(VIDEOS) MASSILLON CITY COUNCILMAN CONTINUES TO CALL OUT "COWARDS" BEHIND A MASSILLON-BASED BLOG

UPDATED AT 10:50 AM

VIDEOS

COUNCILMAN SLAGLE'S

BRIEF STATEMENT

ON 

MASSILLON REVIEW

POLITICAL ATTACKS ON HIM

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

 COUNCILMAN SLAGLE'S

EXTENDED REMARKS

ON

MASSILLON REVIEW

POLITICAL ATTACKS ON HIM 

Since it resumed publication due to (if you believe them) "popular demand," a Massillon-based "anonymous" blog - the Massillon Review (MR) -  has undertaken a series of attacks on lame duck councilman-at-large Larry Slagle apparently for his work as chairman of the Massillon City Council Parks & Recreation Committee on reforming the structure of Massillon's Parks and Recreation Board.

Slagle favors giving the Parks and Recreation (three appointed by the Massillon administration; two appointed by the Massillon City Schools Board of Education) defined powers and thereby have a say in the running of Massillon's Parks and Recreation system.

Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry thinks that Massillon's parks and recreation operation should be under the direction of her administration.

In early July, the mayor made and impressive and perhaps persuasive case to a majority of council that her administration should have the authority and therefore the accountability of administering the city parks and recreation function.

I, for one, agree with the case she made.

But, of course, I have no vote on the matter.

It all falls on Massillon City Council.

The Report does not know whether or not she meant it, but in that council session (referred to above) she seemed amenable to working with council.

Success on getting control for the administration, I think, is having council trust her that she indeed will bend over backwards to "keep council in the loop."

One of the problems with KCP, her administration and those who support her (e.g. the Massillon Review et al) is that they appear to have a strong case of political paranoia and therefore look at anyone who from time to time disagrees with them as being "the enemy."

The vote on Slagle's "reform legislation" is likely to take place next Monday evening.

The SCPR thinks the vote will be close.  Ward 3 councilperson Andrea Scassa has already announced that she will be voting "no" on the Slagle offering.

The Report's sense is that other members of council are persuadable to let the administration take control.

That is where the SCPR thinks that the Massillon Review comes into play.

I have long held that if one wants to know what the administration's druthers are on any given issue, one needs to take a look at "the attack line" of the Massillon Review.

On this issue, as I believe on all issues Massillon, the MR in taking off on Slagle is showing full support for administration control and concomitant accountability.

So it is worth looking at the Slagle/MR feud in some depth.

It could be that the MR's political attack on Slagle will turn a close vote against the administration.

For instance, Nancy Halter (R - Ward 2) was sounding very much last night as if she was in favor of the mayor being in charge.

But given that she has been the subject of political attack by the Massillon Review; will she have it in her political graces to vote for the position?

Councilwoman Halter is a very powerful factor among the Republicans on council in a guidance sense as to how the Republican caucus might vote on any given issue.

So the SCPR thinks that maybe Catazaro-Perry's friends at the Massillon Review may have "out-smarted" themselves and be the reason that the Slagle legislation passes in a close vote.

Why would the Massillon Review take off after Halter?

It is widely believed that the Massillon Review has "a dog in that fight" for the Ward 2 seat.

And, of course, anything to diminish Halter so that the MR supported candidate wins, no?

Maybe, just maybe, the self-identified political geniuses at the MR aren't all that "politically" smart after all?

Here is a full rendition of Slagle's October 7th Public Speaks remarks:  (from the minutes of the meeting)

Alright, unfortunately in the past week I was advised of the fact that the troll site that has attacked me in the past is back up there doing it again.  I want to address that tonight. 

Because I think the cowards that run this site should come forth say who they are and quit hiding behind the anonymity that they get by not putting their names on this site. 

First of all, as a public official I’m fair game about things that are relevant to what’s occurring here. 

But we are all not professional politicians we all have our jobs and our outside life and our daily source of income.  The problem with the internet today is that when someone googles your name this shows up. 

Now these folks won’t come forward to tell me these things to my face I suspect I know who some of them are.  Because they are just cowards.  It’s easier to attack me that way. 

But I’m telling the public today I’m telling every client I’ve ever represented in the past and I’ll represent in the future there is nothing true about that website. 

It is nothing more than an attack site used by political gain and I take offense at anything that’s brought up on it. 

If that term was used by against other people in this chamber there’d be outrage. 

For some reason though they’re permitted to say that about me.  There’s no outrage. 

And I have taken on and the reason I say that is because my professional reputation is at stake. 

And when I’m called a boy or a boy wonder that affects my professional status in this community.  My professional status in this community is very valuable to me. 

