SCHURING'S FALL FROM GRACE?

Well, it depends on what you mean in "fall from grace."

As the SCPR sees Kirk Schuring's political future, he is not in the slightest jeopardy in retaining his seat in 2014.

Statewide, the Democrats are scrambling to find one seat "net" gain in the 2014 Ohio House races to achieve a very modest political goal.

The goal?

To take away the Republican's supermajority status in the House.

And you can be sure that given the anemic Stark County Democratic Party in terms of making a meaningful challenge to either Schuring (the 48th) or Christina Hagan in the 50th, the gain will not be at the expense of either of them.

To be sure, it was a real setback in terms of "aspirations" Schuring might have had for his political career when he lost in 2008 to Democrat John Boccieri for the right to succeed retiring 16th Congressional District Congressman Ralph Regula, when the 16th still included all of Stark County.

But that still is not what The Report is referring to in the expression "fall from grace."

Actually, it is his loss of face among Republicans constituting the Stark County delegation to the Ohio General Assembly.

Schuring ranks dead last among the three according to his latest campaign finance report as a political fund raiser. Hence the kick in of another expression:  "last man on the totem pole." (figuratively speaking)

As pointed out in yesterday's blog, with his being named chairman of the Ohio Senate finance committee, the top billing goes to state Senator W. Scott Oelslager (Ohio's 29th Senate District).

The surprise is that "elected for the first time" in 2012 - Christina Hagan - of the 50th came in second; not Schuring as one would expect.

Here are the numbers.

Number 1 - Oelslager:

Number 2 - Hagan:

Number 3 - Schuring:

Schuring only bests Democrat Stephen Slesnick (the 49th):

And, of course, Slesnick is a member of the 39 member Democratic House Caucus which has absolutely - no - political clout and therefore why would most PACs and lobbyists waste their money on him.

It is interesting to look at the contribution layout for all of them.

(Note:  all extracted data obtained from Ohio secretary of state website)

First, Christina Hagan:

Next Schuring:

And finally, Slesnick:

Indeed, the July, 2013 campaign finance reports for the period January 1, 2013 through June 30, 2013 clearly show that J. Kirk Schuring has had a dramatic fall in political status, prestige and respect from his heyday in 2008 when he was raising tens of thousands of dollars upon tens of thousands of dollars in his quest to be a United States congressman.

Who would have thought in 2008 that by 2013 he would be rank third among three Republicans making up the Stark County delegation to the Ohio General Assembly?

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

TODAY'S STORIES

(UPDATED:  08:15 AM)

Schuring & Slesnick Show Up

at Canton City Hall to Talk

Local Gov't Fund Reduction

(also:  Schuring video talk about meetup)
 

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

 Vassar Park Resident

Bruce Nordman

Says

"No More Excuses" Mayor Healy

On Police Force Numbers

Funding Reduction Notwithstanding

(also:  video  Healy/Nordman exchange) 

  *********************************

SLESNICK

ANNOUNCES

HE IS MOVING

TO

THAT

"CITY UP NORTH"

TO RUN IN 2014 FOR

STATE REP!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

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

Good morning Martin!

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

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

The meeting was informative and candid.

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

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

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

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

I hope that answers your questions. ... .

Allen

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

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

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

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

But that couldn't be true.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

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

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

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

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

And that is not all.

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

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

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

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

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

And there is more to the story.

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

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

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

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

What do they want?

More policemen patrolling their neighborhoods.

The cost?

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

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

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

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

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

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

So lets add up the numbers:

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

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

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

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

Political spin and finesses will not work with these folks!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Now all one can do is assume disingenuousness.

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

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

But maybe not,

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

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

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

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

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

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

Their decision has been made.

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

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

(VIDEO: STATE REP. SCHURING 2/15/2011) "LET'S WAIT AND SEE" ON STATE DEFUNDING OF LOCAL GOV'T? JACKSON TWP PARKS/ROADS A CASULTY OF SCHURING SUPPORTED CUTS?

