BACKROOM POLITICS IN FULL SWING WITH DEMS AS TO WHOM IS GOING TO BE STARK COUNTY'S NEXT SHERIFF?

*******************************************
SUBTOPICS:

SWANSON PICKS LT. LOUIS A. DARROW AS HIS CHOICE?

GEORGE MAIER SCRAMBLING TO GET QUALIFICATIONS TOGETHER?

WAS SWANSON PROPERLY SWORN IN AS "INTERIM" STARK COUNTY SHERIFF?

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

Since it became public knowledge that the recently elected Mike McDonald (November, 2012) was unable to take office on January 7th because of an illness, many have been curious as to whom Sheriff Swanson preferred be named sheriff to replace McDonald.

The naming is to be done by the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee (SCDPCC).

Swanson was sworn-in as interim Sheriff for as many of the 45 days (from January 7th) as need be until the SCDPCC acts.

But first,  just as an aside, the question has been raised to the SCPR as to whether or not Swanson was legally sworn-in as interim sheriff.

Yours truly thinks this is an riveting question that Prosecutor John Ferrero should address in press release form.

Why the question?

Because Swanson was sworn-in on Friday (January 4th) and Mike McDonald was not eligible to be sworn-in, if he were able, until 12:01 AM Monday, January 7th.

Hmm?

So wouldn't the interim have had to be sworn-in at 12:01 AM on Monday, January 7th?

Since Swanson was sworn-in anew while he was under an existing having been sworn-in in 2009, was the January 4th swearing in effective?  Does Stark County even have a legally sworn-in in sheriff?

Stark County Assistant Prosecutor Deborah Dawson was in attendance as Swanson was sworn-in on the 4th by sheriff department legal counsel Vivianne Whalen Duffrin.

One would think that Dawson looking on and Duffrin swearing-in and Commissioner Tom Bernabei (also an attorney and former long time Canton law director) holding the Good Book, that all the legal p's and  q's would have had to be in order.

So the SCPR, more or less, cited to the questioner.

Hmm?  The questioner was not satisfied.

Questioner's response:  Stark County prosecutor's office has been wrong a number of times on advice given in the recent past.

Hmm?

Okay.

Well, Mr. Prosecutor? What's the legal rationale for having Swanson sworn-in before his term expired?

Originally, The Report is told Swanson was a George Maier man (Massillon's safety director and former #2 in the Ohio State Highway Patrol).   He had commissioned Maier as a reserve deputy.

And Maier has been seen at area high school football games in a deputy's uniform.  One has to wonder whether or not he stores the deputy sheriff uniform on a mannequin right next to the mannequin (the SCPR is told) adorned with an Ohio State Highway Patrol uniform and which sits in his Massillon safety director office?

But Swanson himself raised the question last Friday in an interview with the SCPR of whether or not Maier was eligible by the criteria of Ohio Revised Code Section.

So being a reserve deputy is not a enough to qualify as sheriff?

Perhaps, Swanson is convinced that such is the case given the following unbelievable account.

Last Saturday morning at about 5:30 AM "interim?" Sheriff Timothy Swanson assembled his deputies for swearing-in.

But the sheriff was not content just do the swearing-in and let it go at that.

No, not Sheriff Tim.

He let loose with a bombshell of an announcement.

The recently promoted  (August, 2012?) to lieutenant (from sergeant) Louis (Lou) A. Darrow, Swanson reportedly told the rank-and-file, was going to be the new Stark County sheriff.

Stunned!!! were the assembled deputies, The Report is told.

Until he was promoted, the SCPR is told that he was basically road patrol man for a number of years.  He gets promoted and the next thing you know he is going to be sheriff?

He must be a first rate deputy because on February 2, 2010 he was recognized as Deputy of the Year at an annual Stark County safety forces breakfast conclave.

Media reports on his department history include that he:

• has been with the county sheriff's department since 1987,
• started as a corrections offices, but since
• has worked in the civil and operations divisions, and
• has done investigations
• and, to repeat, was recently promoted to lieutenant

The whole scenario is interesting, no?

The Report has asked Swanson to confirm his reported statements on Darrow.  However, the SCPR's source in the judgment of yours truly is impeccable.

So far, no response from Swanson.

So where does leave all the political wheeling and dealing as to whom is going to be Stark County's next sheriff, and maybe even, pending Ferrero letting us know, who is our current sheriff?