For 35 years I’ve represented individuals never a company well rarely a company and I do it without being paid unless I am successful for them.  Because without me they could not stand up to either the insurance industry or in law firms of hundreds of lawyers. 

So to suggest for one minute that I do not have the gumption to stand up is an untruth and is not fair nor is it warranted. 

So I want these cowards to come forth. 

And if they won’t come forth on their own then I am today saying that I will donate $250.00 to a charity of the person’s choice who outs these trolls.  Because this kind of politics has to stop.  It is not American, its not democratic and its not right. 

And those people that go to that site some of whom I respect I would ask that they quit looking at it and quite using it. 

So that’s all I have to say. 

Thanks.

Here is a brief video capture of Slagle answering a Stark County Political Report question on the anonymous MR blog attack on him.



Somewhat amusing from the meeting itself was Ward 5 councilman's Donnie Peters statement when Slagle returned once again to the matter of the Massillon Review's political attacks on him: "I know.  We all hate the Massillon Review."

At the outset let it be said once again (as the SCPR has opinionated frequently in past blogs) that The Report believes Stark County Democratic Party political director Shane Jackson is the author of the MR.

Jackson is also the chief deputy clerk for Massillon clerk of courts Johnnie A. Maier, Jr.

He probably has been encouraged, if it turns out that he is the author of the Massillon Review,  in the blogging endeavor by Maier, Jr., who, in addition to being "the" Massillon clerk of courts is a former Stark County Democratic Party chairman.

In 1995, Massillonians saw fit to pass a .3% addition to the city income tax which currently brings in about $2.1 million to make sure that the city's parks (P&R) be kept in A-1 condition.

What seems to have happened is that the income set aside for parks and recreation has had the effect over-the-years since to make the operations of and funding of (i.e. the use of $2.1 millon, more or less) P&R to become politicized beyond what Massillonians voting for the original levy could have imagined.

As we all know, anything government is by definition political.

We talk about "keeping politics out" of things especially things like parks and recreation.  But to no avail.  Money like power draws the politicos in any community like "honey is to bees."

The "Slagle thing" is just the latest of many, many political battles fought over P&R going back into the 24 year reign of Francis H. Cicchinelli, Jr which ended in May, 2011 with his defeat at the hand of Perry Township import Kathy Catazaro-Perry (KCP) who some deem to be the political handmaiden of Massillon politicos Shane Jackson and Maier, Jr.

One of the prime campaign issues between Cicchinelli and KCP was Cicchinelli's alleged machinations with P&R funding to finance the operations of a cornerstone of his administration:  the construction of and the operation of a city-owned golfcourse known as The Legends.

Especially a sore point was the expansion of the original 18 holes into 27 in 1999.

Cicchinelli himself admits that the expansion was indeed a mistake.

It seems to the SCPR that the anonymous blog entitled the Massillon Review (MR) was started on November 21, 2010 in anticipation of the Democratic primary election.

And from the get-go, the MR was "hot and heavy" on the parks and recreation matter probably with "an eye forward" as the issue being one which catapult Catazaro-Perry into the mayor's chair.

For example, here is a quote from The Massillon Independent included in the December 31, 2010 edition of the MR:

Parks Czar Kenn Kaminski explaining that the parks aren't in horrible condition despite visual evidence to the contrary. It is only that critics of the parks system are "Anti-Cicchinelli" (The Independent, May 10, 2010).

Cicchinelli had to know what was coming.

And, he was not disappointed.

The folks at the MR went on a binge of attacking Cicchinelli the SCPR thinks on the pejorative-personal front (e.g. "Mayor for Life," and the like), on the political front, and for his decision making as Massillon's chief executive officer.

It seems as if the MR had an obsession with Cicchinelli and nearly every blog, if not every blog; since the beginning, has been filtered through the Frank Cicchinelli "are you for him or against him" litmus test.

Returning to the opening MR blog reference to former P&R director Kenn Kaminski which clearly indicates a MR disaffection.

Contrast the December 31 reference to Kaminski to an October 11, 2013 blog referencing a Kaminski letter seemingly supportive of Mayor Catazaro-Perry's version of his departing as Massillon's parks and recreation director as an example of the "filtering" that appears to be well-entrenched at the MR.

Apparently, one can go from "the outhouse" to the "manor house" in the writings of the MR depending on whether or not one is toeing "the party line."

I asked Slagle after last night's work session why he thought he fell in disfavor with the folks at the MR and he answered that really didn't know but though it was because he was not into (paraphrase) "toeing the party line."

In contrast to the MR, the Stark County Political Report has an identified author and has always had an identified author since the beginning of March 12, 2008.