 

Back in February, 2011 the SCPR did a blog on the speculated cuts to local government funding at the hand of the State of Ohio.

Here is a video (02/15/2012) of state Representative and Republican J. Kirk Schuring and Jackson Township fiscal officer Randy Gonzalez addressing the prospect of those cuts:



Well, it is time for someone to tell Representative Schuring that the "reality" of the cuts are now being felt big time in the base (Jackson Township) of his constituency, the 48th Ohio House District.

In a Jackson Community Connection piece (Donna Smith, November 19, 2012), Jackson trustee and president James N. Walters is quoted thusly:  " We need to figure out what we are going to do now that we are in a $3 million hole and we need to move forward.”

On November 6th, Jackson voters rejected a "current expenses" levy which was designed to finance Jackson's parks and roads in an effort to offset some of the $3 million is less revenue with a local tax increase:

What does the defeat of the levy mean?

• All Jackson parks' operating houRS are curtailed to dawn to dusk and there will be no lighting,
• Yard waste drop off shortened hours have been implemented,
• Personnel reductions in the roads and parks department may be in the offing.

What are the political consequences to Representative Schuring for having supported local government funding cuts?

Despite working very hard, Democrat Amanda Trump made very little headway in sending Schuring a message that his safe district was becoming less safe.

But now that reality will be setting in with Jackson residents with diminished services by virtue of Schuring's support of draconian state funding cuts, one has to wonder whether or not a similar effort by Trump going forward (i.e. continuing her campaign unabated) might not yield dramatically different results.

It is always been a premise of the SCPR, that it will take something like a stunning electoral defeat of a Kirk Schuring for the Legislature to get the message that Ohioans are "damn mad and aren't going to take it anymore!"

Recently, Ohio Policy Matters (a progressive think tank - LINK), published a comprehensive analysis of the huge impact that the "reality" of the effect cuts will have on the villages, cities, townships and special taxing districts of Ohio.

Here is table that shows the overall picture of how large the cuts are statewide:

And here is Policy Matters' take on how the cuts will specifically impact Stark County:

While the focus of this blog has not included schools, it is interesting to note (according to Policy Matters) that Jackson schools face a 22% cut state revenues in the upcoming fiscal year.

Over the next two years, it will be interesting to see whether or not Jacksonians might increasingly be thinking (as the reality of the cuts sink in) that it might not be that great of a thing to having the budget-cut-supporting Kirk Schuring continue to represent them in the Ohio General Assembly.

(VIDEO) CAN "AMANDA" TRUMP "KIRK" SCHURING AS DARKHORSE CANDIDATE IN OHIO'S 48TH HOUSE DISTRICT?

The districts may have changed somewhat with the constitutionally required decentennial redistricting of the Ohio General Assembly, however, on old familiar face remains:  the now 51st (seeking election to pretty much the same district, but now redesignated the 48th) Ohio District state Rep. J. Kirk Schuring.

A former insurance agent who was originally appointed to the 51st by the Stark County Republican Party Central Committee in 1993 to replace fellow Republican David Johnson, Schuring ever since has played a game of "musical chairs" with now state Sen. Scott Oelslager ("musical chairs with a twist" - each player gets a seat; just a different seat) between the 51st and the 29th Ohio Senate District.

Because of term limits (which both voted for as a Republican plan to wrest control of the Ohio General Assembly from the control of Democratic strong arm politician Vern Riffe), Schuring and Oelslager are now required to play "musical chairs with a twist" in order to stay in office.

So they stay within the letter of the law, while violating the spirit of it.

It would be one thing if they were highly productive for Stark County.  But they are not.  Oelslager (e.g. "open records law and votes against the Republican Party position [e.g. SB 5] has been better than Schuring who has produced precious little as a legislator and is much more prone to vote the party line including Senate Bill 5.

Enter Amanda Trump.  Though a lifelong Stark Countian (a graduate of Perry High School, as is Schuring; Trump also is a graduate of The Ohio State University), she is only now beginning to make her mark as a Stark County politician.