With all due respect to the sheriff, the SCPR finds it hard to believe that he can convince the Stark County Dems to appoint Darrow.

Maybe the sheriff is more powerful in the backrooms of the Stark County Democratic Party than yours truly has previously thought?

Elevating Darrow may be Swanson's wish, but can he make it stick?

The Report's thinking?

Probably not.

The focus will likely continue to be on either Maier or Tom Ream (Canton's safety director).

It has been suggested to The Report that the dearth of news of who will succeed McDonald could be because Maier is scrambling to find out whether or not he can be appointed sheriff without meeting statutory requirements and given a grace period to meet those requirements.

Now tell me, is this really wild stuff or is this really wild stuff?

And the SCPR thinks this may be just the beginning of the backroom wheeling and dealing!

(VIDEOS: SWANSON SWEARING-IN, COM'RS REGULA, BERNABEI & CREIGHTON, CITIZEN LOY REACT) WILL SHERIFF SWANSON DETERMINE WHO HIS SUCCESSOR IS? SEE McDONALD'S LETTER

 

 
 UPDATE:  01/05/2013 AT 5:15 PM

The Stark County commissioners were thankful Friday that they had someone to turn to on learning that Sheriff-elect Mike McDonald is unable - for health reasons (Swanson:  "it's a completely new battle that he [McDonald] is into now") - to assume office at 12.01 AM on January 7th.

Not just anyone could have been selected by the commissioners inasmuch as official duties cannot be assumed by an elected county official until and unless a bond is issued.

SCPR readers will recall the stand-off between former Stark County treasurer Gary D. Zeigler and Stark County auditor Alan Harold in 2011 (immediately after the Ohio Supreme Court restored Zeigler to office) whereby Harold refused to pay Zeigler and refused to authorize Zeigler to use the county's computer system unless and until he obtained a bond.

No such problem with Swanson.

Inasmuch as he is currently bonded as the sitting county sheriff, it was a mere formality for Tim Swanson to qualify for a newly issued bond to cover the up to 45 days from January 4th on that he will continue to serve as sheriff.

The first order of business for the commissioners was to reluctantly accept the letter of Mike McDonald stating that he was unable to take office.



Immediately prior to being sworn-in, Sheriff Swanson had these comments:



Commissioners accepted McDonald's declination of accepting office and Swanson was immediately sworn in by his legal counsel Vivianne Whalen-Duffrin:



After the swearing-in, the SCPR and other area media conducted a press conference with Swanson:



The SCPR captured reactions to the McDonald situation from Alliance area resident Derrick Loy (former president of the Alliance Area Democratic Club) and Commissioner Richard Regula.



Minutes after the press conference, the SCPR moved outside the commissioners' meeting room with him.  Off-camera,  he shared some interesting additional tidbits, including revelations:

• that he does have a preference who the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee names as his successor and that he will make that name known in due course and try to convince the committee to adopt his choice,
• making it pretty clear that the choice would not be Mike McDonald's November Republican opponent Larry Dordea (who has told The Report he is likely to apply) inasmuch as he (Swanson) deemed Dordea's campaign against him in 2008 to have been an unexpectedly nasty one and that he felt Dordea had stabbed him in the back and had lied to him in telling him that he (Dordea) would not be running against him,
• Swanson recalled how he helped Dordea during his tenure as Alliance Chief of Police (LINK) clean up policing in The Carnation City and had facilitated Dordea's success in the city by hooking him up with leading Alliance area Democrats,
•  

• Note:  This turn in Swanson's take on Dordea is surprising to the SCPR.  During the 2008 campaign Swanson only had neutral to positive assessments of Dordea. The Report's question of Swanson about the contradiction was ignored.
•  
• indicating that his long time chief deputy Rick Perez would not be the choice in saying that Perez would be proceeding with his retirement from the sheriff's department a midnight on the 6th,and
• that he could be supportive of Massillon safety-service director George T. Maier for sheriff, but he is not certain that Maier has kept his policing qualifications current.  However, Swanson did say that he had had difficulties with Maier's brother (Johnnie) in the ebb and flow of Stark County Democratic Party politics over the years.

The SCPR believes that Swanson indeed has enough clout within the Stark County Democratic Party to pull off having the selection committee honor his wishes as to whom succeeds him.

Swanson shared with the press that he has been hanging around the sheriff's department since 1971 as a reserve deputy and stayed on through Papadopulos, Berens (a Republican), Stern and Umpleby and that he plans on returning to reserve status once his extra stint as sheriff is concluded.