Moreover, the SCPR provides ample opportunity for those about who The Report writes to respond.

Even Shane Jackson was afforded that basic fairness in The Report printing "word-for-word" his "had to be an embarrassing to himself" histrionic and hysterical attack on me.

I published his "over-the-top," "Martin Olson: you have gone over the line" obviously emotion laddened e-mail which he copied to quite a number of Stark County/Massillon public officials/public figures.

I know Shane pretty well, And I was not in the least surprised that he would write his "pretext-esque" e-mail.

He and Maier, Jr. are not used to having someone disagree with them and not engage in personal vitriol. 

I have in my possession an e-mail wherein Maier, Jr. tells the receiver that Martin Olson is crazy.

My response?

Crazy to Maier, Jr. - in his mind - is to disagree with him.

My take on him is that he is so much into political power that anyone who differs with him - in his mind - has to be crazy.

That is what people do who cannot keep a proper perspective on politics.

Apparently, the MR is not willing to let those I think it attacks under the anonymous Massillon Review to have the opportunity to defend themselves.

The Stark County Political Report is well-known as providing ample opportunity to those who are the subject of SCPR blogs to respond to the SCPR's opinionating.

My take on the MR blog is that it "cherry-picks" material which is thought to support the blog's "party line" and conveniently leaves out that which might lead to a different interpretation.

I have always read the MR because as a blogger myself I go to sources I think reveals the thinking of Stark's various political figures.

I have said quite a number of times that I think the MR is a public microphone on the political agenda and the political views of Shane Jackson, Johnnie A. Maier, Jr and those who make up the Johnnie A. Maier, Jr. faction of the Massillon (and, of course, Stark County) Democratic Party.

The importance of the Slagle response to the MR attacks on him is in his call for the author of the blog to "man up" and put a name to the blog's editorializing.

We can all speculate on who the author really is but that is exactly what the "believing" and "thinking" is - it is conjecture "pure and simple."

Nevertheless, it appears that area political observers are pretty much of the same mind as to who the anonymous blogger is.

So the SCPR joins Slagle in calling out the cowardice of the Massillon Review.

Dump the cowardice, man up!

By name, stand by your opinions!

Here is the promised video of the remainder of Councilman Slagle's comments on the MR last night.

KATHY CATAZARO-PERRY: THE MAYOR OF MIXED MESSAGES?

Last week the SCPR complimented Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry on her apparent turnaround on working with Massillon City Council on getting her administration's dispute with council as to who has the power to hire and fire (among other issues) the director of Massillon's Parks and Recreation Department.

The hope is that the mayor has turned over a new leaf and is abandoning her confrontational "it's my way or the highway" or, at best, a non-cooperative "drag-my-feet" modality in favor of seeking out common ground with council members in working through Massillon issues.

From the aforementioned blog:

Another important ingredient in Monday's meeting was "born again" Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry's attitude. 

Her outlook was conciliatory in terms of sharing power with council on the matter of who is to hire a new director notwithstanding that the chairman had stated in very clear terms ("absolute, 100%") that the ultimate decision on hiring a director should be with council.

Maybe The Report should have taken a "wait and see" posture vis-a-vis the mayor before ascribing a "change of heart" to the mayor.

At that same meeting (July 29, 2013), Councilwoman Nancy Halter (Republican - Ward 2) expressed concern about the enforcement of legislation she patiently though persistently guided through council with passage occurring on September 4, 2012.

The Report meant to follow up with Halter after the meeting as to specifically what the problem was and who the problem was.  However, yours truly got sidetracked with other matters.

In due course, the SCPR will recall the intention to do this thing or that thing and is certain to follow up.

And sad to say - when yours truly did follow up - what Halter tells The Report is not a pretty picture in terms of the Catazaro-Perry administration doing anything to implement Ordinances 48-2012 and 49-2012.

It could be that Massillon's mayor is learning the wrong lessons from the mayor of Canton.

As reported in prior SCPR blogs, Catazaro-Perry, in addition to being mentored and monitored by Massillon clerk of courts Johnnie A. Maier, Jr.,  has been taken under the wing of William J. Healy, II.

What a combination:  Maier and William J. Healy, II, no?

No wonder Mayor Kathy is flopping all over the place in her relationship with council.  Both, in the opinion of The Report, are "you have do what you have to do to politically - to survive" types.

The SCPR covers Hizzhonor at Canton City Council meetings and recalls the complaints from Canton councilpersons and Cantonians about his not staffing commissions established by council legislation.

If memory serves correctly, Healy dragged his feet (about a year) appointing members to the Canton Tree Commission and had to be embarrassed at a "Public Speaks" segment of a council meeting before getting off his duff and getting the commission up and running.