As the SCPR sees it, Trump's main hope in unseating Schuring would be to hammer away has his support of Senate Bill 5 (hated by public employees like teachers, policemen and firemen) and that he is an excessively loyal Republican.

Other key issues will be the defunding of local government by the Kasich administration aided and abetted by the likes of Schuring in the General Assembly as indicated by his votes for the Ohio budget which contains severe cuts in the state Local Government Fund (some 50% with projections that it will go even higher with tweaks to the budget), the elimination of the Ohio Estate Tax, the elimination of the tangible property tax without a fully compensating offset as originally promised and cuts in K-12 education funding.

At a gathering of the Stark County Democratic Party's Jefferson - Jackson Club last Thursday Amanda said that by her count the 48th District is 50/50 Republican/Democrat.  Moreover, she did touch on the key issues as set forth above.  However, she did not tie Schuring in specifically to those issues.

Hmm?

By inference he apparently thinks that her count is enough to put her in a "deadheat" political race horse with Schuring.

She ought to try that one on Stark County Democratic Party political director Shane Jackson.  The Report thinks he would be just a tad skeptical of that premise.

The SCPR thinks it will take more than just a partisan divide to unseat Schuring.

Money is said to be the "mother's milk of politics."

It is interesting to look at the relative fundraising efforts of Trump and Schuring, to wit:

While they have raised through the pre-primary campaign finance report nearly identical monies, Schuring has a little better than a two to one lead in "balance on hand."

It seems as if Trump does not have far to go in terms of absolute dollars to catch Schuring, but such is a mirage as Schuring, having some 19 years of shoulder rubbing with the fat cat lobbyists who course through the Ohio General Assembly, has yet to put on his Secretariat-esque funding raising gallop.

And she does appear to have some fundraising expertise of her own.  Otherwise, why would Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II allow her to organize fundraising events for him?

Nevertheless, readers of the SCPR can be sure that if it looks like Trump is a legitimate threat to unseat Schuring, the coffers of the Ohio GOP and Republican favoring lobbyists will be raining money millions of pennies from heaven.

If Trump has a "dark horse" chance of defeating Schuring, it will have to be the vigor of her youth (Schuring turns 60 this year) and issues such as Senate Bill 5 that will be key to her.

Here is a video of Trump speaking to the Jefferson-Jackson Demcrats last Thursday's and The Report's brief post-meeting interview.

3RD ANNUAL SCPR "LUMP OF COAL" AWARD - STARK COUNTY OHIO GENERAL ASSEMBLY DELEGATION: OELSLAGER, OKEY, SCHIAVONI, SCHURING, SLESNICK & SNITCHLER

Here it is Christmas season 2010 with the likes of Trustee Louis Giavasis (Plain Township) and Councilwoman Mary Cirelli (Canton) working hard to make Stark County safe and secure in its fresh water drinking supply only to be undermined by the Stark County Ohio General Assembly delegation. Messers Oelslager, Okey, Schuring, Schiavoni, Slesnick and Snitchler (three Republicans; three Democrats) voting either for Senate Bill 165 (2010) and/or House Bill 278 (2004).

Bills 165 and 278 cumulatively took away what little say that townships, villages and cities across Ohio (including, of course, Stark County) had on the exploration of and extraction of oil and natural gas from beneath our homes and farms.

Republican officeholders in particular deify local government and local control.

Congressman-elect Jim Renacci (Republican, the 16th Congressional District) even said that civil rights should be a matter for local governance during his successful campaign against Democrat John Boccieri this past November. While the SCPR profoundly disagrees with Renacci, The Report is all for a local say in when, where and how oil and gas companies explore for and extract oil and natural gas.

Over the coming months Stark County will be a battleground between pro oil and gas company forces and their endeavor to bring hydraulic horizontal fracking drilling operations and those (including Giavasis and Cirelli) who, while not anti-oil and gas, insist on having a say in making sure that any fracking be done in such a way to protect Stark Countians and our water supply.

