HAS THE "O.K. CORRAL" RELOCATED TO CANTON CITY HALL?

As reported by the Stark County Political Report, Monday's Canton City Council meeting turned into - at the end, in the miscellaneous business section - one gigantic turmoil.

The cause?

Ward 2 councilman Thomas West!

Councilman Thomas West (D, Ward 2) renewed his effort to depose Frank Morris as council vice president and majority leader of the 11 member Democratic (of 12 total council members) caucus.

Notwithstanding that he got voted down 8 to 4, it appears that he is continuing what appears to the SCPR to be "provocateur-in-chief" in the sense of making one parliamentary move after another to keep council unsettled, to say the very least.

He seems to have Law Director Joseph Martuccio in a dither as he endeavors to play King Solomon (Martuccio is a thespian, you know) in rightly dividing the law on the question of whether or not the early January election of Frank Morris by a 6 to 5 vote (independent councilman Richard Hart abstaining) will withstand a legal challenge.

Legal challenge?

Yes, Martuccio fears that someone or some entity affected adversely by an ordinance with Morris as vice president of council might challenge on the basis of Morris not having been legally elected.

You do not have to be a biblical scholar to know that Solomon of about 1000 B.C. was going to cut a baby in half so that each contending mother could claim victory, but the "true" mother gave way to save the life of the child.  All of which was a smart thing for the "true" mother to have done as she ended up with the child as a consequence of the "wisdom of Solomon" in ferreting out the identity of the "true" mother.

But "Solomon" Martuccio should know better than play that card with the contending members of council because it is very obvious that nobody is going to give ground  - even if it means saving Canton City Council from itself.

Acting like a "wild 'West,' Councilman Thomas West is resembling a gunslinger of yore rather than a 2014 city councilman.

Canton City Hall these days appears to be a  preparation staging area for the gunfight at O.K. Corral in Tombstone, Arizona circa 1881 than an abode for Solomon about to dispense his wisdom.

On one side:

Side?

Yes.

The four (notice that West is the lead signature) fired off this letter yesterday:

Hmm?

And the other side?

The seven responded this way:

Note that Councilmen Griffin and Babcock didn't sign on with either group.

So what is this "special meeting" designed to achieve, when it occurs?

Well, Councilman West has worked hard to convey the impression he is doing God's work (the SCPR's attribution, not West's) in doing a "come, let us reason together" session.

But it is obvious that at least of his fellow councilmen are not buying his line.

One source tells The Report that West's ultimate game plan is is believed to be to force Councilwoman Chris Smith as a "compromise candidate."

And beyond this, the source says that West though he appears to be "the main man;" he is not, and is actually doing the bidding of  Mayor William J. Healy, II.

This take on the situation has Healy desperate to put Morris aside.

Already under Morris' leadership, council is going over Healy's budget proposal for 2014 with "a fine toothed comb" and thereby putting the mayor under scrutiny that he has never had to abide during his one and one half terms as Canton's chief executive.

Moreover, there is the committee assignment thing, which is the prerogative of the vice president/majority leader of council.

Already Morris has placed two allies in key committee posts.  West has been removed as chair of the Judiciary Committee in favor of Edmond Mack.

Mack is a proponent of charter government for Canton and had been frustrated by West in getting the legislation out of council so that council could vote on whether or not to submit the proposal to Cantonians for a vote.

Mayor Healy is thought to be an opponent of Canton going charter.

With Mack as Judiciary chair, the legislation will - at least - get to the reading/voting stage.  However, The Report is told that the pro-charter council members only have 7 of the necessary 8 votes to send the issue to ballot.

But that could change.  The Report believes that one of the remaining five members is persuadable.

But we shall see.

Another burr in the posterior of Mayor Healy has to be Greg Hawk's return (D, Ward 1) as Finance Committee chair.  Before the budget review process initiated by the Morris-led faction of council, Hawk was the only check on Healy's spin on this or that financial agenda item he has presented to council in the past.