The sheriff seemed to be shaken by the necessity of stepping in to help out in the unfortunate circumstances of Chief Deputy McDonald's career ending illness.

He reviewed with the media of how he experienced a similar trauma in transition in office when his predecessor Bruch Umpleby died suddenly and unexpectedly in July, 1999.  Only a week before his death, Swanson told the press, Umpley pulled him into his office to tell Tim that he would not be running for reelection and that Swanson was his choice to succeed him.

He went on to describe how former fellow deputy sheriff Steve Zerby (who had run against Bruce Umpleby in 1996 and who went on to co-found the Jackson Police Department in the late 1990s) challenged him in the 2000 Democratic Party primary (Swanson having been appointed to succeed Umpleby by the John Ferrreo-led party) and that he (Swanson) had survived because of the support that he had from Umpleby and Umpleby predecessor Babe Stern.

The SCPR has put together a video of Commissioners Bernabei, Creighton and Regula as to what they had to say about the devastating circumstances of McDonald not being able to take office and the need of having Sheriff Swanson stay on for a bit longer.

Within the next week or so it will become clearer who will be the next sheriff of Stark County.

A name that could be one to pay attention to could be that of Canton safety director Tom Ream.  His big liability though is his close association with Mayor Healy.  In the discussion with Swanson on Friday, he made it clear that he is not a big fan of Hizzhoner.

When, in November of 2011, McDonald put his pursuit of being sheriff in doubt, the SCPR asked Ream whether or not he was interested in stepping in.  He indicated that while he was honored that he had been asked to consider pursuing the Democratic nomination that he had determined that he was not interested at that time.

And what about David Zink, the under suspension police chief of Jackson?

Swanson expressed his amazement at the January 2nd gathering of the Jackson FOP (police union) regarding the future of Chief Zink at which the members were considering a "no-confidence" vote.  While the vote was never taken, it appeared to Swanson that the contemplation of such in and of itself was a sign that Zink is not a viable candidate to become McDonald's successor.

It could be that the Jackson trustees have not adequately disposed of the Zink matter to the satisfaction of some township residents.  Swanson suggested that the January 8th meeting of the trustees may produce an onslaught of irate Jacksonians who want more action taken against Zink.

The bottom line on the McDonald succession question appears to the SCPR to be that the recipient of the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee selection could well be determined on the say-so of Swanson.

But for Umpleby and Stern, Tim Swanson may never have been the Stark County sheriff.

Is history about to repeat itself?

Will McDonald's successor be saying:   "But for Tim Swanson's endorsement,
I may never have been Stark County sheriff."

Stay tuned, the next 45 days could be full of political excitement and intrigue!

(VIDEO: SEE McDONALD SUPPORT DEMS SELECTION OF ZUMBAR) DEMS SHOULD APPOINT REPUBLICAN & FORMER ALLIANCE POLICE CHIEF LARRY DORDEA SHERIFF, BUT THE MORE LIKELY CHOICE IS MASSILLON SAFETY-SERVICE DIRECTOR GEORGE T. MAIER?

It was a little over a year ago (October 31, 2011) that Stark County Democratic Party chairman Randy Gonzalez did what had to be the most odious political duty that he has ever had to do in his entire political life:  appoint Republican Alex Zumbar as Stark County treasurer.

Reason?

The public was demanding it!

Very rarely does the public get that intensely involved in who the politicos appoint to office.

But finding a successor to the resigned/retired Stark County treasurer Gary D. Zeigler (as a consequence of controversy in the management of operations of the treasury during much of Zeigler's years in office [that is, in hindsight]) had turned into a political "hot potato."

Gonzalez was determined not to be a chairman who ushered in the demise of countywide elected Democrats by doing the politically correct thing (from the Democratic perspective) and appointing a Democrat.

And there were those who argued that he do exactly that.  One being Canton mayor William J. Healy, II and another Canton City Council president Allen Schulman.

It is widely believed that Gonzalez was targeted by some within the party for ouster.  

Well, that did not happen.

It is somewhat ironic that the staunchest supporter of Gonzalez holding his political nose and appointing Republican Alex Zumbar was none other than Sheriff-elect Mike McDonald.

See the following video to refresh yourself at the vehemence of McDonald's support of Gonzalez.