The coming week Trustee Giavasis will - at a regular session of the Plain Township Board of Trustees - be offering a resolution that he says is intended to safeguard Plain Township fresh water drinking supply from pollution that some say come from the fracking process.

On January 20th (for pro and anti-fracking forces) and January 27th  (for the Ohio Department of Natural Resources) informational meetings will be held at Oakwood Middle School in Plain Township on the safety of the fracking issue.  The meetings will be hosted by WHBC1480's Ron Ponder of Points to Ponder (10:00 a.m. through Noon, Monday through Friday).

Members of Stark's delegation to the Ohio General Assembly should plan to be present at the meetings to hear what Stark Countians have to say about the votes for Bills 165 and 278.

For the SCPR's part, today's blog bestows the dubious honor of Oelslager, Okey, Schuring, Schiavoni, Slesnick and Snitchler receiving the 3rd Annual SCPR "Lump of Coal" Award for their collective efforts in undermining local government.

SERIES: HOW ARE THE MEMBERS OF THE STARK COUNTY DELEGATION TO THE OHIO GENERAL ASSEMBLY DOING? TODAY: SCHURING 1

Ohio state Senator Kirk Schuring has come under a lot of criticism from the SCPR as a legislator who cannot get bills he is the prime sponsor of through the legislative body he is a member of.

In what The Report continues to believe was primarily a campaign ploy by Schuring in preparation for what turned out to be an ill-fated run against Democrat John Boccieri to succeed Ralph Regula in the United States House of Representatives, Senator Schuring offered this resolution in the Ohio Senate in December, 2007:

Needless to say, the resolution went nowhere.  The Report thinks the effort was a political gambit which Schuring had to know had no future.

Had to know?

Yes, had to know!

The Ohio House was and continues to be controlled by the Democrats.  Moreover, the governor was and continues to be the Democrat Ted Strickland.  Besides that, Strickland says that he loves Schuring opponent "as a brother."

So they (the Dems) were going to let Schuring pull off a stunning legislative coup?

What's that saying about swamp land in Florida?

So far as the SCPR is concerned Schuring and his sidekick, W. Scott Oelslager, have been pretty much worthless to Stark County in terms of "bringing home the bacon" to the county.  Together they have about 40 years in the Ohio General Assembly.  But to what end for Stark County?

The Schuring/Oelslager duo for some reason (which totally escapes the SCPR)  have been able to endear themselves to Stark County voters and by playing their version of musical chairs (varying from the classical kids game in that each gets a seat - just a different seat:  a House (the 51st) or a Senate (the 29th); depending on the demands of term limits, seem to be guaranteed a place in the Ohio General Assembly for as long as they live.

In this year's game Schuring needs to occupy the 51st and Oelslager the 29th.

The Report's analysis is that neither will have any trouble being re-elected.

QUESTION THE SCPR HAS FOR FORMER STARK COUNTY DEMOCRATIC PARTY CHAIRMAN JOHNNIE A. MAIER, JR: MAY "THE REPORT" CRITICIZE THE GOVERNOR?

While yours truly was an active Democrat (now a political independnt), the, then, Stark County Democratic Party chairman Johnnie A. Maier, Jr (who is now clerk of courts for the Massillon Municipal Court), said something to the effect:  "You know, Martin, the letter to the editor you wrote to The Repository might be deemed to be critical of the governor."

Heavens forbid!

A letter critical of the governor!!!

Well, if Maier thought that letter "might be deemed to be critical," he hasn't seen anything yet.

The SCPR believes that Governor Strickland has been too quick to listen to the politicos like Johnnie A. Maier, Jr and has been so politically cautionary that he blew a major opportunity to fix the funding of public education.

Some of us wanted the governor to "come out-of-the-box" on being elected, capitalizing on his 60% to 40% massive victory over Republican Ken Blackwell and take bold initiatives to fix this long-festering problem as played out over many years in the contest of the DeRelfe cases decided by the Ohio Supreme Court (four in number).