And make no mistake about it, William J. Healy, II does hold political grudges.

The two have been bitter combatants over the six years of Healy's rule on the 8th floor.  The mayor is savvy enough to know that with Hawk being "in the majority" on key votes, he has leverage that has the potential to make Healy "cry Uncle" on finance issues that Hawk is intent upon.

As majority leader Chris Smith, Healy has to be thinking,  would likely restore West to chair of Judiciary and "anybody but Greg Hawk" as chair of Finance.

Of course, outside observers know it is likely that any such development would likely nudge council into out-and-out warfare.

Healy has clearly aligned himself with West and Smith and the SCPR believes that the West (and Smith) agenda being played out is in reality the William J. Healy, II agenda.

There is no doubt that West and Smith get something out of this fight if Chris Smith surfaces a majority leader.

The question for Canton's version of the gunfight at the O.K. Corral is who will be left standing when all the "political" bullets have been fired?

VIDEO: STARK COUNTY GOV'T GETTING SPECIAL SCRUTINY AT STATE LEVEL BECAUSE OF ITS HISTORY GOING BACK SOME 5 YEARS?

It appears that the folks who run state of Ohio departments of government are wary of anything coming to them out of Stark County.

Since April 1, 2009 when the story broke that the-then Stark County treasurer Gary Zeigler was accusing his chief deputy Vince Frustaci stolen taxpayer money from the county treasury, there have been a number of Stark County originated events (including the Frustaci revelation) that have kept our county in the limelight of attention with the bureaucrats who run Ohio's capital city.

Frustaci subsequently pled guilty.

But for about two and one-half years following the revelation, activities which included:

• the involvement of the State of Ohio Auditor (auditing the Stark treasury and finding deficit management oversight which Zeigler steadfastly denied), and
• the Ohio Supreme Court (determining whether or not the-then Stark commissioners [Bosley, Ferguson and Meeks - all Democrats] had properly removed Zeigler from office)
• Note:  The Supreme Court found that they had not used proper constitutional safeguards and therefore returned Zeigler to office.  He did work out an agreement with the-then commissioners Bernabei, Creighton and Ferguson on October 19, 2011 to retire/resign

became part and parcel of Stark County making a negative name for itself in Columbus as an outgrowth of other screwy happenings that followed on the heels of the Frustaci matter.

The "other screwy happenings" have included:

• the election debacle in Lake Township (November, 2011 - SCPR prior blog LINK) as township trustees first appeared to have won a hard fought election to take the Uniontown Police Department township wide, only to have the Supreme Court overturn the election results because of deficient ballot language that originated with township legal counsel but was never corrected despite timely word from the Ohio secretary of state of the need for a correction,
• the selection in February, 2013 of a sheriff (former Massillon safety director George T. Maier) by the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee to replace "the unable to take office for health reasons" Mike McDonald (elected in November, 2012) with Maier having questionable - as a matter of law - qualifications under Ohio Revised Code Section 311.01.  
• Note:  Maier's right to serve is under review with the Ohio Supreme Court as this blog is written,
• the action of mayor-elect Kathy Catazaro-Perry requesting (in December, 2011) a State of Ohio Auditor audit of Massillon city finances (denied by Auditor Yost) only to be renewed by her as mayor in May, 2013 to prompt Massillon being put on either an Ohio monitored fiscal watch or fiscal emergency.

Spillover from Stark's negative name in Columbus was evident (at least to the SCPR) this past Monday night at Canton City Council meeting when Canton law director Joe Martuccio got up at Council's Committee of the Whole meeting which precedes the regular council meeting and explained why there was an item on council's agenda to amend Canton's ballot initiative to have city voters decide whether or not to tax themselves 4 mills in property tax to support the city parks and recreation function.

