(VIDEOS) COMMISSIONERS HOLD FAST IN REFUSING A STARK COUNTY BIDDER ON CONSTRUCTION BID. HOW COULD THIS BE GOOD FOR STARK COUNTY? ALSO, HANKE ANNOUNCES RETIREMENT, HOOVER RETIRES FRIDAY, FERGUSSON TO RESIGN EARLY & RICK PEREZ RETIRES ON 12/31/2012

 SPECIFIC LIST OF VIDEOS:

1. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR MIKE HANKE ANNOUNCES RETIREMENT EFFECTIVE MARCH 1, 2013,
2. 25 YEAR STARK CO. COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEE MARILYN HOOVER TO RETIRE AS OF FRIDAY, AND
3. STARK CO. BASED CENTRAL ALLIED ENTERPRISES, INC LOSES OUT TO A WAYNE CO. COMPANY ON MARLBORO SEWER PROJECT NOTWITHSTANDING ITS "LOWEST BID."

Yesterday, as yours truly opened the stairs doorway to the 2nd floor of the Stark County office building, it was a sight to behold.

Some 75 workers for Central Allied Enterprises, Inc. were milling around in the area in front of the building elevators extending down the hall towards the commissioners' office and then in the other director down towards the Stark County auditor's office.

What's up?

The SCPR as always had viewed the day's agenda and from the looks of it, the meeting seemed as if it was going to be rather pedestrian.

But as The Report has said in many SCPR blogs, one never knows what surprises awaits yours truly in the course of public meetings.  And Stark County commissioner meetings are no exception.

Before getting into the big controversy that erupted yesterday in the commissioners' meeting room, here are the "milder" surprises that happened yesterday:

• Mike Hanke, the chief county administrator of some five years, announced he is retiring effective March 1, 2013,
•  

• Commissioner Pete Ferguson notified all that he is resigning effective December 31st though his official term runs through January 3, 2013, and
• Marilyn Hoover, a key Stark County commissioners' administrative staff member who announced her retirement last month after 25 years of service will spend her last day working for the commissioners tomorrow.
•  

• Also, information came out that Chief Deputy Sheriff Rick Perez is retiring (a second time?) from the sheriff's department as of December 31st.

The big, big surprise, perhaps (the Hanke retirement announced was pretty surprising), was the attempt by Central Allied Enterprises, Inc. (a Stark, County company) to get commissioners to not follow the recommendation of Stark County Sanitary Sewer Engineer Jim Jones that they reject Central's "lowest bid" on the Marlboro Township Sanitary Sewer and Storm Sewer Improvement project to benefit about 90 Marlboro residents who live in the vicinity of State Route 619 and Marlboro in unincorporated Marlboro.

But the commissioners chose to follow the recommendation of Jones notwithstanding the impassioned plea of Central Allied's CEO Gerald Orn.

So what is so surprising about this turn of events?

One of the first and most emphatic points that Commissioner Creighton made when she took office on her election in November, 2010 was that she was interested in seeing to it that Stark County-based companies got county business whenever the county made purchases for products and services.  And Commissioners Bernabei (elected originally in 2010; reelected in November, 2012) and Ferguson (elected in 2008, but choosing not to seek reelection this year) were on board with her on that very point.

For a number of years the Stark County sanitary engineer's office has been working to put together a project to replace sanitary and storm sewer infrastructure in Marlboro.

So it had to be pleasing to the commissioners when the bids were opened on the Marlboro project on October 12th of this year that a Stark County company (Central Allied) was the low bidder by some $13,000.

But the law, as the SCPR understands it (LINK), is that the commissioners have some discretion within which to accept bids in that the catch phrase is not "lowest," but "lowest and best."

Well, how do they determine what is best?

Answer:  they rely on their expert on such things which in this case is Engineer Jones.

On Tuesday Jones wrote the commissioners telling them that in his judgment the $2.5 million (plus a little) contract should go to Wenger Excavation of Dalton, Wayne County, Ohio.

The project is funded by a combination of:

• a U.S. Army Corp of Engineers administrated federal grant,
• Community Development Block Grant funding through the Stark County Regional Planning Commission, and
• Metropolitan Sewer District funds.

His reasons for selecting the Wayne County company over the Stark County company?

1. Central Allied's bid ($2,547,138.20) is in its essence equal (given that we are talking slightly in excess of $2.5 million) to the Wenger bid ($2,580, 299.55),
2. Wenger "has performed many satisfactory projects" for Stark County "over the last 30 years," according to Jones' recommendation,
3. Central Allied, on the other hand, has had two projects in the last six years for Stark County and Jones says "that there were problems ... on both projects,"
4. "The quality of the work was non-standard, causing delays, safety issues, added expense, excessive noise, and quality problems."
5. Jones cites "dewatering of ground water" issues with Central Allied on the two previous project and says that dewatering may be a factor in the Marlboro project,
6. "Central Allied Enterprises was non-responsive to the List of public projects request in the Bidder's profile section of the Bid Documents,"
7. "Central's list did not indicate type of project or project contact person or phone number information,"
8. One of Central's references "which included storm sewer had some negative comments to standards which may relate sanitary sewer installation" on the Marlboro project.

A main point raised by CEO Orn in his remarks to commissioners yesterday was the number of Stark County (which he estimated at 100, but which the company's legal counsel guessed to be about 80) citizens who work for Central Allied.

Here is a video record on proceedings yesterday.



Off camera, he told the SCPR that Central's failure to get the contract from Stark County could negatively impact as many as 40 Stark County jobs.

The bottom line was that the commissioners were going to follow the county engineer's recommendation and were not going to yield to the pressure of some 75 workers and company officials (including Orn) who appeared at the commissioners meeting.

From what the SCPR can gather from Jones' report, it appears that the commissioners did the right thing by Stark County's sanitary sewer customers (of which, yours truly is one) and most importantly the folks who live in Marlboro Township who will be directly benefiting from the work done.

The SCPR has covered the Stark County commissioners for all of the time that Bernabei, Creighton and Ferguson have been in office.  During that time, it is The Report's clear impression that they make every effort to award county contracts to Stark County based business so long as they can ensure quality products and services.

One thing that worried The Report somewhat was the heavy reliance of the commissioners on Engineer Jones' say so.

Not so much on this particular bid, but whether or not the commissioners, in general, are biased to what a public official's stand is on any controversy that comes before them for which the commissioners are the deciders.

So The Report sat down with Commissioner Creighton and engaged a "devil's advocate" position on yours truly's concern.

Creighton in the back and forth convinced The Report that such was not the case.

She cited a recent case involving a situation in Beach City in which the public officials were contesting the citizens and the commissioners sided with the Beach City residents.

Moreover, there is a street naming issue (Brook Avenue) between affected Perry Township residents and safety officials (fire, police and emergency services) that the residents brought to the commissioners' Public Speaks forum a number of weeks ago.

Creighton, for one commissioner, assured yours truly that she was hearing the residents' concerns loud and clear and that the commissioners are working to formulate a solution that will satisfy everyone.

Her point?

She was not going to be an "automatic" for the public officials.

That is what the SCPR wanted to hear.

Bernabei and Creighton came into office at a time that Stark Countians were disgusted with a perceived lack of openness, transparency, communicativeness, accessibility and the like being handed out by a number of county officials.

The have vowed to change that perception.