Now it is McDonald's replacement that is in question.

Yesterday, sitting Stark County Sheriff Tim Swanson announced that McDonald would not be taking office.

As put by the North Canton Patch's Morgan Day:

Michael A. McDonald, 54, announced today that he is not medically fit to take office as he continues to battle esophageal cancer ... .

Swanson likely will remain as interim sheriff, pending the selection within 45 days of the interim selection a successor to McDonald.  Stark County commissioners will meet at 1:00 PM today to consider the appointment of an interim.

McDonald came forth in November, 2011 and revealed to the media that he had a case of esophageal cancer.

On numerous occasions since McDonald revealed that he had cancer, the SCPR inquired of him as to whether or not he was up to the rigors of running for office and, if elected, serving.

In an August 16th blog, The Report listed the following McDonald response to questions about his health:

• "I'm feeling good, I'm coming to work and I'm out campaigning,"
• It's no secret that he has esophageal cancer and that he shared that information with the Rep so that he could take advantage of the opportunity to educate the public about what the potential consequences could be if acid reflux goes untreated,
• But that he does not have serious problems with the cancer presently,
• In no way, shape or form does the cancer interfere with his doing his job or campaigning nor will it have any affect on his ability to serve as sheriff, if elected.

That was a little over four months ago.

So why was The Report so fastidious on the McDonald health issue?

From the August 16th blog:

The SCPR's point of view is that he needs to keep the public appraised of his medical condition right up through the election.  For, God forbid, if his health was to take a turn for the worse and it turns out that it is knowable prior to the election that he likely will be unable to serve; the Stark County voting public is entitled to know so that voters can choose between the possibility they will be voting for a situation that the Stark County Democratic Central Committee will be picking the next Stark County sheriff or the alternative Republican Larry Dordea.

McDonald never waivered with The Report on his health condition.

It got to the point that on one occasion when yours truly asked questions of McDonald, he anticipated that they were on his health (which they were not) and interjected that his health was just fine.

So now on January 3, 2013 we get news that his health is such that his doctor says he should not take office as sheriff.

What Stark Countians now have to believe is that the turn in McDonald's health to the point of being unable to serve took place in the space of November 1, 2012 through January 3, 2013.

The SCPR understands that McDonald and others close to him (i.e. politically close, who McDonald undoubtedly confided to) needed to be in denial for personal pyschological reasons.

But The Report has been told and believes that Stark Dem officials were surveying Stark County police communities looking for possible candidates to step in at the last moment, if need be, to run in McDonald's place.  One such target is believed to have been Louisville police chief Andrew Turkowski. 

Area media is reporting that Stark County Democratic Party chairman Randy Gonzalez is saying that that yesterday's announcement is a big surprise to him.

Such could actually be the case.  But who will believe it?

The question of what he knew and when he knew it is likely one Gonzalez cannot win from the public perspective.

If it turns out that he has known for some time of even a likelihood (not necessarily a certainty) that McDonald was in no condition to serve and did not insist that such be shared with the Stark County voting public, then it will likely look to Stark voters that he was protecting the Stark Democratic Party's interest.

To repeat, as pointed out above; it could be that he did not know.  But in this cynical age of politics very few, if any, are likely to believe him.

So what to do?

The SCPR thinks the thing to do is for him to lead the Stark County Democratic Party (once again) to appoint a Republican:   Larry Dordea, who recently concluded a unsuccessful campaign against McDonald.

Throughout the campaign, the SCPR took the position that both McDonald and Dordea were eminently qualified to be sheriff.  Stark Countians would be in for some good sheriffing, no matter which of the two won.

Dordea ran a relatively close race against McDonald receiving some 82,000 votes after having lost in a respectable showing to Sheriff Swanson in 2008.

He served effectively as the chief of the Alliance Police Department in the early 2000s and is doing a sterling job a chief in Hartville presently.

But he is a Republican.

For most Stark Countians, party i.d. is irrelevant.

However, it would take a superhuman act for Gonzalez to lead the Dems central committee down that road a second time.

One way for that to happen is for McDonald to weigh-in.

If he were to ask the Dems to appoint Dordea; how could they refuse?

The SCPR does not expect that there is any way that Dordea will be selected either because it comes out that the Dems knew that it was likely McDonald would not be able to serve or that McDonald will ask them to do so.

The Dems are still smarting from losing the county treasurer and auditor offices (they believe, through no fault of their own) in 2010 and are in no mood to lose the sheriff's office, to boot.