It appears to the SCPR that Stark County may be acquiring - at least from the secretary of state's office perspective and, perhaps, from the state auditor - a "watch them" and "give them special scrutiny" as a consequence of Stark County political and administrative history since April 1, 2009.

Nearly everybody and most entities want to make a name for themselves.

But not a negative image that may be taking hold in the Columbus bureaucracy on Stark County government.

Here is Law Director Joe Martuccio addressing the parks and recreation property tax levy amendment issue:

A "PROBABLE CAUSE" HEARING (ON "ALLEGED" THEFT-IN-OFFICE) SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 23RD ON CONSEQUENCES OF STARK CO. COMMON PLEAS JUDGE FORCHIONE ORDER IN THE STUDER CASE. HMM?

UPDATE:  04:45 p.m.

The SCPR has learned that Judge Frank Forchione nemesis Craig T. Conley has been retained (on a pro bono basis) to provide legal advice and counsel to Louis W. Demis with regard to his affidavit (see full affidavit below) vis-a-vis Forchione and his allegation that Forchione's re-directing of fine money ($5,000) via his order in the Scott D. Studer case from the Stark County treasury general fund to the Sandy Hook Support Fund amounted to a theft-in-office by the case law of Ohio.

Conley says that Demis is committed to pursuing his allegation to a successful conclusion.

Conley tells the SCPR that he will be in contact with Akron prosecutor Craig Morgan soon in a coordinating sort of way in preparation for a "probable cause hearing" set for April 23, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. in the Canton Municipal Court with former Barberton judge Michael McNulty presiding.

SUBTOPIC

REPOSITORY SITS ON STORY

What is the expression about getting more than one bargained for?

Oh!  How about?  "Be careful what you wish for — you just might get more than you bargained for."

Well, as it turns out, "getting more than one bargained for" may be the ultimate consequence for Judge Francis (Frank) G. Forchione of the Stark County Court of Common Pleas in his sentencing of Scott D. Studer.

The, let's say, the "unorthodox" (to be euphemistic) original sentencing (December 19, 2012) was done in the full glare of media attention and Forchione - as a ramification of the sentencing hearing - garnered local, statewide, national, and, indeed, international attention.

Here is a SCPR LINK for those SCPR readers who are not familiar with the details of a matter in which Forchione ordered a convicted felon (Studer pled guilty to several felony counts) to pay a $5,000 fine NOT through the Common Pleas Court Clerk of Courts TO be forwarded on to the Stark County treasury and then deposited in the Stark County general fund as required by Ohio law, BUT TO the Sandy Hook School Support Fund in order to aid the families of the victims of the December 14, 2012 mass shooting/killing of 20 students and 6 teachers in Newtown, Connecticut.

Within days local attorney and civic activist Craig T. Conley accused Forchione of grandstanding (SCPR LINK).  Moreover, a Bethlehem Township resident stepped forward and asked Conley to file a lawsuit in order to get the money to where it belonged, he said: to the Stark County general fund.

Conley agreed to do so pro bono (for the public good).

For his civic-mindedness, Conley was rewarded by being named the subject of a ethics complaint filed by an anonymous (SCPR LINK) person on January 28, 2013.

Ultimately, Forchione found a way (SCPR LINK) to retrieve the $5,000 fine from Newtown and amended the original Studer case order and by the amendment had Clerk of Courts Nancy Reinbold forward the $5,000 onto Stark County Treasurer Alex Zumbar for deposit in the county general fund. 

The Marcelli complaint was voluntarily dismissed on February 15th.

Conley on March 26, 2013 was exonerated (SCPR LINK) by Ohio State Bar Association ethics counsel on the ethics complaint "as being unfounded."

End of matter?

Apparently not!