The Report thinks that the commissioners have made progress, but work along this front remains.

For instance, the SCPR has not been impressed with how the commissioners have handled the Stark County Dog Pound Advisory Board (SCDPAB).

These folks in The Report's estimate have been terrific advocates for the well being of stray and abandoned dogs housed at the Stark County Dog Pound (Pound) and have volunteered thousands of hours at the Pound in the face of resistance, yours truly believes, by employees, management and, yes, even the commissioners.

Former commissioner Todd Bosley was instrumental in forming the SCDPAB.  Commissioner Creighton says that he (and his fellow commissioners at the time) had no authority for doing so.

The Report believes that members of the SCDPAB (which only has a couple of members remaining out of a total of seven; the terms of the others having expired and left unfilled by Bernabei, Creighton and Ferguson) were so much of a "pain in the _ss" to folks working/running the Pound and to the commissioners themselves that the commissioners are simply letting the SCDPAB atrophy through the expiration of all terms over time and thereby put it out of existence.

The SCPR thinks that the commissioners handling of the SCDPAB matter is disrespectful of these folks and dishonoring of all the hard work they have blessed the county with over the years.

A very compelling case can be made that BUT FOR the activism of the SCDPAB members, the "in process" replacement of the Pound's HVAC system would not be happening.

However, to their discredit is the manner in which they are handling the the demise of the SCDPAB.

They should go front and center and outright disband the board.

And it wouldn't hurt to have past and the remaining few members into a commissioners meeting to honor them for their service.

While the SCPR sees a substantial improvement with this board of commissioners over previous boards, they are not perfect.

Returning to the commissioners action yesterday, it seems to the SCPR that the commissioners showed that they have spine when it comes to an influx of complaint and criticism.

There is no doubt to The Report that they want to see Stark County-based business get the county's business.

So it had to be particularly difficult for them not to award the Marlboro project to Central Allied.

Whether one agrees with the decision or not, the commissioners demonstrated in not choosing the Stark County company that they have the fortitude to do what they think is the right thing to do in terms of what Ohio law allows and in their perception of the overall interest of Stark Countians.

(VIDEO) COM'R FERGUSON GETS ASSIST IN "SHARED SERVICES" PUSH. CANTON TO GET 50 CENTS ON THE DOLLAR ON OHIO LOCAL GOV'T CUTS FROM CASINO REVENUES. REST OF STARK CO. GOV'TS TO GET ABOUT 25 CENTS ON THE DOLLAR.

Lame duck commissioner Pete Ferguson (his term ends December 31st in that he is not seeking re-election) is receiving an assist in his effort to get Stark County's political subdivisions (i.e. the county itself as well as Stark's villages, cities and townships) to share services.

His effort is to get a cooperative agreement among Alliance, Canal Fulton, Canton, Louisville, Massillon and North Canton on the sharing of services on matters related to implementation of and enforcement of building codes.

Stark County (through Ferguson's initiative) was recently awarded a $75,000 Kasich administration Local Government Innovation Fund grant to study the feasibility of collectivizing county/political subdivision services.

The SCPR has learned from a solid estimate published by Policy Matters Ohio (a centrist think tank) that the cure which local Ohio General Assembly members Hagan (R - Marlboro), Oelslager (R - Plain), Schuring (R - Jackson) and Slesnick (D - Canton) for the dramatic cuts in Ohio's Local Government Fund ("LGF" - to localities (50% over the 2012/13 fiscal year) in the form of casino profits will not begin to fill the financial void created by the LGF rollback.

Canton is the only Stark County entity that will recover 50% of its LGF loss.  The rest of Stark's cities, villages and townships will get about 25 cents on the LGF lost.

And you can be sure that the only way a de facto consolidation of services can occur in Stark County is to go euphemistic and come up with a phrase like "shared services" to describe what looks like and smells like merger and for local communities to be up against it financially.

Stark's political subdivisions zealously guard their independence to the point that the independence becomes "turfism" which in the end hurts the local government in terms of competence and efficiency and all of Stark County in terms of the quality of services provided to the taxpaying public.

At what turned out to be the last "out-in-the-county" community meetings by the Stark County commissioners (ended because of poor attendance) in Lake Township on September 18th, the SCPR captured Commissioner Ferguson explaining to the two or three gathered his initiative and his progress.



Yesterday the The Report spoke with Commissioner Ferguson about his continuing progress as he approaches his end as a county office holder in 81 days.

As an update, he tells The Report that he sent out letters to the mayors/service directors of the Stark targeted communities to ascertain whether or not they have any interest whatsoever in becoming more efficient on administering their building codes.

Next he will hold a face-to-face meeting with interested communities.  At the meetings he will be sharing with officials the savings they can expect to realize from "sharing services."

Beyond the meeting, the next step will be to do the study with the assistance of Stark County Regional Planning Director Robert Nau.

And finally, assuming that there will be a finding that the study will confirm that bringing multiple building departments will be determined to be efficient and cost saving, Stark County will ask Ohio to fund the actual implementation of shared services.

The SCPR reads Ferguson as being somewhat pessimistic that Canton and Alliance will be interested in his cost-saving initiative.

But he says, even if only one city from among Alliance, Canal Fulton, Canton, Louisville, Massillon and North Canton is willing to move forward with Stark County with the feasibility study that it likely will be a go from the State of Ohio.

The SCPR applauds Ferguson for his work and urges Alliance, Canal Fulton, Canton, Louisville, Massillon and North Canton to hear him out on his proposal and participate in the feasibility study.

In the end they can choose to continue to be turf-bound and thereby hurt their own taxpayers and citizens in terms of quality and convenience of services.

And if some choose to continue to stand off unto themselves, then cries of financial crisis or crunch have a rather empty ring to them, no?

(VIDEOS: FERGUSON & KASICH) STARK'S COMMISSIONER PETE FERGUSON LEADS THE WAY FOR CONSOLIDATION & COLLABORATION. CANTON MAYOR HEALY CONTINUES TO RESIST.

As Stark County Commissioner Pete Ferguson nears the end of his term in office (he is not running for re-election), he is on the cusp of realizing a dream of his on one of his two primary goals that he has been working to achieve for a good part of the past three and one half years.

Ferguson's two primary focuses have been on:

• proposing, promoting, facilitating and lobbying for the consolidation/collaboration of common local government services (e.g. building departments, health departments and informational technology), and
• and convincing the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs to establish Veteran's home facilities in Stark County which would offer a range of services from independent living to assisted long-term medical care.

Recently, he learned that Stark County has been awarded an Ohio Department of Development (DD) grant of $75,000 out of the department's Local Government Innovation Fund (LGIF) which is designed to assist Ohio's political subdivisions with collaboration projects.  The winning Stark County grant is to be used to fund a Stark County Building Department Shared Services Feasibility Study.

Ferguson says there were a number of Stark County entrants for a grant including one advanced by the Stark County Council of Governments (SCOG) for its 9-1-1 countywide rehabilitation project and that he is thrilled with having had his building departments consolidation/collaboration proposal as being the one chosen.

Key figures cited by Ferguson in putting together the successful effort include Stark County Regional Planning Director Robert Nau and his staff as well as North Canton Mayor David Held, North Canton City Engineer Jim Benekos, and former state Representative David Johnson

Moreover, he singles out Stark Countian Daryl Revoldt for putting him in contact with Deputy Chief - Office of Redevelopment at Ohio Department of Development - Thea Walsh.  Commissioner Ferguson said that Walsh took an immediate interest in his project and worked with him to put together a plan that LGIF found merit in.