At the county level, once a political party loses an office; it is likely that it will remain lost to that party for quite a number of years.

Who thinks that the Republicans, now that they are in charge,  are going to lose control of the auditor and treasurer's office any time soon?

So there is little doubt that were Dordea to be selected, he and perhaps successor sheriffs likely would ensure continuing Republican control of the office for years to come.

The SCPR is hearing from both Democratic and Republican sources that the Democrats are being leaned upon to select Massillon Safety-Service Director George Maier.

If he wants the job, a politically initiated person would have to think that the job is his for the taking.  His brother is Johnnie A. Maier, Jr who formerly has served as chairman of the Stark County Democratic Party and is currently Massillon clerk of courts.

Maier became the second in command in the Ohio Highway Patrol when Democrat Ted Strickland became governor.

Was it merely coincidental that at-the-time Stark County Democratic Party chairman Johnnie A. Maier, Jr (JAM) happened to have been the first Democratic Party chairman in all of Ohio to have endorsed Strickland in a then contested Democratic primary?

Can anyone imagine that Johnnie will not be driven to make brother George Stark County's top cop?

The Maier family has been prominent in Massillon city policing going all the back to when Johnnie's/George's father served as a Massillon policemen.  Brother Chuck (now a security official with Massillon city schools) has been a policeman and George has two sons Johnnie (Ohio Highway Patrol) and Michael (Massillon police) who, according to The Report's information are currently in policing.

George is now the political appointee of Massillon mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry as safety-service director in Tigerland.

Notwithstanding Maier's policling background and obvious Stark County-based political clout, in the opinion of the SCPR, he would be a poor choice for all of Stark County.

Not because he lacks solid policing credentials (LINK), but because of temperament issues.  One only have ask Lawrence Township trustee Michael Stevens, (formerly in the inner circle of the JAM/Massillon political machine),  a former Cicchinelli administration service department supervisor.

The Report wrote a blog in March, 2012 (LINK) which gives particulars as to why Stark Countians should be wary of having Maier as the county's top cop.

The best case scenario for non-political Stark Countinans would be for Dordea to get the job.

But do not hold your breath.

Politics will, in this instance, most surely will prevail.

Stark's Republicans blew it big time when they would not recommend (one of three) the obviously qualified Democrat Chryssa Hartnett (a prosecutor in John Ferrero's office) for consideration by Governor John Kasich in replacing Stark County Court Common Please judge Charles Brown on his retirement.

Notwithstanding that the Democrats selected Zumbar reluctantly, they did do the right thing for Stark County political and governmental stability.

But do not expect a repeat.

Gonzalez and the Stark Democratic Central Committee would be the laughing stock of politicos throughout Ohio if they were to for a second time in a little over a year to do the best thing for for the Stark County community on a call for non-partisanship. 

Political realities with both Stark County political parties and indeed all political party organizations is to feather their own nests and not to look out for the well-being of the citizenry.

Look for a Democrat to become the next Stark County sheriff.

And do not be surprised if it turns out to be George T. Maier.

There are better Democratic choices if Dordea is not to be the selection.

One would be Turkowski of Louisville.  As the well-respected leader of the Stark County Police Chiefs Association, Turkowski was a leading voice in aiding the Stark County commissioners to avoid a county financial disaster in passing a 0.5% sales tax increase in November, 2011.

There has been some talk that Jackson police chief David Zink would be a likely replacement for McDonald inasmuch as he is chief of one of Stark County's largest police districts.  Moreover, he took out petitions to run against McDonald in the March, 2012 primary.

But it appears that Zink has torpedoed himself.

Recently, according to an area media report, Jackson trustees initiated an investigation of Zink (hiring private legal counsel) on allegations, to wit:

... that Zink violated the township’s harassment policy by trying to have a physical or dating relationship during the last five years with a female police department employee whom he supervises. The attempts included a kiss, repeated offers to travel out of town together for training, uninvited visits to her home and an uninvited visit to her hotel while she was away at training two hours away from Stark County.

...

According to [the private legal counsel Hill's] report, Zink denied all of the allegations when interviewed by Hill. But Hill noted that he was able to corroborate most of the allegations by a third party or through documents and that Zink had not been persuasive in denying the allegations. He said the chief hesitated when asked about an incident in 2007, then read from a prepared written statement to describe his version of the events. At another point in the interview, Hill said Zink had become “flustered and ambiguous” in addressing the allegations.