The SCPR learned on Friday (late in the day) that a Columbus resident (Louis W. Demis) has filed an affidavit with local authorities on February 28th alleging that Judge Forchione had in ordering (and in following through in seeing that the order was effectuated [re:  Letter of Transmittal, January 3, 2013]) that the $5,000 be paid to the Sandy Hook victims relief fund rather than to the Stark County treasury committed the criminal offense of "theft in office," to wit:

The SCPR has further learned that Stark County's only countywide newspaper has known of the affidavit being filed for some time and has decided (a least for the time being) not to inform Stark Countians of the pending action.

This is the same newspaper who saw fit to publish an article about Mayor Healy's wife and her being arrested on October 13, 2011 on a matter that had absolutely no relevance to the mayor's performance in office.

Pray tell?  How many standards are in effect at The Repository?

Of course, local authorities treated the affidavit as if it was the hottest potato to hit the Stark County in many a moon.  Forchione served as the top prosecutor in Canton during his 13 years in the Canton Law Department where he served his full legal career (other than also maintaining a private practice) until he was elected to the Stark County Court of Common Pleas bench in November, 2008.

Canton Law Director Martuccio tells the SCPR that immediately on receiving the affidavit, Canton Municipal Court Clerk of Courts Phil Giavasis telephoned him with the question:  "What am I to do with this affidavit?"

Answer:  Martuccio directed his Canton Law Department staff find non-Stark Countian criminal justice folks to take a look at questions compelled by the filing of the affidavit; namely:

• whether or not to prosecute (who turned out to be Assistant Akron Chief Assistant Criminal Prosecutor Craig Morgan) on the basis of the affidavit, and 
• whether or not a viable judiciable complaint (i.e. probable cause) has been made (who turned out to be the retired but formerly long time Barberton Municipal Court Judge Michael McNulty).

Martuccio agreed with The Report's assessment that the filing of the affidavit was consonant with Ohio statutory authority which seemingly is Ohio's version of "citizen arrest" legislation (Ohio Revised Code Sections 2835.09 and 2835.10) that is prevalent across America.

Moreover, he told The Report that over his years in the Canton Law Department only few of such affidavits have been filed.

This past Tuesday, April 9, 2013, Canton Municipal Court acting presiding and administrative judge Stephen Belden set a  "probable cause hearing" on the Demis affidavit for Tuesday, April 23, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. before Judge McNulty.

Martuccio said that it is not likely that Judge Forchione will be appearing at the hearing.  However, he added that if probable cause is found, then Judge Forchione will be processed through the criminal justice system the same way as any other citizen.

If this matter passes the "probable cause" hurdle, one has to wonder how Prosecutor John Ferrero (Stark County's prosecutor) handles the matter inasmuch as felonies get prosecuted at the county level and not the municipal court level.

As readers of the SCPR know, yours truly, like Sheriff Tim Swanson, does not have a lot of faith (LINK) in how Ferrero runs his office.

However, this one, if it gets that far, appears to be a "no brainer" that Ferrero's office would not be touching this one with the proverbial "ten foot pole."   The office provided legal advice to Judge Forchione during the Marcelli challenge of his sentencing of Studer.

Undoubtedly, the matter would not be presided over by a sitting nor former Stark County Common Pleas Court judge.

The SCPR has learned that a local (Canton-based) lawyer is looking at taking on the case (apparently in advisory role to Mr. Demis since only prosecutors try criminal cases in Ohio) on a pro bono basis.

There probably is no more apt way to describe what Judge Forchione has gotten himself into other than to use the "tar baby story" (not the SCPR's idea, rather an idea borrowed from another) from the collection of Uncle Remus stories many of us "older" folks were subjected to in elementary school decades and decades ago.

Nowadays it is not cool to use these stories because some think they are racist expressions.

The SCPR's use of the tar baby story is designed to vivify the sticky situation that Judge Forchione apparently has created for himself in grandstanding (Conley's accusation) in having Scott Studer pay his fine - not to the Stark County treasury as required by law - but rather to the Sand Hook Foundation.