Revoldt is a Kasich administration appointee currently working in the Department of Development.  Formerly he has served as mayor and city council president of North Canton, chief of staff for now retired Congressman Ralph Regula, and as director of Region 9 (Akron office) of the Department of Development during the the Taft administration.

To get an idea of inter-local-government collaborations that Governor Kasich hopes to achieve with LGIF statewide, here is a YouTube video produced by DD as a concrete example which features a City of Green project and which also highlights Stark County Educational Service Center (SCESC) Superintendent Larry Morgan (yours truly's spouse is president of the the center's governing board).



Morgan is recognized statewide as the architect of Ohio's very best collaborative health insurance program which saves participating school districts many, many taxpayer dollars.

Local retail drug stores have fought COG's mandatory mail order prescription drug which saves taxpayers about $1 million a year.

Governor Kasich has taken a lot of flack from local government officials (in Stark County most notably Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II) for his 50% cut (to date) through fiscal year 2013 of Ohio's Local Government Fund and the threat that he will eliminate the funding completely in the state biennium 2014 - 2015 budget.

The SCPR believes that Kasich's cuts through his budget proposal was draconian and ill-advised and is an effort to force tax increases onto local taxpayers while appropriating formerly allocated state local government funds to Ohio's general revenue fund for broad state purposes.

This move is a breach of a promise made by past Ohio government officials to allocate local government funding in exchange for local officials supporting state income tax issues.

The governor says he is not bound by what prior governors have promised.

Isn't that interesting?

He has initiated some measures to lessen the impact of the funding cuts.

One such initiative was State Issue 2 (Senate Bill 5) which had a number of provisions which would have cut the cost of local governments.  Of course, as we all know, the issue was overwhelmingly rejected by Ohioans on November 8, 2011.

Another of those measures is encompassed in the LGIF and its prod on local government officials to become much more efficient in their operations.  This is the administration's "carrot."

But it is also administering a "stick" with its drastic local government funding cuts.

Anyone familiar with local turfism knows that each locality wants it own fire department, police department, its own school district et cetera, et cetera and only moves to consolidate and/or collaborate when deficit finances compels action.

It is interesting that Healy refuses to cooperate with Ferguson and his consolidation/collaboration work in his effort to make local government more efficient, less expensive and more citizen-user friendly. 

The SCPR's take on Healy has always been that he refuses to work with anyone on anything unless at the end of the day he or one of his proxies is in charge.

Here is a LINK to a prior blog (December 22, 2011) in which the SCPR writes about Commissioner Ferguson's interest in winning a LGIF and Healy's ire about his work for Stark County government efficiencies.

The question is fast becoming:  Will he be able to afford continuing to hang onto his [actually Canton's] turf?

Canton is under the gun with its finances.  Healy says that Canton will have a $4 million to $4.5 million deficit in 2013 because of the Local Government Fund cuts.  His solution is to get Cantonians to agree to a tax increase.

But what if the citizens of Canton refuse him?

All of a sudden, the Local Government Fund cuts "stick" comes into play in Canton, Ohio, no?

Won't he have to rethink his "protecting Canton's turf" stance?

Kasich's breaking of the faith (in past promises) might be morally reprehensible, but the evaporation of local government funding is reality!

The SCPR is impressed with Ferguson's persistence.  While he will be leaving office on December 31st of this year and likely will not be in office to see the realization of his consolidation/collaboration goal, Stark Countians will likely benefit from his work.

And who knows.  Maybe in time the city of Canton might be part of a consolidated Stark County Building Department along with Alliance, Louisville, Massillon and North Canton?

Here is a video of Commissioner Ferguson describing the grant process and what he hopes will come of the study it finances.

WILL CANTON MAYOR HEALY GIVE COMMISSIONER PETE FERGUSON A BREAK FOR THE SAKE OF HIS LEGACY AS COUNTY COMMISSIONER?

A study or an heaven sent to "twist Canton Mayor Healy's arm?"

The SCPR thinks that the Sisters of Charity funding ($75,000) of yet another study of whether or not "it is the thing to do" to merge the Stark County and Canton City health departments is in "realpolitik" an effort to put moral pressure on Healy to set aside his ego for the best health interests of all of Stark County.

Even Healy, as brassy as he is, is not likely to call the head of the Sisters of Charity upbraiding the charity for funding the project.

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.

Healy has done pretty much the same thing on the Randy Gonzalez-led effort to fix Stark County 9-1-1 emergency fire, police and EMT call receiving and dispatch, but with a different approach.

He hasn't screamed at Gonzalez or Project Manager Joe Concatto (who carries the additional baggage of having worked in former Canton Mayor Janet Creighton's administration).  His tactic in this instance is refusing to respond to their entreaties to get Canton to take the next step towards completing the consolidation.

Of course, we all remember the episode last year when Healy's safety director Tom Ream (who is chairman of the Stark County Council of Governments which is overseeing the consolidation) moved to take over the project manager function when federal government funding for the position ran out.

And then there is the IT (Information Technology) duplication housed both with Stark County Auditor Alan Harold and Canton.  There's been talk by Harold and the rational people working for him that becoming more efficient with taxpayer dollars certainly appears to be a thing to do.  But The Report hears that "mum is the word" from those reporting to Healy on the city side of the equation.

So why all this resistance from Mayor Healy?

As the SCPR sees it, the mayor has two problems with the talked about mergers/consolidations:

1. He is not so much opposed to blending operations, but he insists that the outcome be controlled by Canton government inasmuch as it is the largest city in Stark County and moreover because it is the county seat, and
2. Probably his most despised pair of political adversaries are Stark County commissioners:  Republican Janet Creighton and Democrat Tom Bernabei.

Healy, whom The Report hears is considering running for Ohio secretary of state two years hence, is hellbent upon being the "main man on campus" in Stark County.

Undoubtedly, the umpteenth study on this or that consolidation/merger will come back in the affirmative.

It goes without saying.  It is a "no-brainer."

But to point to and focus on studies is irrelevant to William J. Healy, II, unless, of course, they support his position.

He is truly a "my way or the highway" type of guy.

While Commissioner Pete Ferguson is well liked by nearly everybody, the SCPR believes he has been - let's say: less than steller - as county commissioner.

But he has worked industriously on three projects:

• Getting Stark County a Veterans medical or living facility,
• Promoting the county's use of BidExpress to streamline local government contract bidding/bid award procedures, and, of course,
• consolidating/merging redundant local government services (i.e. building, health, 9-1-1 and IT).

His best chance to leave a legacy as commissioner (he is not running for re-election) appears to be on getting the health departments merger.

Only Healy seems to stand in the way.

With the entry of the Sisters of Charity into the foray in a funding sense, the question becomes:

Will such prove to be a "heaven sent twist" of Mayor Healy's arm and thereby bless Ferguson with a legacy to leave that has eluded him for the better part of four years?

Hmm?

Well, 264 days remain before Commissioner Ferguson leaves office.

Shall we declare a period of prayer and fasting beseeching for the "arm of the Lord" to do His work?