One might say that the Catazaro-Perry administration has not gotten off dead center on the Halter sponsored "vacant ... [and] non-owner occupied building" legislation because she moved the enforcer-in-chief (James Johnson) from the Massillon Buidling Department into being interim safety director.

(Note:  Catazaro-Perry's original safety director, George T. Maier (Johnnie's brother), had been appointed by the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee in February to be the Stark County sheriff (an appointment which is under legal challenge to be decided any day now by the Ohio Supreme Court).

But then again, it does not appear that Johnson's move should have anything to do with "not getting the job done" in Massillon's building department (which adjoins the mayor's office) in terms of enforcing the existing building code including Halter's legislation.

For The Report is told that the department has two new hires who, Halter thinks, should be "Johnnie On The Spot" in terms of thoroughgoing enforcement.

Halter says that when Johnson had the job (and she thinks he was a good building code enforcement officer), he would send out reports as to what he did with complaints about building code violation allegations.  When asked about why those responsible now to do the work of enforcing Massillon's code were not doing reports, Johnson's response?

They think it would be "a waste of paper."

Hmm?

Halter's response:  "Have they ever heard of e-mail?"

One of the hires is David Mayle (husband of Johnnie A. Maier, Jr. secretary Tammy Mayle.)

Formerly, until Stark County voters unelected him in November, 2010, Mayle was a top level employee of now former Stark County auditor Kim Perez (now in line to become Canton's treasurer as he is currently unopposed for the office as of the date of this blog).

So it is an SCPR premise that as things stand now, Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry is sending out mixed messages.

On the one hand she shows promise with respect to being part of the solution regarding the long time, chronic problems with regard to Massillon's Parks and Recreation board operations.

On the other hand, her administration (after all "the buck does stop at the top, no?) is showing that getting Massillon's neighborhoods ship-shape is not a priority in that it apparently is not leaning on the Massillon Building Department to consummately enforce Massillon law.

A note to Mayor Catazaro-Perry.

Councilwoman Halter is not going away on this issue.

It was a core issue in her running for the Ward 2 council seat in 2011 that she was going to do something about redeeming Massillon's declining neighborhoods.

And in seeking re-election this fall what is her core message to the voters in Ward 2 going to be?

Bingo!  You've got it.

She is going to say something to the effect:  "I am going to double-down on my effort to push the administration to vigorously enforce Massillon's building code and to implement my sponsored and guided passage of ordinances 48 & 49-2012."

Councilwoman Halter showed in defying the odds in getting her legislation passed in the first place that she is "one determined councilwoman" and she is not going to quit until the Catazaro-Perry administration starts energetically enforcing 48 & 49-2012 as well as all aspects of Massillon's building code.

Massillonians take the condition of their neighborhoods very seriously.

And Councilwoman Halter will not rest until the Catazaro-Perry administration does too.

When will it dawn on the mayor that she cannot pick and choose what she will or will not work with on council with respect to solving Massillon's problems?

It is looking like that Catazaro-Perry has met her match in Halter and she is about to learn an important lesson:  "Quit sending mixed messages to Massillon City Council."

(VIDEOS) FINALLY! MASSILLON MAYOR KATHY CATAZARO-PERRY SHOWS SOME LEADERSHIP.

VIDEOS

COUNCILMAN LARRY SLAGLE

PRESENTS

HIS

PLAN

FOR SOLVING THE

PARKS & RECREATION BOARD PROBLEM

MAYOR KATHY CATAZARO-PERRY

PRESENTS

HER

PLAN

FOR SOLVING THE

PARKS & RECREATION BOARD PROBLEM

POST-MEETING
HALTER
CHOVAN
DEL-RIO KELLER
&
SLAGLE
ON LAST NIGHT'S PROCEEDINGS

It appears to the Stark County Political Report that Massillon Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry had plenty to smile about at Monday's Massillon City County work session.

After Parks and Recreation Committee chairman Larry Slagle (D - at large) made his presentation as to what he thought should be the resolution of the long standing impasse between council and the mayor as to whom should be in charge of Massillon's Parks and Recreation Board (MPRB - Board), Councilman Donnie Peters, Jr. (R - Ward 5) offered that council ought to hear from the mayor on the issue.

Probably most of us present were expecting her to administer a tongue lashing to council as has been the case for most of her 18-1/2 months as mayor on most issues that have arisen the administration and the legislative body.

But lo and behold:  a surprise!

Instead of chastising council for seemingly embarking on a path to take charge of the MPRB (assuming that Slagle's proposal was well received by his fellow council members), she took a much more reasoned and conciliatory tact than yours truly ever remembers her taking in the past.