From Wikipedia here is the essence of the story:

Br'er Rabbit ("Brother Rabbit") is the main character of the stories, a likable character, prone to tricks and trouble-making who is often opposed by Br'er Fox and Br'er Bear.

In one tale, Br'er Fox constructs a lump of tar and puts clothing on it. When Br'er Rabbit comes along he addresses the "tar baby" amiably, but receives no response. Br'er Rabbit becomes offended by what he perceives as Tar Baby's lack of manners, punches it, and becomes stuck.

So the question becomes with the filing of the Demis affidavit: Is Judge Forchione about to become stuck to a problem that he gave birth to beyond anything anyone dreamed of?

Will he be pondering the adage: 

"Be careful what you wish for (i.e. publicity? in making the order) — you just might get more than you bargained for."  Or will the affidavit prove to be "a tempest in a teapot?"

Only time will tell.

Stayed tuned to the SCPR where you can depend on hearing Stark County news and analysis when it breaks!

(VIDEOS: REAM, SWANSON, McDONALD, OLIVER, MARTUCCIO & HANKE) ARE THE STARK COUNTY METRO NARCOTICS UNIT & CRIME LAB IN JEOPARDY BECAUSE OF STATE OF OHIO LOCAL GOV"T FUND CUTS? WILL OELSLAGER, HAGAN & SCHURING HEED SCOG PLEA TO GET BEHIND HB 471 & RESTORE SOME LCL GOV'T FUNDING?

UPDATE:  06/06/2012 AT 4:00 PM

Larry Dordea (Hartville chief of police and Republican Alliance city councilman-at-large) has brought to the SCPR's attention that he believes that this blog's statement as to his position (on the basis of prior conversations between The Report and Dordea) on the Stark County Crime Lab does not adequately convey his strong support for the lab.  He agrees with those who point out that if Stark County did not have the crime lab, Stark County law enforcement agencies would be greatly disadvantaged if they had to rely on the state of Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation (BCI).

As is always the case with The Report, subjects of the blog get a full and complete opportunity to respond to yours truly's take on them as public figures and/or positions on issues discussed in the Stark County Political Report.

As for the Dordea/McDonald match up, the SCPR believes this race is akin to that between Republican Alex Zumbar and Democrat Ken Koher for Stark County treasurer in November, 2010.

Stark Countians will benefit, no matter who among the two is victorious in November of this year.

ORIGINAL BLOG

Watching and listening to the Stark County Council of Governments (SCOG) monthly meeting yesterday was a sobering experience as it became apparent that "the chickens are coming home to roost" in terms of real world consequences coming to Stark because the Republican dominated Ohio General Assembly voted last year to dramatically cut the state Local Government Fund (LGF) allocations to Ohio's cities, villages and townships for the biennium 2012-2013 fiscal years.

It appears to the SCPR that the cuts could undermine law enforcement efforts in Stark County.

Yesterday, the membership of SCOG voted to eliminate some $160,000 plus in annual payments to the Stark County Metropolitan Narcotics unit. While Sheriff Swanson said that the department would continue operating the unit, it is hard to believe that the loss of the SCOG funding will not diminish the units effectiveness.

Here is a sampling of SCOG's discussion of the issue featuring SCOG Chairman and Canton Safety Director Thomas Ream, Stark County Sheriff Tim Swanson and Stark Narcotics head Sgt. John Oliver.



And here is the videotaped statement of Chief Deputy Sheriff (Jail Division) Mike McDonald who is also a candidate for sheriff in November against Hartville police chief and Republican Alliance city councilman-at-large Larry Dordea:



CLICK HERE to link with the Stark County Sheriff's website which explains the history, mission and composition of the unit.

SCOG members also discussed the future for SCOG's pride and joy project - the Stark County Crime Lab.  There was a whole lot of concern of where they are going to find the funding for it  beyond 2013.

So it seems to The Report that Stark County is going to have its law enforcement and criminal justice system adversely affected by the state cuts  notwithstanding the fact that Stark Countians voted to approve a 0.5% sales tax in November, 2011 in order to solve a financial crisis that county government was experiencing.