But no, Strickland listened to the professional political advisers like Maier, and decided, as he told one Stark County elected education official at a Stark County located appearance, "to keep his powder dry."

Well, Governor Strickland,  the powder is drier than dry.

Stark Countians and all Ohioans should know that Ohio is now on the brink of having Strickland's "keeping my powder dry chickens, coming home to roost!"

Stark County's main Ohio senator (in terms of geography and population represented) Kirk Schuring is of 21 Republican senators playing a game of "political chicken" with the governor on gubernatorial politics being played out in the Ohio Senate.

This is the same Kirk Schuring, as a "grandstand" political move, who wanted to get a constitutional amendment on the ballot in 2008 to supposedly fix the funding of public education problem.  The SCPR analysis at the time was that it would do no such thing, but that it was okay for as far as it went.

Schuring had to know that his initiative was going nowhere.  He was running against one of  Strickland's best friends for Congress (16th):  John Boccieri.  No way was the governor going to allow Schuring to pull off this political scheme.

Schuring appears innocent enough, but the SCPR believes he is as political as anyone else.

But Schuring's disingenousness is in no way excuses the governor for having blown it in the first place.

The SCPR is told by Stark County's other Ohio senator (Joe Schiavoni - who represents the Alliance area) that Republicans in the Ohio Senate are being besieged by educators from all over Ohio, including Stark County, to solve the budget impasse with the governor and save Ohio's schools from devastating funding cuts in next year's local school district budgets.

The SCPR asked Schuring what he was going to do on the impasse.

What does Schuring do?

Ignores the question.

Schuring, apparently, is adopting the ways of former 50th House District representative John Hagan (about to resume a more suited position as Marlboro Township trustee), ignore people and questions you do not want to entertain.

The SCPR has long held that Schuring is an illusion as a state representative (House or Senate side).  He and his running/exchange musical chairs mate Scott Oelslager (serving in a majority/supermajority context for most of their tenue) have achieved very little for Ohio and Stark County in their over 40 years in the Ohio General Assembly.

But again, the SCPR blames the governor more than Schuring and Oelslager and, indeed, the entire Ohio General Assembly.

Strickland has failed in his self-proclaimed role as being "the education governor."

Now Ohioans including Stark Countians, of course,  are left to decide next year whom among Strickland and Republican Kasich "is the lesser of two 'political' evils."

Oops, here yours truly is at the end of this blog and remembers something.

Disclaimer:  "The SCPR did not get the approval of former Stark County Democratic Political Party chairman Johnnie A. Maier, Jr prior to publshing this blog critical, in part, of Governor Ted Strickland."

SCHURING & SNITCHLER GET IT RIGHT. THE REST OF THE STARK COUNTY OHIO GENERAL ASSEMBLY DELEGATION "GET CAUGHT WITH HAND IN TAXPAYER'S POCKET?"

The Schuring quote is from his op-ed piece that appeared in The Rep shortly after the vote on the Ohio budget bill in July, 2009.

Today, the Ohio Supreme Court in a 6 to 1 vote, validated the Schuring position.

The man who wants to play musical chairs Schuring and become Stark County's primary state senator (once again); namely,  Scott Oelslager (Republican - 51st), crossed aisles to join Democrats on July 13, 2009 to vote for a de facto $851.5 million to deny Ohioans the right to vote on whether not to expand gambling in Ohio.

Oelslager joined Ohio House Democrats Mark Okey (61st), Slesnick (52nd) and Schiavoni (33rd - the Senate) to deny the basic right of Ohioans to self-determine on the spread of gambling.

Why did Oelslager and the Democrats approve the "usurping the voters" measure?

Because, if they didn't; they would have to join opponents Schuring (R - Jackson - 29th/Senate) and Snitchler (R - Lake - 50th/Ohio House) in an up or down vote on a tax increase to plug a nearly $900 million deficit if voters opt not to allow an expansion of gambling come November.

Voting "up or down" is what legislators should have to do.

So one can only look on Oelslager, Okey, Schiavoni and Slesnick as being "political cowards."

The SCPR applauds Schuring and Snichler for being willing to put their political necks on the line next year less than a year before they have to stand for re-election.

You can be sure that all of the Stark County delegation members (including the "apparent for now" stand up guys) will be working overtime between now and the pre-election break next summer/fall to find a way to avoid voter accountability on raising taxes.

Keep tuned on his one.  A front and center up or down vote on a highly controversial issue may well be in the offiing before the November, 2010 elections!

TALK IS CHEAP? SCHURING - ONCE AGAIN - PROVES TO BE A "COOKIE CUTTER" REPUBLICAN

Yours truly has spoken with state Senator Kirk Schuring quite a few times over the last few years.

One of the frequently uttered lines by Schuring over this space of time has been: "I know, Martin. You think I am a "cookie cutter Republican."

Now is the time to make a definite attribution. State Senator J. Kirk Schuring is a "cookie cutter Republican."

Schuring had the perfect opportunity yesterday and break ranks with the run-of-the-mill senate Republican (the leadership voted for the bill, giving it the margin it needed to pass) by voting for the next biennium Ohio budget bill or alternatively taking the lead in the Ohio Senate and offer a alternative to the Strickland/Ohio General Assembly compromise being voted upon.



The SCPR believes that this is one more reason to be added to the list of reasons that his candidacy for Congress against Democrat John Boccieri failed last year. Schuring loss was truly astounding. Particulary the margin he lost by in Stark County.

Apparently, the votes he got in Stark were from the Republican base with very few coming from Democrats and independents. The moral of the political story for Schuring is that - if the Democrats run a strong candidate - he loses countywide in Stark.

Accordingly, look for Schuring to run once again in the seat that Oelslager is vacating (the 51st) in their game of musical chairs (thereby defeating the spirit of Republican initiated term limits legislation) where the registration number favor Republicans.

The Stark County Republican Party is on life support. Even though many Democrat officeholders are trying to self-destruct (Healy, Swanson and Zeigler for sure); Republicans won't let them.

Under Jeff Matthews feeble leadership (aided by Republican operative Jason Wise), there are no strong Republican candidates in sight to take on Democrat Stark County auditor Kim Perez and Stark County commissioner Todd Bosley in 2010.

Schuring has suggested to the SCPR that one of the options that he was looking at for 2010 was running countywide.

Yours truly now believes that would be foolhardy. In view of his staggering loss to Boccieri (2008) and his hewing the Republican Party line, how can he win against strong Democrats such as Perez and Bosley in a Democratic leaning county?

If Schuring were to run against either and lose, he would be finished politically in Stark County, except in Republican dominated areas of the county.

ARE STARK STATE STUDENTS FACING A TUITION INCREASE? HOW ABOUT STARK'S STUDENTS ATTENDING OTHER STATE UNIVERSITIIES IN OHIO?

UPDATE: 07/15/2009

STARK LEGISLATORS WERE UNABLE TO PROTECT STARK STUDENTS FROM THE POSSIBILITY OF INCREASED TUITION FEES - KENT STATE HAS ALREADY DECIDED TO HIKE TUITION 3.5%

WILL THE UNIVERSITY OF AKRON AND STARK STATE COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY FOLLOW?

ORIGINAL STORY

The Stark County legislative delegation is a feeble bunch who are not major players in Columbus and therefore Stark County consistently comes out on the short end of the stick in Columbus largess.

Stark State College of Technolgy students and parents should be just a little bit nervous as the Ohio General Assembly works toward fashioning a permanent budget within the next week or so which includes closing a $3.2 billion gap. Currently, the legislators are working on a second temporary budget.

An interesting piece appeared in the Akron Beacon Journal (ABJ) today, Budgeting befuddles universities, by staff writer Carol Biliczky.

In it she talks about the University of Akron and Kent State University concerns about whether or not they face state cuts which, of course, are concerns to Stark Countians because many of our high school graduates attend either Akron or Kent.

Moreover, the worries are much closer to home: Stark State College of Technology located in North Canton, Ohio.

Here is a quote from the ABJ piece on Stark State:

Stark State College has blazoned across its Web page that tuition would be frozen for a third year in a row. But spokeswoman Irene Lewis Mott declined to say whether the college would increase tuition if the state subsidy is short.

So why is it we haven't heard reassuring words from the likes of Oelslager, Schurng, Okey, Slesnick, Snitchler and Schiavone?

How about it guys? Do Stark's students have anything to fear about tuition increases this upcoming school year?

SCHURING STANDS BY AS OHIO SENATE KILLS STRICKLAND EDUCATION REFORM BILL?

Republicans have controlled the Ohio Senate from 1985 through today: 24 continuous years.

For 17 of those years (1985 - 1992) Republican Scott Oelslager was Stark County's state senator.

For the last seven, its has been state Senator J. Kirk Schuring (Republican - Jackson).

In the build up to running against Democrat John Boccieri, Schuring, early in 2008, tried to talk his fellow Republicans (which controlled both the Ohio House and Senate) into putting a constitutional amendment on the ballot that would have done two things:

• required the Ohio General Assembly to fund the education budget first; not last as is currently the order of things
• stabilized the percentage of the Ohio budget that would fund education year-in and year-out

Schuring's bill was an improvement over the way things have been. But hardly an overhaul of a system of funding which was declared by the Ohio Supreme Court to be unconstitutional four different times before the Court washed its hands of the entire matter.

The percentage of Ohio's budget?

Consider this.

Akron Beacon Journal Statehouse reporter Dennis Willard wrote this today (GOP Senate boots chance to fix school funding):

In the late 1960s, almost every school district in Ohio was on the guarantee. [guarantee is a bad thing because district funding is at rock bottom - SCPR] It was a result of lawmakers, beginning in 1946, reducing the state share of education funding from 50 percent to 30 percent.

What Republicans have done since the first Ohio Supreme Court decision is throw millions into the education put without appreciably change the percents of the Ohio budget going towards education. It has hoovered between 37% to 40% which is not anywhere near the 1946 level of 50%. As a consequence, local taxpayers have anted
up the deficiency which is the reason Ohio's system of funding remains unconstitutional.

So where is Schuring now?

He could have helped Strickland by leading the fight to put rationality into funding. But he didn't. The man who claims he is no "cookie cutter" Republican, consistently acts as if he is.

Though an affable guy who is responsive to the housekeeping needs of his constituents, Schuring is an utter failure on policy grounds and fighting for meaningful reform on education funding.

Schuring sat by and let his Republican colleagues take Ohio into the dark ages of public education finance. As Willard points out, though the current funding on the basis of "number of students" system is deeply flawed; it's head and shoulders above what Schuring et al have done: make school funding an arbitrary - no criteria - "whatever the Ohio General Assembly says" process.

In its editorial today on the Senate action, The Repository speaks of another casualty of the Senate action: the Ohio Graduation Test (OGT) stays put; not to be replaced the ACT scores for purposes of high school graduation and college entrance.

Retired judge of the Stark County Common Pleas Court W. Don Reader (a Republican who has undoubtedly supported Schuring over his years in the Legislature) will be outraged when he sees the OGT factor.

In May, 2008 Reader was in the audience when Eric Fingerhut came to Stark State College of Technology for a higher education forum and scolded Ohio for staying with the OGT.

Finerhut promised to try to achieve the change Reader (who is a board member at the Stark Education Partnership) advocated.

And try Fingerhut and the Strickland administration did. But the Ohio Senate scuttled the change.

What The Rep fails to point out is this.

Where was J. Kirk Schuring in "at least" fighting to the bitter end to save Judge Reader's proposal embraced by the Democrats?

Of course, we all know how protective that The Rep editorial board has been of Kirk Schuring for all of his years in politics. It must be the Timken Company connection.

Watch as Judge Reader makes his impassioned plea.