FIRST, THE SLAGLE PROPOSAL

Councilman Slagle proposes that council repeal Massillon Ordinance 163:03, to wit:

163.03 POWERS.
     The Recreation Board shall possess all the powers and be subject to all the responsibilities of the local authorities under Ohio R.C. 755.12 to 755.18.
(Ord. 201-1995.  Passed 10-16-95.)

And Ordinance 163:04, to wit:

163.04  PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT.
     A City of Massillon Park and Recreation Department is hereby created within the City. The Park and Recreation Board shall determine the positions needed for the operation of the Department.  The necessary staffing, wages and the budget to operate the department shall be submitted by the Recreation Board to the Mayor and then forwarded to Council for approval.
(Ord. 201-1995.  Passed 10-16-95.) 

Beyond the repeal of these original statutes, Slagle is out to reconstruct them along the following lines:

• Spell out the exact duties of the Board,
• Indicate the authority that the Board is to follow (answer: city council),
• Under Slagle's plan, the Board would appoint the parks and recreation director subject to approval by council,
• Institute guidelines as to:
• what the position of director will entail,
• the minimum requirements needed to be director,
• what the director's authority would be,
• Provide that the Board submit a budget but approved and administered by council,
• Set up a Golf Advisory Committee and an Recreation Center Advisory Committee with no power but to make recommendations.

Though he admits his proposal carries his bias, Slagle is not insisting that the loggerheads between council and the administration necessarily be resolved precisely according to his suggestion.

It appears to the SCPR that the main purpose of his proposal is to get the solution to the ongoing controversy concerning the management of Massillon's parks and recreation system out of the political realm as much as possible and into a form that is effective and efficient.

Here is a video of the main body of Slagle's presentation including some reaction from members of council.

NEXT, CATAZARO-PERRY'S REACTION

All-in-all the mayor made a very persuasive case that the executive branch of government (no matter who happens to be mayor) is the only entity suited to administering any Massillon department of government regardless of what that department's function may be.

In support of her basic argument she brought out:

• That the main players in the controversy seemed a few months ago to be content with the notion that Law Director Perry Stergios was the appropriate person to look at the law (state statutes and Massillon ordinances) and make a determination out of his analysis whom he thinks the language of the law indicates (between the mayor, council or Board) has the authority to appoint the parks and recreation director,
• That his reading of the law was that the administration had the authority to appoint,
• That his take was rebuffed, 
• That the Parks and Recreation Board has been running things (not the administration) and consequently it has had some major goof ups. 
• For example: 
• an employee who is not being properly compensated according to her legal right, and
• the appointment of a director (Straughn) by the Board who (the mayor says) "lied and cheated and did things he shouldn't have done" and then the Board turns around and prevailed upon the administration to get rid of him,
• That neither council nor the Board is suited to run Massillon's parks and recreation operations and facilities because one (council) works two hours a week and the other (the Board) works two hours a month,
• That only the administration with its "hands on" day-to-day administration operations is situated to oversee the day-to-day functioning of the city's parks and recreation facilities and operations,
• That her team of administrators can and are working with interim director Doug Nist to put him in a position to competently if not expertly perform as permanent director and that they believe they can have him ready by September.
• That as things would unfold under Slagle's plan, Nist would have five park and recreation board members and nine council members to answer to rather than merely the mayor and interim safety director Jim Johnson,  which is too cumbersome and susceptible of political pressures from many directions,
• That she has no problem with council approving her appointments on parks and recreation,
• That she and her administration be permitted a year to work with parks and recreation (with the Board being "advisory" only) to straighten out the department's operations and if the administration cannot make it work, then council can revisit matters in terms of the Slagle plan.

Here the mayor is in action making her case:



A COMPROMISE IN THE WORKS?

Both Councilman Slagle and Mayor Catazaro-Perry are to be commended for their presentations last night.  They did get a little testy with one another but they kept their differences civil.

Slagle is to be lauded for getting the ball rolling with his plan which has the potential (in the ebb and flow of discussion) as never before for getting the parks and recreation problems piece of Massillon city government getting resolved.

Catazaro-Perry for making a compelling case for her administration being the key component in any resolution plan.

The mayor is to be applauded also for what she did not do.

She could have threatened to veto Slagle's proposed legislation should it in its essence pass council.  If she were to do so, it would take a six to three vote to override it.  

Had she threatened a veto, she would have undone all the good that she did for herself vis-a-vis council at last night's meeting.

For the first time in her tenure as mayor, it is beginning to dawn on the SCPR that perhaps she is getting her act together on the leadership front.

All Massillonians should certainly hope so.

The parks and recreation component is a small part of the overwhelming problems facing Massillon.