The levy was sold to the public on the basis of being used to used to undo severe cuts in the law enforcement and justice system of Stark County made in 2011.

And the Stark County commissioners have been good to their word and have begun restoring affected departments of county government to their 2010 levels.

Republican members of the Stark County delegation (Christina Hagan - the 50th House District, Scott Oelslager * - the 29th Senate District and Kirk Schuring - the 51st House District) voted for the budget bill (HB 153) and for ending the Ohio Estate Tax (beginning January 1, 2013).

Notice that there is an asterisk by Oelslager.  The asterisk is next to his name because he originally voted for HB 153 but then voted against it in the final vote.  One would think that by voting "no" on the final bill, he should be given credit  for being against cuts in local government funding, no?

No!

Why not?

Because he gave as the reason in a Repository report for voting "no" on the bill as being that: 

[h]e opposed the conference committee inserting provisions into the bill related to merit pay and performance standards for teachers.

 Accordingly, he does not deserve credit for looking out for local government funding.

A key action by SCOG yesterday was authorizing Canton Law Director Joseph Martuccio to prepare a resolution asking the "Stark County delegation" to the Ohio General Assembly to support HB 471 which would restore some of the cuts to local government funding.

Here is a video of the discussion of  SCOG board members including Martuccio and Stark County Chief Administrator Mike Hanke.



As pointed out on the McDonald videotape, McDonald sheriff opponent Larry Dordea has told the SCPR that while it is convenient and helpful to have a local crime lab, if it was lost because of the evaporation of funding, that the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation (BCI) would do just fine.

Other officials beg to differ.  An example was given to The Report that BCI reports can take up to two to three months in the making whereas Stark County Crime Lab reports are generally available within two weeks.  

Moreover, it is said that reliance on the BCI could cause a delay in the administration of justice.

It seems to the SCPR that Representatives Hagan and Schuring as well as state Senator Oelslager have some explaining to do to Stark County voters.

Democrat state Rep. Stephen Slesnick (the 52nd House District) has consistently opposed Governor Kasich's cuts of local government funding.

(VIDEO) CANTON LAW DIRECTOR RESPONDS TO CITIZEN CONLEY'S DEMAND THAT HE PROSECUTE REINSTATED STARK COUNTY TREASURER GARY ZEIGLER FOR "DERELICTION OF DUTY"

Reinstated Stark County Treasurer Gary D. Zeigler probably cannot believe that Canton Law Director Joe Martuccio is considering the possibility of bringing criminal charges (2nd degree misdemeanor) against him for dereliction of duties in his management of the Stark treasury before he was illegally (according to the Ohio Supreme Court) removed from office on August 23, 2010 by the then commissioners Bosley, Ferguson and Meeks because they did not accord Zeigler his due process of law rights as required by Article II, Section 38 of the Ohio Constitution.

After all, county and federal prosecutors made findings that Zeigler was not involved in the theft of what some believe to have been as much as $2.96 million of taxpayer money by his - up until April 1, 2009 -  Chief Deputy Vince Frustaci.

But Martuccio is.

No, Canton's law director is not retreading the ground already covered by the county and federal prosecutors.  His consideration is solely on Zeigler's steadfast and consistent contention that he did nothing wrong in terms of the controls, structures and management style he had in place before his ouster.

Last Thursday local attorney and civic activist Craig T. Conley fired off a letter to Martuccio outlining why he thought the law director should proceed with charges against Zeigler, to wit:

 

It appears to the SCPR that Conley is outraged by Zeigler's persistent denials that he failed to take appropriate management and administrative actions to prevent a theft like Frustaci's from happening.  Moreover, it seems that he will not rest until there is some sort of finding by a court of law that Zeigler failed Stark County taxpayers.