AN UNFAVORABLE ZEIGLER SETTLEMENT COULD MEAN POLITICAL DEFEAT FOR COMMISSIONERS BERNABEI & FERGUSON?

Just about everybody in Stark County government just wants Stark County Treasurer to be gone! gone!! gone!!!

A week ago today, as we media types waited as a Stark County commissioners executive session meeting with Stark County Ross Rhodes et al  dragged on and on and on, yours truly figured out what this session was all about:  "a discussion of the way to reach a settlement with Stark County Treasurer Gary D. Zeigler to get him out of office.

Conventional thinking is that as long as Zeigler continues as Stark County Treasurer as he was when his employee and then Chief Deputy Vince Frustaci is believed to have stolen $2.96 million (he admitted in his guilty plea to having stolen $2.46 millon) in Stark County taxpayer dollars, Issue 29 (a county sales tax of 0.5% proposal) has no chance of passing.

The SCPR agrees with Stark County Prosecutor John Fererro's assessment as reported by Kelli Young in Treasurer’s presence in county government weighs on sales tax vote, The Repository, October 5, 2011.

Ferrero expressed doubt that whether or not Zeigler is present as county treasurer as being a material factor in whether or not the new tax will pass.

Should the county agree to a settlement with Zeigler which results in his resignation from office, the major factor will not not be a groundswell of support for the tax issue.

The larger factor, the SCPR believes, is how the public would perceive the favorability/unfavorability of the specific terms of any such settlement and the fallout on the two November, 2012 commissioner races.

Commissioners Tom Bernabei and Pete Ferguson are up for re-election in 2012.  So far, neither they nor any prospective opponents have taken out petitions from the Stark County Board of Elections.

Whether or not they (especially Bernabei) seek re-election could hinge on whether or not the sales tax passes in the first place.  Presuming that it does pass and both decide to run, then any settlement could play significantly in their chances for re-election.

The Report believes that it is highly unlikely that a settlement can be reached before November 8th and even if it does, it will take time for the Stark County voting public to absorb and reflect on the terms of the settlement, and determine whether or not the commissioner adequately protected the Stark County taxpayer interest in negotiating a settlement.

Such is the "tightrope" that the commissioners, and more specifically Commissioners Bernabei and Ferguson, are walking on as they consider whether or not they can abide settling with Zeigler.

In any event, Zeigler, of course, has no chance whatsoever of being re-elected should negotiations totally breakdown.  Already waiting in the wings is former Treasurer Alex Zumbar who Zeigler's attorney has described as a usurper treasurer for the time he served after Stark County commissioners removed Zeigler from office in 2010.

Whether or not Zeigler serves to September, 2013 (the statutory end to his term) is unknown as this blog is written, but the SCPR is confident that Zeigler's successor will be Zumbar.

A Zeigler resignation will likely mean that commissioners will be appointing an interim treasurer if Zeigler resigns and The Report believes that the choice will be Zumbar.

The Report doubts that Stark's Democrats will put up a candidate to oppose Zumbar, that's how well taken Stark County officialdom (Democrats included) were with Zumbar for the time that he served as Stark County treasurer.

(VIDEOS: FERGUSON, FERRERO AND COMMISSIONER PRESS CONFERENCE) - A LEGISLATIVE "RAIN DELAY" AT WEDNESDAYS STARK COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING ON SALES TAX INCREASE PROPOSAL?

 

 

Yesterday, the Stark County media (i.e. the SCPR, The Repository [Kelli Young], the Akron Beacon Journal [Nancy Molnar], and the Alliance Review [Laurie Huffman] all gathered at the commissioners' meeting room on the 2nd floor of the Stark County Office Building to hear the monumental decision.

The monumental decision?

Indeed!

The decision was to be made by commissioners on the percent county piggyback tax would be added to the 5.75% (5.50 of it going to the state of Ohio) Stark County sales tax.

But hold on a minute, Nellie!!!

It seems that the commissioners were so overwhelmed with the "rain" of  presentations by elected county officials at Tuesday's work session with information, with recommendations that the decision scheduled for Wednesday had to be put on "rain delay" as in the game of baseball when the skies open up and pour down sending everybody running for cover.

Maybe it was the presentation by Sheriff Tim Swanson who argued for a 1% sales tax increase on a permanent basis and joined by Prosecutor John Ferrero that turned their heads.

Immediately after the meeting, the SCPR caught up with Commissioner Pete Ferguson and asked him whether or not he had heard the Swanson/Ferrero wish for a 1% increase.  Here is his video response.

And obviously the decision proved too difficult to make this far in advance of the cut-off date (August 10th).

The commissioners until Tuesday seemed to be set on a 1/2 cent sales tax proposal to Stark 's voters.  They had been out in the community to twenty-two Stark County communities beginning on February 9th at Plain Township Hall and ending on June 30th at Marlboro Township Hall.

Though they have valued community input, they were disappointed at the poor turnout.  In Canton, nobody showed up.  In Alliance, two people showed up.

Jackson and Perry Townships provided the best turnouts.  However, in the case of Perry, their visit fell on the heels of a torrential rain that caused extensive flooding in the township and affected residents turned out in force to talk not so much about the levy, but about what the county might do to solve their flooding problem.

Some residents wanted guarantees that if they supported a sales tax increase that some of the money would be used to work on Stark County's severely overtaxed (no pun intended) ditching arteries which have gone largely unattended to since the 1980s.

Commissioner Bernabei, speaking to the request, emphatically said that no guarantees could be made because the 1/2 cent increase being considered would put Stark County in a "treading water' mode (again, no pun intended).

The SCPR believes the Perry visit could have been a "watershed" moment (for the third time, no pun intended) where the commissioners had to start thinking:  "you know what, 1/2 cent is simply not going to cut it; we have to entertain the notion of going higher."  

Add to the other community visits (excluding Canton, which apparently has no problems which Stark County government might help with in that nobody including Canton government officials showed up at)  and the many other problems that citizens across Stark County brought to their doorstep and having no money to promise fixes, one would think that commissioners had to be thinking in the back of their minds:  "Are we kidding ourselves in going to the voters with a 1/2 cent proposed increase?"

If there has been "a straw which broke the camel's back," it had to - perhaps been Tuesday's work session presentation and probably the dire ones by Sheriff Tim Swanson and John Ferrero. 

Yesterday, The Report blogged on the Swanson presentation.  CLICK HERE to see the video.

Today, The Report presents Ferrero's case for a 1% sales tax increase.

Coming full circle and in hindsight, yours truly should not have been surprised by the "legislative rain delay" announced yesterday.

The SCPR believes that the delay in and of itself signals that a modification of the original plan to ask voters to approve a 1/2 cent increase is in the works.  

What might the change be?

A full percent increase?  A three-fourths of a percent increase?  A permanent increase?  The tagging of the proposed increase with designations of how the money will be used:  a part to criminal justice operations and administration; a part to fixing Stark's ditches over a planned span of years and a part to economic development efforts designed to bring down the 10% (increased in June) unemployment rate in the county?

Afterwards, the media converged on Commissioners Bernabei, Creighton and Ferguson.  Here is the video of the exchange.

COULD IT BE MAY, 1995 ALL OVER AGAIN (WELL, SORT OF) ON COUNTY SALES TAX?

As yours truly recalls, when Republican John P. Dougherty (a former state school board member) ran for and was elected county commissioner in 1994 he was telling voters do not elect me unless you pass the sales tax issue too.