It is likely that Massillon will soon be designated by the state of Ohio Auditor as being under fiscal watch or fiscal emergency.

If so, council and the mayor and her administration working together is the only pathway to recovery.

Perhaps last night was the beginning of Massillon officials' reaching out to one another and a beginning of the end of finger pointing at one another?

Here is a video featuring Nancy Halter (R - Ward 2), Milan Chovan (R - at large), Michelle Del-Rio Keller (Parks and Recreation Board chairperson) and Slagle with the post meeting assessments.

(VIDEOS) IT AIN'T EVEN THE 4TH OF JULY AND THE FIREWORKS ARE GOING OFF AT MASSILLON CITY COUNCIL!

CORRECTION:  The second Massillon BOE appointee is Moe Rickett and not Ester Bryant as originally reported.

VIDEOS

LAW DIRECTOR PERRY STERGIOS

AND

COUNCIL

ON

HIS OPINION ON PARKS & RECREATION

THE RELATIVELY CALM PART

OF THE DISCUSSION ON THE

PARKS & RECREATION ISSUE

PARKS & RECREATION MEMBER

JOHN WOLF'S

SOLUTION TO THE

PARKS & RECREATION ISSUE

(GETS INTO IT WITH COUNCILMAN PETERS)

COUNCILMAN LARRY SLAGLE

ON

HIS PLANS

TO RESOLVE

THE PARKS & RECREATION ISSUE

SAFETY DIRECTOR JIM JOHNSON

&

MAYOR KATHY CATAZARO-PERRY

TAKE ON COUNCIL ON THE

STREET LIGHTING ISSUE

COUNCILMAN PAUL MANSON WEIGHS-IN

COUNCILMAN ED LEWIS WEIGHS-IN

All the ingredients were in place for fireworks at Massillon City Council's work session last evening.

Indeed, a few of fireworks banged loud in a spectacular display of political combustion involving:

• Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry, 
• interim safety director Jim Johnson,
• Law Director Perry Stergios,
• Councilman Paul Manson (D - at large), 
• Councilman Milan Chovan (R - at large), 
• Councilman Donnie Peters, Jr (R - Ward 5), and 
• Ed Lewis, IV (R - Ward 6) as well as
• Parks and Recreation board member John Wolf 

But it took more than the mix of these persons to set things off.

Okay.  Exactly what is the "more than?"

Add in two issues:

• What to do about the Parks and Recreation issue of appointing a new director, and
• Who is to blame for Massillon over paying by perhaps as much as $100,000 plus (when early termination fees are included) for street lighting expenses.

THE PARKS AND RECREATION ISSUE

The explosiveness of the meeting all started with (after Parks and Recreation Committee chairman Larry Slagle opened the topic what to do about the Parks and Recreation Board) Director Stergios.   Check out this video of Councilman Ed Lewis asking for Stergios for his imput:

Chairman Slagle went on to conduct a discussion of what to do about the seemingly forever controversy in terms of what authority the Parks and Recreation Board (Board) has with respect to:

• controlling its finances (which with an 0.3% income tax levy [1995] and fees takes in about $4 million annually, and 
• determining who is to be the Board's director

The SCPR was very impressed with how Slagle kept the discussion on track amidst the outbursts.

It appeared that Slagle's mission was simple.  He was intent on gathering information from council members as to their feelings about the aforementioned primary issues and the lingering issue of what to do with the golf course aspect of Board operations.   After the meeting, The Report spoke with Slagle as to what is next.

Most of the meeting discussion on Parks and Recreation went smoothly, witness this video:

That is until Parks and Recreation Board member John Wolf (one of two member appointed by the Massillon Board of Education [the other being Moe Rickett]) was invited to speak by Chairman Slagle.

With Wolf came a second round of pre-4th-of-July fireworks.

First, he compared the 30 or so minute council discussion  on Parks and Recreation to the Battle of Gettysburg (which, by the way, yours truly is a native of Gettysburg and the Battle of Gettysburg marks the 150 anniversary of "the turning point in the civil war" 1863 conflict next week).

Second, he announced to council that Parks and Recreation Board is to meet on July 12th and that he was confident that the Board would cobble together its idea(s) of what's its authority should be and that he would present it council soon thereafter.

Wolf's plea with council to be patient with the Board while it came up with a resolution expressing its desires set off Donnie Peters, Jr (Ward 5.).  Here is the video.

At the end of the day, it appears to the SCPR that Chairman Slagle has the matter of Parks and Recreation in hand and will be the catalyst in solving this long simmering Massillon department of government problem.

Here is Slagle post-meeting sharing how he plans to approach resolving the Parks and Recreation problem:

THE STREET LIGHTING ISSUE

Ward 1 Councilwoman Sarita Cunningham-Hedderly heads up council's public utilities committee.

She has been waiting until Ohio Edison area manager Ray Martinez could make it to a work session to get into an issue that has been bugging council for a couple months now.

It came to light in April, that Massillon was paying about $15,000 more a month in street lighting rates since former Safety Director George T. Maier (now serving as the "appointed" sheriff of Stark pending the outcome of Ohio Supreme Court litigation as to his qualifications to hold office) negotiated a deal in September, 2012 (effective in October) with American Electric Power (AEP) to  what he thought at the time (according to administration officials) was a good deal for Massillon and would result in substantial savings to the city over the two year life of the contract.

But he thought wrong.

How's that?

It appears to the SCPR that on the surface of the consideration,  Massillon was getting a better deal from AEP than it was from Ohio Edison (OE).

However, because of the rules of Ohio's Public Utility Commissions (PUCO) on rates (called tariffs by the PUCO) that allowed OE to issue credits to Massillon, the fact of the matter turned out to be that existing OE contract, notwithstanding the seeming better AEP rate, was much the better deal for Massillon on street lighting.

What came out of council's discussion last night was that Maier failed to get back to OE's Martinez and let him know that Massillon was thinking about switching to AEP and that the failure is the core reason why Massillon got nailed for about $15,000 a month more in street lighting costs (January through May).

To add insult to injury, when the lights came on (no pun intended) with Maier replacement and interim Safety Director Jim Johnson in April (in consultation with Martinez) that Massilon had made a costly mistake in negotiating the switch to AEP, it was only some splendid work by Martinez that got Massilon back on track with OE.

In other words, the Catazaro-Perry administration looked like a bunch of fumblers and bumblers.

And there was nothing Martinez could do to make that embarrassment to vanity part of the administration's problem go away.

What came to light at last night's meeting (likely the first that council knew about it) is that in addition to paying AEP a higher rate for street lighting, Massillon had to pay OE/First Energy Solutions (FES) a termination fee of $150 for what one source tells the SCPR is some 100 or so Massillon accounts held by OE/FES or combination thereof.

It appears, but nobody seemed to know for sure, that AEP must have waived a $16,000 early termination fee when Massilon switched back to Ohio Edison for street lighting.

Somebody had to eat "humble pie" to pull that one off, no?

"Nobody seemed to know" (from the administration standpoint) was at the heart of the matter of the resulting fireworks-esque discussions that took place between Mayor Catazaro-Perry, Safety Director Johnson from the administration side, and Massillon council  led by Councilpersons Manson, Chovan and Lewis.

A note:   Councilman Donnie Peters, Jr. took the tack that the matter is over and done with and the council persistent questioning was unavailing.

The SCPR sees the street lighting brouhaha as a proxy for the overall issue between the administration and many if not most of council that the adminstrators and councilpersons do not trust each other.

The video (on the street lighting discussion) at the end of this blog amply demonstrates the deep, deep distrust that exists between the administration and council.

It is hard to see how Massillon gets it fiscal affairs straightened out in such a climate.

The key problem, as The Report sees it, is that the tone of the administration (not communicating with council) comes from the clerk of courts office and Clerk Johnnie A. Maier, Jr. and his chief deputy Shane Jackson.

He and his sidekick (as well as other Massillon officialdom adherents to the Maier power model) seem hellbent on beating down any opposition to their plan and vision for Massillon.

Unless and until Mayor Catazaro-Perry separates from the Maier political machine, she is destined to be a one-term-mayor and will likely be remembered as a monumental failure as the city's chief executive after the 24 reign of Frank Cichinelli as mayor.

While Cicchinelli may have brought troubles onto himself which provided the Maier forces an opportunity to pounce on him, his 24 years had to have been - by and large - a very good time for Massillon.

Those days are long gone as Massillon now faces the prospect of being placed in fiscal watch or emergency ironically at the initiative of Mayor Catazaro-Perry herself.

At one time in her political career, yours truly thought she had a very bright future.

But that all vanished when she threw in "lock, stock and barrel" as the political appendage to the former Stark County Democratic Party chairman.

In doing so, she has lost her individual political identity and is largely seen as the window dressing of a de facto Maier administration.

Here is the full video of the street lighting fiasco discussion including sharp exchanges between Safety Director Johnson and the mayor with council members:

Weighing in on the night's fireworks were Councilman Manson:



and

Councilman Lewis:

MASSILLON MAYOR KATHY CATAZARO-PERRY MOTTO: "IF AT FIRST YOU DON'T SUCCEED, TRY, TRY AGAIN?"

It is becoming obvious that the new mayor of Massillon has less ideas on fixing the city's budget shortfall than the the man she chased from office.

Moreover it appears that Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry is prepared to engage a prolonged stand-off with Massillon City Council in order to get some semblance of financial stability in Tigerland but being fixated on one idea.

The most immediate relief to the financial woes for Massillon is to get council to go along with a reduction in the city's income tax credit for taxes that Massillonians pay to other villages/municipalities where they work.

She failed on a 8 to 1 vote (only Councilman Slagle voting for her proposal) on March 5th. (LINK to prior blog) to reduce the tax by 50% for a two year period of time.

She now proposes a reworked credit reduction of 35%  for an indefinite term.

But where are the changes of heart coming from for Mayor Kathy to prevail this time around?

Trouble is for Mayor Kathy is that Republicans (who now control council 5 to 4)  do not like to raise taxes in any way, shape or form.

While they were sincere in saying that they regret the need to layoff 27 city workers (all union employees - 10 firemen, 9 policemen, 6 street department workers and 2 from the city sanitation department); philosophically, these Republicans appear to be committed to "living within one's means" and sometimes that means incurring the pain of cutting jobs.

So it would be really, really surprising if the mayor is going to be able to convince any of the Massillon Republican council members to come over to her side on a relatively minor modification of the old idea.

The SCPR believes that she may well pick up Democratic councilpersons Scassa and Townsend on a second go round.

But perhaps not Paul Manson who seems to be committed to putting on a 0.2% add on to the city income tax subject to the approval of Massillon voters.

A burning question has to be whether or not she will lose Councilman Slagle's vote this on her second try.

Really?  Why?

How about because he is getting trashed in the media by the Maier faction of the Massillon Democratic Party.

Safety-Service Director George Maier and his brother Clerk of Court Johnnie A. Maier have lashed out (George - "shame on them") at those (Slagle, Townsend, Manson from council; Auditor Jayne Ferrero, Law Director Perry Stergios and Treasurer Paul Lambert)  who recently took an "automatic" (by virtue of 1995 city council legislation) 3.5% pay increase in the midst of Massillon's current financial crisis.

Moreover, it appears that a Massillon based "anonymous" (indicative of cowardice, no?) political blog which hammers away at any who criticize, or are uncooperative with, or do not bend to the will of the Catazaro-Perry administration, has been assigned the task of politically hatcheting Slagle in that the blog focuses on him over beyond others taking the raise.

The SCPR believes that the blog is the work of Johnnie A. Maier,Jr. political operative (political director of the Stark County Democratic Party) and  Maier chief deputy Massillon clerk of court Shane Jackson. 

A move that The Report believes borders on being politically moronic in that Slagle so far as been Catazaro-Perry's only support on the tax reduction issue.

It will be interesting to see exactly how politically mature Councilman Slagle is.

If he sticks by the mayor in a second vote in the face of the severe criticism leveled to him by Catazaro-Perry's nearest and dearest political allies, one has to be completely impressed with this councilman-at-large doing what he thinks is best for Massillon notwithstanding the bashing he is taking from the mayor's friends.

The SCPR would not be surprised to see Slagle stick with the mayor notwithstanding the thumpings he has gotten.

The Report sees him as a thoughtful guy who has a thick political hide.

Moreover, as a liberal Democrat he undoubtedly feels more comfortable with tax increases that the Republicans do.

But on the other hand he has gotten bounced around by the Maier political family.

In the end, his decision will probably depend on how much ego he has.

While the mayor is likely to get up to two and, perhaps, as many as four votes;  do not look for her to get to the magical number of five.

At least, not this time around.

The police and firefighters are turning up the pressure big time.

The laid off police just did a media event designed to elicit empathy/sympathy from the Massillon electorate to the point of motivating voters to put pressure on council to approve the quickest route to generating new revenues.

Will the Republicans be able to withstand the pressure of emotionally driven constituents calling them and insisting they give in to the administration?

The laid off firefighters have appealed their layoffs the Massillon Civil Service Commission.

If they persist and it looks like they are ultimately going to win a demand that at least five of the ten laid off be reinstated, will the prospect of their prevailing cause one or more of the Republicans to yield?

Perhaps not.

Republican Councilman Donnie Peters, Jr (chairman of the finance committee) says he is not considering changing his vote unless and until  "the contracts of police officers and firefighters are settled."

The Report believes he likely expresses the attitude of all his fellow Republicans.

Catazaro-Perry says she has "ideas" (emphasis added) about solving Massillon's financial dilemma.

Really?

Why then is she back to council for a second round on the same old idea that was so thoroughly trounced on March 5th?