This is the same Craig Conley who took great offense at the Stark commissioners (Bosley, Harmon and Vignos circa December, 2008) imposing a 1/2 sales tax on Stark Countians and who was instrumental in forming a "Vote No Increased Taxes Committee" that caused the issue to be placed on the November, 2009 ballot.  Voters overwhelmingly repealed the tax.

This is the same Craig Conley who took great offense at Sheriff Tim Swanson dissing of the Stark County public ("poop on the public") in speaking in support of the imposed tax and took him to task in the media.  

This is the same Craig Conley who initiated litigation (since taken over by Stark County prosecutors) to recover the missing monies from Frustaci and Zeigler in a civil action which is in progress in Stark County Common Pleas Court (visiting Judge Inderlied). 

So Conley isn't somebody one would want to be a target of.  It could be that Zeigler has met his match in Conley.  

As a sidenote, here is a copy of a check representing Frustaci's pension fund from the U.S. District Court for Northern Ohio sent recently to Stark County commissioners.

The SCPR caught up with Martuccio at last night's Canton City Council meeting and videotaped his response to the Conley letter in terms of the actions he is taking.  He says that his consideration could take weeks if not months to come to a determination.

LOCAL ACTIVIST & ATTY CRAIG T. CONLEY "DEMANDS" THAT CANTON LAW DIRECTOR JOE MARTUCIO PROSECUTE REINSTATED STARK CO. TREAS. GARY D. ZEIGLER. WILL HE?

Earlier today, the SCPR received a copy of a five-page letter from local attorney and civic activist Craig T. Conley to Canton Law Director demanding that Martuccio file misdemeanor charges against reinstated (by the Ohio Supreme Court) Stark County Treasurer Gary D. Zeigler.

Zeigler has to be feeling pretty good about having been reinstated by the high court, and perhaps even thinking he has Stark County government by the vitals, in that the Supreme Court found that county commissioners had removed him illegally in that he was not accorded "due process of law" under the removing authority statutes invoked by the commissioners (Ohio Revised Code Sections 321.37 & 321.38).  Accordingly, the removal failed to square up with Article II, Section 38 of the Ohio Constitution.

Ousted treasurer Alex Zumbar has asked the Supreme Court (Court) to reconsider its decision.  The matter is now pending.  But most legal observers do not expect the Court to change its ruling.

Zeigler's attorney has told area media that his client is looking at being paid his back wages and benefits and, perhaps, to file a wrongful termination civil suit against the county.  Moreover, Zeigler is seeking to avoid having to repay the county about $1.5 million (by the SCPR's estimate) in unrecovered losses on account of the theft of by Zeigler's former Chief Deputy Vince Frustaci of what is believed to be a total of $2.96 million (Frustaci has admitted to $2.46 million).

Zeigler points out that county and federal prosecutors have exonerated him of any involvement in the theft.

Zeigler goes one step further.  He says that he did nothing wrong in the administration of his office and therefore should not face any civil liability for the losses.

It is the unwillingness of Zeigler to admit that he did not institute procedural safeguards to ensure that events like the Frustaci theft could not happen that drives the likes of Craig Conley into a tizzy.

Conley from the very beginning has pushed authorities (the commissioners, the auditor and John Ferrero, the county prosecutor) to get moving on:  #1 removing Zeigler from office, and #2 recovering any money not covered by bonds and insurance directly from Zeigler himself.

Now that the Ohio Supreme Court has reinstated Zeigler, Conley has put on his legal thinking cap and pushed for either the Stark Republican Party or the Stark Democratic Party to initiate a petition drive pursuant to ORC 3.07/3.08 (which would require about 20,000 valid Stark County voter signatures) as the signatory authority on a complaint filed with the Stark County Court of Common Pleas in order to try Zeigler for removal for alleged nonfeasance.  Zeigler would be entitled to a jury, if he wanted one.

However, both parties have refused to use their central committee structure to collect the needed signatures thus leaving Conley looking for other ways and means to get Zeigler out of office.