Well, he won - ousting incumbent Democrat Mary Cirelli (now a Canton councilwoman-at-large).  On the day after the election Cirelli said she expected to lose as much as two months out from the election because it was a Republican year (1994:  remember Newt Gingrich and the Republican "Contract with America) and therefore did not put much money into the campaign.  Hmm?

 

But the levy lost.

Interestingly enough, current Commissioner Janet Creighton (a Republican) was on the ballot as an incumbent candidate for county auditor.

So like it or not, Dougherty and fellow commissioners Don Watkins (a Republican) and Gayle Jackson (a Democrat) had to go back to the drawing board for a new try for the May 2, 1995 primary election.

Watkins wanted to put on a full 1% for an indefinite period.  However, Dougherty and Jackson opted to push for a 1/2 cent tax increase for four years with one-half of the tax dedicated to criminal justice. Stark County had voted down 8 sales tax issues for the period 1985 through 1994.

The "deja vu, all over again" Yogi Berra "funnyism" comes into play because the SCPR has gotten indication (last Wednesday) from a Stark County commissioner that the commissioners have under active consideration the placing of a 1/2 cent sales tax issue that (here is the difference from 1995) that may be fully dedicated to Stark criminal justice system (in the main:  the sheriff and the courts).

County officials often repeat that the criminal justice expenses to the general revenue fund are about 70% of Expenditures.

 

All the commissioners will tell you that they want to get back to a fully funded criminal justice system (a la 2009 and 2010 which would bring 41 sheriff deputies back to work).  Seventy percent times $56 million (rounded off to simply this discussion) equals about $39 million needed for a fully funded criminal justice system.

A 1/2 cent sales/use tax raises about $22 million in Stark County.  If the tax were to pass, then the county would have to take about $17 million from the general revenue fund (funded by non-sales-tax revenues of about $34 million) allocated to  to the criminal justice line items leaving about $17 million for other general fund obligations.

At these numbers, the county gets back to some normalcy.

The advantage to the commissioners and other county office holders is that earmarked purposes for voted in taxes seem to work.  One of the reasons that the 2008 imposed tax by Commissioners Bosley, Harmon and Vignos got repealed by voters in November, 2009 was because the revenue was divided between fixing the 9-1-1 emergency system and the county general fund.  Of course, the primary reason was that the commissioners "imposed" the tax.

As the SCPR sees it, a "for the general fund" sales tax has no chance of winning in November.  But a dedicated tax might. 

A key on a criminal justice dedicated sales tax passing could be the term of the tax. The Report believes that five years is a likely term that the commissioners come up with whether or not the tax is dedicated to criminal justice.

The Stark commissioners are busy rebuilding trust at the county level of government.  But Bernabei and Creighton have only been on the job 6 months as of now and it will only be 11 months come November.  Not enough time to restore public confidence.

The Report favors the entire criminal justice system being funded by a sales tax (which would take the better part of a full percent).  However, a one percent sales tax is a non starter in 2011.  In five years?  Perhaps.  Maybe even the overall state and county economy may be significantly better.

(VIDEO) COMMISSIONER FERGUSON & NORTH CANTON MAYOR DAVID HELD COLLABORATING ON VETERANS HOME FOR THE DOGWOOD CITY. COULD MEAN THAT FERGUSON WILL BE RUNNING FOR SECOND TERM AS COUNTY COMMISSIONER.

 

At yesterday's work session of the Stark County Commissioners, Commissioner Ferguson shared with fellow commissioners Janet Creighton and Tom Bernabei the results of a meeting he had in Columbus last Thursday with Director Moe of the Ohio Veteran Services Commission, Mayor David Held of North Canton, state Representative Kirk Schuring (R-Jackson, the 51st) and state Representative Christina Hagan (R-Marlboro, the 50th) to explore the prospects for getting a veterans home located in Stark County.

The effort is an outgrowth of a letter generated out of the Cuyahoga County Veterans Service Commission which fell into the hands of Commissioner Ferguson.

As Commissioner Ferguson explains in the accompanying video, if the project is realized (and Representative Schuring says (to Mayor Held) that - if it happens - it will be at least three years in the making), then North Canton or wherever the home is eventually located could get up to 200 jobs.

The political significance of the timeline is that Commissioner Ferguson's term expires on December 31, 2012.  As readers of the SCPR know, doing something for military veterans has been a consuming passion with Ferguson.  The Report can't imagine that he would not want to remain to see this project through to the end.

Ferguson has worked hard disassociate himself from what fellow commissioner Janet Creighton has termed as being the "good old boys network" of the Stark County Democratic Party.  Should he seek re-election, which The Report believes he will, only then will Stark Countians know the full impact of the Frustaci scandal.

No Democratic official had any involvement whatsoever in former Stark Treasury Chief Deputy Vince Frustaci theft of at least $2.46 million (some believe to have been $2.96 million) in Stark County taxpayer money.  However, there may be a public perception that certain public officials (e.g. Kim Perez, Todd Bosley, Steve Meeks) did not exercise enough oversight to see to it that the possibility of a theft of public funds be eliminated.

Perez (for auditor), Bosley (for state representative) and Meeks (for county commissioner)  (thought by many to part of a Democratic officials "good old boy network") were soundly defeated in November, 2010 and one has to wonder whether or not a negative public perception as set forth above played a part in the outcome.  Bosley may have caught a double whammy because of his participation in imposing a 0.5 sales tax increase on Stark Countians in December, 2008.

Ferguson has been commissioner since January, 2008.  He was a member of the board that removed Gary Zeigler as county treasurer - August, 2010) under permissive authority of the Ohio Revised Code for the mere fact money was missing from the treasury even though Zeigler was completely exonerated of any involvement by county and federal prosecutors.  So his success or failure in 2012's election might well be dependent on whether or not in the public mind he was  part of the network as expounded upon above.

Here is the video of Commissioner Ferguson and Mayor Held speaking about the prospects of a veterans home for Stark County and specifically for North Canton.

(VIDEO) COMMISSIONER PETE FERGUSON BECOMING "POLITICALLY CORRECT" ON WHETHER OR NOT HE SAW VIDEOTAPE OF DOG ABUSE AT STARK COUNTY DOG POUND?

There is no doubt about it!

Commissioner Ferguson did say (see video posted at the end of this blog; hereinafter "TAPE") in July at the regular monthly meeting of the Stark County Dog Pound Advisory Board (SCDPAB) that he in fact saw dog abuse on a videotape taken of operations at the Stark County Dog Pound.

By the regular November 24th meeting of the commissioners, he had a "revised" memory and he had not seen what he saw in July.  Moreover, on January 20, 2011 he appeared before the SCDPAB at its regular monthly meeting and reaffirmed that he did not see what he said he saw back in July, 2010.

So, what is one to make of the turnabout?

The SCPR believes that it became "politically incorrect" (in terms with the commissioners' relationship with the Teamsters Union - which represents the dog pound workers) for Ferguson to have seen what he emphatically saw in July.

Another interesting thing is that one SCDPAB member (seen on the accompanying tape) muses about how "THE TAPE" (defined as being the tape that Ferguson was referring to at the SCDPAB July meeting) has come up missing.

The SCPR asked Stark County Dog Warden Reagan Tetreault for a copy of THE TAPE (request made by the SCPR in December, 2010) and, after being ignored for the better part of two days and only after County Administrator Mike Hanke intervened to get her to respond to The Report's telephone call, did Tetreault provide "A" tape (an October tape - not "THE TAPE").

The Report believes that THE TAPE existed at one time and that Ferguson in fact viewed it.

The only other possibility is that Ferguson totally fabricated his account of having viewed THE TAPE at the July SCDPAB meeting.

Either scenario should not be comforting to Stark Countians.

While some may think that THE TAPE incident is "much ado about nothing," it is a mistake for any citizen who cares about the accountability of government to take such a view.

At issue in this vignette on the operations of county government, is the credibility of an elected commissioner, the preservation and protection of public records, the job performance standards at a unit of county government, the responsiveness of the dog warden and whether or county taxpayers are getting what they are paying for (i.e. Ferguson "All I saw were people sitting around doing nothing").

There are signs that Tetreault is getting a handle on matters at the Stark County Dog Pound (Pound), but it still is too early to tell definitively.

Stark Countians who care about the handling of and care of dogs at the Pound should be appreciative of the Stark County Dog Pound Advisory Board.

One has to wonder whether or not the Stark County commissioners (especially Ferguson, and former commissioners Bosley, Jackson, Harmon, Meeks and Vignos) rue the day that the Advisory Board was created and staffed.

They surely have been "a pain in the _ _ _ _" to the commissioners while being "guardian angels" for those Stark County dogs who have the misfortune (at least historically) to end up at the Stark County Dog Pound.

IS WARDEN REAGAN TETREAULT MAKING SATISFACTORY PROGRESS ON "GETTING A GRIP" ON DOG POUND PROBLEMS? SCPR THINKS COMMISSIONERS NEED TO TAKE A NEW LOOK AND REPORT BACK TO STARK COUNTY PUBLIC.

It is said that "dog is man's best friend."  However, can it be said that "man is a dog's best friend?"

Apparently not in Stark County.  Unless "man" is defined to be the Stark County citizens who serve as volunteers at the Pound.

For years now, there have been problems reported to the Stark County commissioners about the operations of the Stark County Dog Pound (SCDP - "Pound").  But it appears that very little, if anything, has gotten better for dogs who have found their way to the SCDP.  Or, for that matter the selfless volunteers who expend many, many unpaid hours providing the unmet needs of Stark County's strays.

On January 27, 2010 (nearly one year ago), Stark County commissioners (Bosley, Ferguson and Meeks) fired Evert Gibson as dog warden because of unresolved problems.  Gibson had been on the job for several years.

After some controversy between the commissioners and members of the Stark County Dog Pound Advisory Board (SCDPAB) over the appearance of an non-SCDPAB recommended person as one of five finalists, the current warden Reagan Tetreault (on the list) was appointed (May 5, 2010) with a starting date of May 24, 2010 subject however to a 120 probationary period.

September 24th (the end of the probationary period) came and went with nary a word from commissioners that Tetreault was experiencing any difficulties getting a handle on Pound problems.  In fact, the SCPR specifically asked the commissioners that question and was told that all was going well.

Hmm?

It wasn't 30 days before big time problems surfaced about operations at the SCDP.  October 13, 2010 was a particularly bad day for the Pound.

One involved a dog who had been at the Pound well less than a required minimum of 72 hours (by Ohio law) and whose owner had contacted the Pound to claim the family pet was inadvertently euthanized.  A second incident involved a properly restrained dog that was mauled by a neighbor's dog notwithstanding the fact that the owners of the mauled dog had brought to the attention of Pound officials allegations of violations of law on the part of neighbor in the maintenance and control of his dog.

An excerpt from a Repository report of November 2, 2010:

These two incidents set off a firestorm of protests by the dog owners, members of the Stark County Dog Pound Advisory Board and Pound volunteers as to the quality of management that was being administered at the Pound.

The SCPR began hearing that members of the Stark County public and volunteers working at the Pound were not being treated respectfully by Pound employees.  And these allegations were being made to commissioners at their regular meetings.

These allegations found their way into action by Warden Tetreault and the SCPR wrote on December 13th that it may be that Tetreault was getting a grip of matters at the SCDP.

 In a follow up with Tetreault (see The Report's take on her delayed response below), she tells the action she meted out was a three-day suspension of Pound employee Vince Williams to be served December 29th,  January 19th and February 16th.

It appears to The Report that Tetreault "getting a grip" may have been wishful thinking by yours truly.

Since the 13th, The Report has had occasion to contact Warden two times for information about Pound operations and both time came away feeling that Treteault was - to put it euphemistically - less than enthusiastic about dealing with the SCPR.  On the second occasion, The Report made a telephone call (early in the day, then a late afternoon follow up) for certain information on Monday and only after intervention by county Chief Administrator Mike Hanke did yours truly get a Tetreault response two days later.

So this got The Report to thinking, what are others' take on how Tetreault is doing?  Accordingly, The Report contacted a member of the SCDPAB and obtained these responses:

Response #1 (December 16th - before the SCDPAB meeting)

We have an Advisory Board meeting tonight, but I doubt if we will make much progress b/c Reagan (warden) has said she will not be attending. It would be helpful if she could answer some of our questions. Also she has postponed sharing the volunteer handbook she has written until after the first of the year,, saying that the commissioners need to approve it . In my opinion, it would be a good idea if she communicated with the volunteers and the Advisory Board.  ... .

I personally have not been to the pound since Vince's disciplinary action: however in talking with other volunteers, I have not heard that anything has changed for the better  regarding the employees' relationship with the volunteers and/or the public.

Also we are asking commissioner Ferguson to respond to a recording  we have of him speaking at an Advisory Board meeting ( believe it was in July) where he states he is extremely upset by a video he had seen of dog abuse at the pound. If you recall, he denied seeing a video  - when you asked him about this after a recent commissioners' meeting.

Response #2 (December 16th - after the SCDPAB meeting)

Warden Regean did not show up at the meeting; the Board discussed how we can not move forward until we have communication with the warden. Topics such as ; poor ventilation at the pound, the volunteer manual she is completing, reporting abuse of the dogs , answering volunteers' questions about feeding, procedures, etc. need to be adresseed so as to stem rumors and suspicision.

the Board agreed we would wait until the new year to approach the commissioners about the need for communcation between the warden and volunteers and the Advisor Board, and also if Dr. Ferguson has not yet reponded to his comment that he had not seen a video of dog abuse, when he is recorded on audio at a July Advisory Bord meeting stating how upset he was after seeing abuse to pound dogs on a video .

The SCPR is reassessing whether or not matters have improved at the Pound and so should the Stark County Board of Commissioners.

Commissioner Pete Ferguson needs to meet with the SCDP Advisory Board (whose members are appointed by the commissioners) and clear up once and for all whether or not he has seen dog abuse on video captured on cameras in place at the Pound.

Beyond Ferguson acting, the entire board (which will have in a few days Janet Creighton and, of course, the recently recently in Tom Bernabei) needs to take a fresh look at operations at the Pound and make a determination as to whether or not Reagan Tetreault is making satisfactory progress in "getting a grip" on the long time problems at the Pound.

While the SCPR understands better than most that the commissioners are in the throes of dealing with severe county budgetary problems, the chronic difficulties at the SCDP also require their urgent attention.

The Report urges Ferguson to meet with the SCDPAB at its January meeting and thinks it would be a good ides for the "new" board to assess Tetreault's progress or lack of progress and report back to the Stark County Public at a regular commissioners' meeting not later than the end of January, 2011.

(VIDEO) WHO HAS THEIR FACTS STRAIGHT ABOUT THE OPERATIONS THE STARK COUNTY DOG POUND?

The SCPR has been hearing about allegations of "dog abuse" and "not enough food to eat" BUT FOR food being brought in by volunteers at the Stark County Dog Pound (SCDP - Pound).

It is beginning to look like - to The Report - that Stark County commissioners are becoming increasingly annoyed with Pound volunteers.

Last Wednesday, yours truly asked Commissioner Pete Ferguson (on camera, but after the formal commissioner meeting) about the allegations made by volunteers at previous commissioner meetings and at the monthly meeting of the Stark County Dog Pound Advisory Board (SCDPAB - whose members are appointed by the commissioners).

Here is his response:  (note what Ferguson has to say about the role of the SCDPAB)



The SCPR has asked SCDPAB officials for a copy of the video some members claim shows abuse.  So far the promised copy has not been produced.

The Report will keep digging to find out whom among the commissioners and the volunteers has the correct facts on whether or not dog abuse has been recorded on Pound cameras and whether or not the dogs at the pound have enough to eat.

At this juncture, the SCPR has been unable to determine where the truth lies. 

The SCPR, "keepin them honest!"

THANKSGIVING 2010

Stark County has had a number of local political figures step forward with a positive contribution to the well-being of our county in 2010.

The STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report) recognizes the following for their contributions to better government and/or making current officeholders more accountable.

JANET CREIGHTON

The former county auditor, mayor of Canton and now commissioner-elect of Stark County has an opportunity to turn a bad Stark County situation into a markedly improved one.

For Creighton to run for county commissioner in the worst of times is a clear indication that she truly cares about Stark County and its citizens.  As mayor of Canton she was a cheerful person who connected well with everyday people.  Moreover, this loyal Republican worked well with an overwhelmingly Democraticall- controlled council.  Better by far than the current Democratic mayor.

Stark Countians should be thankful that a person who has been there and done that in terms of leadership has been willing to answer a call to leadership that Stark County so desperately needs.

TOM BERNABEI

For this former city councilman, longtime law director and Healy administration official to, along with Creighton, to step up and seek leadership in the most difficult of times for Stark County shows that he too cares about the county and its future.  He did the same thing when the Stark Area Transportation Authority (SARTA) needed someone to step into the breech when agency's leadership was suddenly vacated.

Bernabei could have passed on getting back into politics especially in view of the indignant way he was treated by fellow Democrat Mayor William J. Healy, II.  Healy was foolish enough to fire Bernabei from his key administration post.  Any chance Healy had to have a successful administration, vanished with the firing.  Bernabei could have said to himself:  Who needs the grief after his many years of public service? But he didn't.  Being the consummately civic person he is, he put personal comfort aside to answer the call to leadership.

His troubles will be different this time around.  He will not be humiliated by his peer leadership as with Healy, however, there will be troubles aplenty.  The finances of Stark County are about as bad as they can get.  As he said during the campaign to go from $56 million to about $35 million in the space of a few years just will not wash.  Somehow, someway he, Creighton and Ferguson will have to find ways and means to avoid financial catastrophe.

Solutions willbe  hard to come by for the trio of commissioners.  However, Stark Countians should be grateful that Tom Bernabei is one of our new commissioners.


STEPHEN TODD

Though a neophyte politician, he did very well as an independent candidate running against Bernabei/Walters in the "unexpired" term of Tom Harmon race.

Very impressively, he garnered 9.87% of the vote.   In doing so, he, perhaps, encourages others who do not carry the Republican/Democratic label to run for office.  More and more, voters are thinking that Rs and Ds do not have the answers we are all looking for.  Stark Countians should be appreciative that Todd has blazed a path for other independents and non-mainline-party hopefuls to seek office in Stark.  These are folks who could energized Stark County government and politics with fresh approaches, fresh ideas.

One other thing to be thankful for.  But for Stephen Todd, the SCPR believes Republican Jamie Walters would have been elected.  Such, The Report believes, would have been a disaster for Stark County.  Walters apparently is a man who really believes that Stark County can be run on $35 million when the criminal justice part of Stark County alone costs about $39 million.


BILL SMUCKLER

Cantonians should especially be pleased and gratified.  The Hall of Fame City needs relief from the Healy administration and quick.  Smuckler has already defeated Healy in one Democratic primary and appears to have an excellent chance to do it again come May, 2011.

While the SCPR is not real wild about Smuckler and his ideas of economic development via annexation, he appears to be a better choice than Healy.

Smuckler's best positive point that Stark Countians as a whole should gratefully anticipate, if he is elected mayor of Canton, is his interest in consolidation, merger, cooperation within the political infrastructure of Stark County.

ALEX ZUMBAR

It will be a relief to Stark Countians to finally put the Gary D. Zeigler era behind us with Alex Zumbar's ascension to the Stark County treasurer post.  Beginning on April 1, 2009 through August 23, 2010, Stark Countians had to be demoralized as they looked on as the spectacle of Zeigler hanging on as treasurer despite calls for his resignation for not having measures in place to prevent a loss of taxpayer monies from the county treasurer at the hand of former Chief Deputy Vince Frustaci.

Zumbar has done a terrific job wherever he has been as a financial person in charge be it Alliance or North Canton.


ALAN HAROLD

As auditor-elect, Harold has the promise of taking the politics out of who serves in the day-in, day-out jobs in the auditor's office at the pleasure of Stark County citizens and taxpayers.

It seems like the auditor's office like all too many Stark County elected offices have been places where wel -connected Republicans and Democrats have ended up with jobs to the exclusion of ordinary Stark County citizens.

The SCPR believes that outgoing auditor Kim Perez made progress in keeping politics out of employment decision.  However, The Report thinks - despite Perez's denials - that a number of his employees are on the job because of their political connections.

Harold says he is going to completely do away with politics having anything whatsoever to do with whom gets a job in the operation he runs.  Moreover, Harold says that his own partisan political connection with other Stark County officeholders will not factor in when he sees something amiss in how a county office is being run.  He repeatedly bashed Perez on this count during the campaign just concluded.

Stark Countians have to be thankful that Harold is on the record to a commitment to remove politics from who works for the county.  These jobs are for the people of Stark County; not the politically connected.


PETE FERGUSON

Stark County Commissioner Pete Ferguson has embraced local government efficiency as his thing to focus on during his first term as commissioner.  Up until he found this cause to promote, it appeared to the SCPR that he was floundering in his effort to find an identity as commissioner.

Ferguson's finding is calling should be a delight to Stark Countians.

While the county and City of Canton has been working on merging some of their duplicative services for a couple of years, the commissioner side of the discussions has undergone a major change and will be experiencing additional changes.

Tom Harmon is gone (December, 2009), Todd Bosley is leaving (December,2010) and Steve Meeks (in the opinion of the SCPR) served his last day as commissioner yesterday.

So Ferguson, a man with staying ability (at least until December, 2012), and a person who can see to it that Stark County government becomes more efficient.

Ferguson has embraced the rework of 9-1-1 "countywide." the notion of political subdivision coming together on putting together an Internet-based competitive bidding program, combining the Stark County and Canton health departments and a coalescing of building department functions.

Undoubtedly, Stark Countians are thankful to see government official Ferguson working diligently to save taxpayer dollars.

(VIDEO: FOR CITIZENS & PUBLIC OFFICIALS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN "EFFICIENT" GOV'T) - BID EXPRESS - ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY FOR STARK COUNTY GOVERNMENT TO BECOME MORE EFFICIENT?

At Commissioner Pete Ferguson's initiative, local officials assembled at the Stark County Regional Planning Agency to hear a presentation by Bid Express officials to interest county, township, city and village officials in an Internet program offered for a fee by the company which appears to more than pay for itself in savings to local governments who have to competitively bid out government business (by state law) and, where not required to do by law, should do so.

By coming together, local governments can pool their resources to make the program affordable.  Commissioner Ferguson and Councilman-at-Large Bill Smuckler (who will be running for mayor of Canton in May, 2011) are spearheading the effort.  Although Ferguson is newer at the effort than Smuckler (who has been the foremost advocate of regionalism in Stark County), he is pushing hard to get better cooperation.

But will local governments be receptive to the Ferguson/Smuckler prodding?

Yours truly has written before on this topic and will continue to do so in an effort to push efficiency and effectiveness in local government.

It has been like pulling teeth to get local governments (17 townships and 19 villages and cities) to work together on such things as developing an efficient and effective countywide 9-1-1 call and dispatch system, consolidating health department functions and merging building department duplicated operations.

On 9-1-1, for instance, a major 9-1-1 player with its CenCom center - Nimishillen Township - refuses to cooperate with county officials putting together a countywide system. 

On the building department issue, there is a problem with outright merger because Canton has more detailed requirements than Stark County and therefore a countywide agency would not suffice.  However, the county can and the SCPR believes should contract with Canton to do the county's work.

One has to wonder where Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II is on the issue of consolidation.  He talks a good game.  However, his administration presented and had Canton City Council pass a measure Monday evening to continue an independent contract for building code oversight and enforcement and not coordinate with Stark County officials despite Canton's supposed interest in   His prime opponent in May, Councilman Bill Smuckler seems to be much more consistent and hence reliable on government consolidation, merger and cooperation than Healy.  Smuckler voted against the Healy administration proposal.

On another front, apparently the mergers of the health departments are pretty much a certainty with the Canton Health Department likely to be the surviving entity.

Ferguson issued an invitation to many more political subdivision officeholders than showed up at the October 19th meeting he called for them to hear Bid Express make its presentation.  The Report has prepared a video for those not attending and for citizens interested in the taxpayer savings to be realized in an adopting of the Bid Express program to see.

The presentation is compelling and Commissioner Ferguson tells the SCPR that he believes that its adoption will become a reality.

With the county facing as much as a $20 million drop off of revenues from 2010 to 2012 and with many of Stark's villages, cities and township facing financial difficulties, the time has never been a better time to push for more cooperation, sharing and merger of duplicative services among all of Stark County's governments.

Much more needs to be done than is currently being considered.  However, Stark Countians should be encouraged with the efforts underway.

Here is the video presentation by Bid Express.

PETE FERGUSON - TO BE THE "DECIDER-IN-CHIEF" WHEN CREIGHTON & BERNABEI TAKE THEIR COMMISSIONER SEATS? WILL THE REALLOCATION OF 9-1-1 ($2.75) BE THE FIRST TEST CASE?

 

Stark Countians have made their choice and voters have elected two strong leaders as commissioner.  And strong leadership is exactly what Stark County needs during these days of county financial crisis.

Both Creighton and Bernabei have experience amidst difficulties.  

The SCPR believes that Canton was already a city on the slide when Creighton became mayor in 2004. Even though she had a Democratic Canton City Council to work with she did so and in fine fashion.  Legislative Democrats have told The Report over and over again how much easier it was for them to work with Creighton in a cooperative vein than with Mayor Healy.  However, Creighton, a mayor, had her own agenda which she forcefully and effectively pursued.

Even though he likes to trumpet having graduated from the New York University Stern School of Business, current Canton mayor Jamie Healy did not have brains enough to keep Tom Bernabei in his administration.  Had he done so, Canton, likely, would be in better fiscal shape than it is now.  Though methodical and even-tempered, Bernabei has strong viewpoints which cost him his job in the Healy administration.

As commissioner, the SCPR believes that Bernabei and Creighton will continue to be strong-willed leaders.  Generally, they should get along.  However, there will be issues that they will see the solution differently and thereby will be at loggerheads.

This is where Commissioner Pete Ferguson comes in.

In a Bernabei/Creighton stalemate, on whose side will he come down on?

The easy analysis would be to conclude that, of course, Ferguson the Democrat will side with Bernabei the Democrat whom he has known, not that well - according to Ferguson, going back to Bernabei's days as a Canton law director.

Ferguson has known Creighton going back 35 years.  And, he has known her better than Bernabei.

He likes and respects both of them.

The SCPR put the question of how he will decide when Creighton and Bernabei disagree to Ferguson after last Wednesday's commissioners' meeting.  Ferguson said that sharing political party identity would not be any factor.  Rather, he said, he will consider the merit of each side's argument and go where the facts and the merit of their respective argument take him.

Ferguson's answer was predictable.

Let's take a "real issue" and put it in speculative context to see how a possible Creighton/Bernabei difference might play out with Pete Ferguson who could turn out to be Stark County's version of the "decider-in-chief" (a la George Bush).

What issue?

How about the 9-1-1 funding issue.

The SCPR believes that enormous pressure will be brought on commissioners, once again, to reallocate the $2.75 million sitting in county coffers (collected from the Bosley, Harmon, and Vignos imposed 0.50 sales tax, later rejected by Stark County voters) designated for use in rehabbing 9-1-1 call receiving and dispatch to public safety forces.

Reallocation?

Yes, reallocation.

Sheriff Swanson has recently announced he is laying off 41 deputies.  And stirrings are already afoot to negate Commissioner Bosley's and Stark County Council on Governments Governance Committee chair Randy Gonzalez (also Jackson Township fiscal officer) insistence that the $2.75 million remain dedicated to a 9-1-1 fix.

Let's assume for the sake of putting Pete Ferguson on the spot that Bernabei and Creighton take opposite points of view (for whatever reasons they have); leaving it to Ferguson to be the decider.

What will Pete do?

There are compelling arguments on both sides of the issue.  So Ferguson's model for deciding pretty much goes out the window.  

So the answer will lie in Ferguson's judgment of where most of the people of Stark County are on the issue.  Right now, based on The Report's conversation with Ferguson last Wednesday, it appears that Ferguson plans on running for re-election in 2012.  If he runs, he says, it will be his final term.  But, unless Stark County is in total financial chaos in 2012 - which is highly possible in the opinion of the SCPR, The Report believes Ferguson's eye is toward running again.

The SCPR believes that if put in the position of deciding, Ferguson will find a reason to reallocate.

Public safety is the Stark County public's highest priority and having deputy sheriffs out on patrol will trump (in the court of public opinion) repairing 9-1-1.

What person running for public office would want to fly into the face of voters?

Just ask Commissioner Todd Bosley about that!