Concerned Citizens of Stark County) as being "idiot environmentalists."  When contacted by The Report about the allegation, he denied that he had said any such thing.

Republican Governor John Kasich has been ga-ga over the prospects of fracking bailing the Ohio economy out of the doldrums since very early in his administration.

Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown says he is neither pro-fracking nor anti-fracking.

Republican presidential candidate and pro-fracker Mitt Romney is seemingly on a mission to paint President Obama as being anti-fracking.

Recently, OpenSecrets.org published a chart showing oil and gas industry overwhelmingly supporting Republican politicians.

It will be interesting to see which political party made the right choice on which side of the fracking issue to lineup on.

If the prospect of fracking proves to be an economic boom without attendant environmental safety problems  for Stark County, Ohio and America without, then Republicans stand gain with the American public.

If, on the other hand, there are "Deep Water Horizons" out there lurking, then Democrats, of course, are likely to be seen has having tried to protect the environment.

At the end of the day all one has to do is FOLLOW THE MONEY to know that the fracking issue, indeed, has strong partisan political overtones to it.

ANY ELECTION EXCITEMENT BUILDING FOR STARK CO. 2012 ELECTIONS IN STARK?

To repeat the headline question:  Any election excitement building for Stark County 2012 elections?

Answer:  yes and no.

Obviously, first and foremost is the Republican presidential primary election which is a part of the overall March 6th Ohio primary elections.

A recent Quinnipiac University Ohio poll shows former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum leading former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney 36% to 29% with former Speaker of the U.S. House Newt Gingrich coming in at 20% and Texas Congressman Ron Paul at 9%.

However, the big factor two and one-half weeks out from Ohio's primary is the estimate that as many as 50% of those polled say that they are not fixed in their choice.

While Santorum is presently leading across the state, the SCPR believes that Romney is likely ahead in Stark County inasmuch as Santorum appeals to the most conservative part of the Republican Party and The Report does not see Stark Republicans as fitting that description.

The Romney campaign website claims that many prominent Ohio Republicans have endorsed him (e.g. U.S. Senator Rob Portman - January 19, 2012).

It will be interesting to see who, if any of the candidates, actually show up in Stark to campaign, and, more importantly, who shares the stage with the candidate - as a tip off - as to who the local Republican establishment is to support.

Stark County Commissioner Janet Creighton tells the SCPR (as of yesterday) that she is undecided.

Other than the Republican presidential race, there is not that much going on for Stark Countians in the primary.

There is a GOP nomination for U.S. Senator contest going on for the right to match up with Democratic United States Senator Sherrod Brown going on, but it looks as if Josh Mandel (Ohio treasurer) has it locked up which makes the race ho-hum.

 Ditto for Brown.  He has two "write in" opponents.

However, there are two "inside the Columbus beltway" intraparty fights with a Stark County aspect that is likely lost on most Stark County primary voters which could affect who is chairman of the Ohio Republican Party and the Ohio Democratic Party.

First, the Beth Williams versus Sarah Brown 29th District State Central Committee Woman race.

The SCPR is told by Jim Woods of the Medina County Tea Party that the Tea Party contemplates filing litigation against the Kevn DeWine as chairman of the Ohio Republican Party to invalidate a rule that DeWine forced through into the governing rules of the party that requires central committee persons to have voted in the Republican primary in the last two primary elections.  If left to stand, Woods tells The Report, Williams would not be qualified to serve.

There is a fight going on within the Ohio Republican Party with Governor Kasich behind the dissidents to remove DeWine as chairman.

The SCPR's impression is that both Brown and Williams favor DeWine's removal.

It is hard to imagine Sarah Brown not winning a Stark County Republican Party intraparty contest.

Secondly, there is similar fight is going on within the Ohio Democratic Party (ODP) as to whether or not Chris Redfern is to remain as chairman of the ODP.

Redfern has recruited Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II to be his man from Stark County.  Healy interesting enough is opposed by his successor 52nd District Ohio House state Representative Stephen Slesnick.

The SCPR believes that Healy is trying to position himself to take over control of the Stark County Democratic Party.  This race will be an indicator of how much strength Healy has among rank and file Democrats.

If Healy wins this race and if Democrats take a bath in the newly formed Ohio House districts (i.e. the 48th - Schuring, and the 50th - Hagan) which the SCPR projects they will, then there might be renewed impetus to set current chairman Randy Gonzalez aside to be replaced by Healy or one of his political confederates with a mission to reinvigorate the Stark County Democratic Party which has fallen on hard times over the last several years.

The Dems could be looking at a loss of the prosecutor's office, the sheriff's department and, perhaps, even the coroner's office come the general election of 2012.

Stay tuned.  The SCPR expects the general election of 2012 to be all excitement!