His thinking seems to be that of keeping pressure on Zeigler to resign.

There has been talk of a settlement of the lawsuit seeking recovery of losses from Zeigler of the remaining missing money whereby a part of the deal would be Zeigler resigning.

The SCPR has spoken with Law Director Martuccio and he indicates that he has the Conley letters (there is a second one sent this afternoon which provides more details which Conley thinks Martuccio will find helpful in his deliberations) and will be going over them with his two prosecutors who try criminal cases in the Canton Municipal Court.

The Conley/Zeigler face-off is an interesting ongoing phenomenon and is one for Stark Countians to watch closely.

The SCPR believes that Conley is the one Stark Countian who is every bit as pugnacious as many believe Zeigler is and seems to demonstrate.

It could be that Zeigler has met his match in Craig T. Conley!!!

Here is the main Conley letter:

(VIDEO) CANTON LAW DIRECTOR JOE MARTUCCIO EXPLAINS HOW SB5 (COLLECTIVE BARGAINING) COULD PUT A CRINKLE IN CANTON'S LABOR/MGT RELATIONS. CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE IS ON THE WAY!

Obviously and predictably, organized labor is against the Ohio Republican Party's plan to curtail the bargaining rights of unions under Senate Bill 5.  The bill has passed the Senate and is nearing passage in the Ohio House.

But unions are NOT the only ones opposed to the bill.  A number of Ohio city councilpersons and administrators are against it.

Last night Mansfield City Council was considering passage of a non-binding resolution.  The Mansfield News Journal reports the anti SB5 sentiments thusly:

The resolution says SB 5 prohibits local government employees from negotiating benefit plan coverage and to set local community-based policy standards, resulting in an unfunded state mandate and impeding management efficiency and the effective use of tax dollars. It also says elimination of bargaining rights will result in more discontent, lower morale and higher rates of absence, abuse of rules and dismissal of honest attempts to work in collaboration.

What is missing from the Mansfield action is that passage of the bill could save Ohio's local governments (including cities) significant amounts of money.

What local government managers appear to value (including Canton's) over monetary savings is labor peace. 

Although Martuccio acknowledged in a talk to city officials (see video below) on March 8 (at Mayor Healy's monthly budget forum) that cities could reap financial benefits from the Ohio General Assembly legislation, it seemed clear - from the March 8th meeting and other city official public expressions - to the SCPR that Martuccio and his fellows in Canton city government do not relish telling affected city workers that they - because of the legislation - are being cut in their income.

If the cuts do eventually take place, it seems near certain that they will occur only after the voters of Ohio have endorsed the legislative action in a constitutional referendum.   Organized labor and their friends are set to spearhead an effort to put the question before Ohioans on November's ballot.

A spin off of a vote on such a referendum could be it having an effect on Canton's mayoralty race.

On the surface, it might seem to favor whichever candidate comes out of the the Democratic primary.  Pro-union voters will be out in spades in locales like Canton.  Either Republican candidate (Gerig or Conde) has a tough way to go in Canton with its 9 to 1 Democratic voter registration majority.  But add onto that a high pro-union turnout on a SB 5 repeal effort and it might be that the tough becomes impossible.

However, such might not be the case.

Yesterday, the Canton Profession Firefighters Association (CPFFA) Local 249 union endorsed Republican Conde.  Not a move that either Democrat (Healy or Smuckler) is pleased to see.  

Smuckler would appear to have more of a problem garnering union support than Healy should he be the Dems nominee.  


Recalling the large union turnout when Healy formally announced for mayor earlier this year, it might be that Conde (in light of the firefighters endorsement) has a chance to get additional union support should he be the GOP nominee and Healy is not the Democrat nominee.   Or, at the very least, get unions neutralized.


Here is Canton Law Director Joe Martuccio speaking on SB 5 and its possible ramifications on cities: