NORTH CANTON MAYOR DAVID HELD TELLS SCPR THAT TWO LEVIES WILL PASS WITH OR WITHOUT THE VOTE OF A NORTH CITY COUNCILMAN. HMM?

Next Tuesday (May 4th) North Canton voters will be deciding whether or not to pass a couple of levy requests.

The strange thing about this election is that a North Canton councilman is telling some North Canton folks that he will not vote for the EMS levy.
However, he did vote to put the levy on the ballot for the rest of the North Canton electorate to vote up or down on the issue.

Who is this councilman?

None of the SCPR's three sources will name the councilman. 

Apparently this is a classic case of political "do as say, do not do as I do."  Or is it?  Does this councilman hope that voters will vote the levy down?  How much is he privately campaigning against the levy?

Nobody seems to know.

Why is the mystery councilman opposed anyway?

Council president Daryl Revoldt says that it "probably" is because the councilman thinks that the cost to North Canton of running an EMS service has gotten totally out of hand and believes if voters reject the levy EMS will go belly up and then North Canton can reconstruct an EMS in a more fiscally responsible manner.

One example given by the council (according to a source - not Revoldt) is the assertion that an EMS worker made $95,000 in 2009.  Presumably, this happened - if it did -  because of overtime paid.

The 1.5 mills EMS levy is to run two years.  Revoldt and Mayor David Held that they are optimistic that this levy and a 1.0 mill road levy will pass.

On the EMS levy they point to a community survey completed by 19% of the North Canton public which gives the City high marks for its EMS services.  Revoldt says that he is confident that EMS will pass because the decision to put the issue on the ballot was "market driven."  In other words, citizens will support with taxes those functions of government that the public perceives to be "value added."

The road levy may be a "different kettle of fish."  It failed by about 10 votes in November, 2009.

However, Mayor David Held is optimistic about its prospects for passage this time around.  He says that the only reason that the 2009 effort failed was because there was new money in the levy.  Held uses the deletion of the new money from the levy as a example of and proof of how North Canton government listens its citizens.

The SCPR believes that North Canton government is more and more in the listening mode vis-a-vis its people.

If so, the future of North Canton could be tracking into positive territory.

DAVID HELD STANDS BY HIS ADMINISTRATORS AND CITY EMPLOYEES ON THE DISPOSITION OF "STREET SWEEPINGS?" DOES NORTH CANTON, ODOT AND THE STARK COUNTY ENGINEER HAVE IT RIGHT?

Mayor David Held of North Canton tells the SCPR that what North Canton has been doing in terms of disposing of its street sweepings has been going on across Stark County (for communities that have street sweepers) for the past ten years.

He stands by his contention that North Canton has only been doing what other nearby government entities have been doing.  Moreover, he says that the local branch of the Ohio Department of Transportation and the Stark County engineer's office has a sort of  "Pied Piper" (the SCPR characterization - not Held's) on the matter of disposing of street sweepings.

Held says that some North Canton government officials are trying to use the North Canton "street sweepings" issue as a pretext to force him to dismiss North Canton administrator Earle Wise, Jr and city utilities supervisor Thomas Chupar, but that these offcials can forget it because he views Wise and Chupar as being officials of the highest integrity and valuable assets to North Canton.

Held is to meet with Ohio EPA officials on Wednesday (December 9th) as well as state Senator Kirk Schuring to determine exactly what is and what is not permitted by operation of Ohio Administrative Code section 2745.27.

As an aside, the SCPR asked about a copy of a test taken by North Canton city employees and administrative officials at a Erosion and Sediment Control continuing education session (put on by Julie Barberi) of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources in March, 2009 and November, 2008.

Why the question?

Because there was at least one of the questions in the 45 question test that is relevant to the North Canton street sweepings mess.

The question:  "Street sweeping material is considered hazardous waste material?  True or False?"

What do you think the correct answer is?

According to the answer key:  "True."

But the real answer is:  "it depends."

Depends on what?

Are the sweepings saturated with the likes of oil, gasoline and the like?

If they are, then the answer is clearly "True."

According to Held, if not; then he believes the sweepings may be "solid waste," but not "hazardous waste."

Of course, Held et al have been working on the premise that the sweepings are "yard waste" and, hence are disposable as "back-fill" as North Canton has been doing at its Jackson Township contracted site.

The SCPR believes that North Canton has been operating under a "wishful thinking" modality.  If North Canton officials determined that the sweepings are "solid waste," the the dumping has to take place at a landfill which runs about $200 a dump.

North Canton has been doing the "yard waste" dumping at least as far back as the days that present North Canton City Council president Daryl Revoldt was mayor of the Dogwood City.

The SCPR believes that "the test question" as set forth above, should have red flagged to North Canton officials that it had a problem with the disposal of its self-defined "yard waste."  The next step down from "hazardous waste" is not :yard waste," but "solid waste."

Held says that "the test question" did trigger North Canton to begin checking out the "real" definition of the street sweepings.  With all due respect to Held, the SCPR is skeptical of his answer.

The Report believes that North Canton citizen activist Chuck Osborne was the trigger.

At the end of the day, getting clarification is critically important not only for North Canton, but also to many Stark County political subdivisions.  Held tells The Report that only Canton and Perry Township (so far as he knows) have properly disposed of street sweepings in recent times.

This issue affects government.  It boggles the mind that even government is not effectively communicating to government.

What is wrong with the "rule-makers" at the Stark County level, the state of Ohio level and the national level that permits a situation that political subdivisions do not know what is expected of them?

However, the SCPR does not excuse North Canton.  The "test event" was months ago.  The test question clearly indicated alarm bells.  Yet, now is Held scheduled to go to Columbus to get to the bottom of the matter.

Moreover, the Held "we are doing what many others are doing" mantra is not acceptable.

When individual citizens are unclear of what the rules, regulations and law requires of them and follows the lead of friends, neighbors and relatives;  courts-of-law generally do not accept the answers like:  "but your Honor, my neighbor Joe does exactly the same thing."

North Canton's mistake could cost the city $100,000 or more in scarce taxpayer money.  Money that could go towards fixing potholes given that North Canton voters rejected (by four votes) providing one mill more to the streets department to take care of city roads and streets.

Undoubtedly Osborne is a pain to North Canton officials.  But folks like Osborne do provide a public service.

The silver lining out of  North Canton illegal dumping revelation is that its occurrence is likely to get Ohio EPA communication more clearly!

But North Canton should have pursued the clarification - a looooong time ago.