As a consequence of the investigation, Zink was suspended without pay for a month.

So it would seem that Jackson officials (which includes Gonzalez who is a former Jackson trustee currently the elected fiscal officer), will be preoccupied with dealing with the spill out from their actions vis-a-vis the allegations.

Moreover, it is not likely that Gonzalez and the Dems would want to have to defend a Party choice of Zink to replace McDonald.

However, that is not to say that politics rather than getting Stark County's very best "on the overall merits" law enforcement official in place as McDonald's replacement will be the prime factor in the selection process.

Remember that political parties are not about doing what is best for everyday citizens unless circumstances (e.g. Zeigler/Zumbar) give them no other choice.

It appears to the SCPR that Stark's organized Democrats are in the catbird's seat in terms of being free (in terms of Stark Republicans not considering Democrats for selection) to make a politics-based choice and therefore Stark County is unlikely to get the county's very best policemen as Stark County's top cop.

LOOKING At THE NUMBERS IN THE DORDEA/McDONALD RACE FOR SHERIFF

The SCPR has already written (LINK) about reasons why former Alliance Chief of Police Larry Dordea lost to Chief Deputy Sheriff Mike McDonald in their November 6th race.

But it still was somewhat startling to see the detailed numbers (published yesterday by the Stark County Board of Elections) which document the outcome of the race.  Especially in light of the fact that Dordea has run countywide before, losing in a very respectable showing to Sheriff Tim Swanson in 2008.

Yesterday's numbers show that McDonald actually picked up 1,249 votes of some 4,285 provisional ballots that are reflected in yesterday's count.  Originally, it was said by BOE officials that some 5,900 provisional remained to be counted and so there appeared to be a slim hope that Dordea (behind by 5,730 in the unofficial count) might astound everybody and get a vast majority of the provisions.

Well, as it turns out, such was not a possibility inasmuch as only 4,285 provisionals qualified for the sheriff race recount.

Three things stand out to The Report about the McDonald victory.

First, the inability of Dordea to pile up a large plurality over McDonald in Alliance.

Only a 298 vote margin for a man who was police chief in Alliance for about eight years and who is in his second term as councilman-at-large?

All one had to do on election night was to look at the Alliance differential to know that Dordea was not going to win countywide.

Second, and by contrast, how McDonald did in his home area:  the Louisville/Nimishillen Township area.

The way to make the hugely significant point of McDonald's home turf margin of victory is to compare it to the Smuckler/Regula race numbers for county commissioner (the only other Stark County race other than the presidential race that was competitive).

Regula out-polled fellow Republican Dordea by 400 votes in Louisville and 601 in Nimishillen Township and looking at the Regula numbers the turnaround results are astounding:  a Regula victory in the face of a Dordea loss in both communities to the tune of a 2,235 vote turnaround.

Thirdly, looking at Dordea's numbers in the Republican strongholds of Jackson and Lake Townships, while strong for Dordea, pale in comparison in what Democrat McDonald was able to do in vote margin victories in the staunchly Democratic cities of Canton and Massillon.

And McDonald won in the Republican/Democratic battleground area of Stark County (Plain Township) by 570 votes.

To win, Dordea had approximate (i.e. come closer) to how former Stark County commissioner Richard Regula ran in his former Canton City Councilman Bill Smuckler.

Or perhaps matching up better with Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's?

Mike McDonald actually out-polled Stark County presidential winner Barack Obama by upwards of 3 percentage points.  Impressive, no?

In recent decades, Democrats have dominated control of the Stark County sheriff's department.  Only in 1981 - 1984 (Robert Berens) have the Republicans had a smell at running Stark County's top law enforcement agency.

With this loss, it could be decades more that the Republicans will be shut off from putting their law enforcement philosophies to work out on Atlantic Boulevard!

ELECTION ANALYSIS: (SHERIFF RACE) POLICE/FIRE UNIONS PUT McDONALD OVER THE TOP?

Anytime unions figure into an election in a committed, big-time way, Republicans usually do not fare too well.

The SCPR recalls a bygone conversation with an East Central Building and Construction Trades official about an entreaty by a leading Stark County Republican official (at the time) to the union that it consider a more balanced alignment  between Democrats and Republicans as to whom unions put "boots on the ground" for and "money in the pockets" of in terms of political support.

Well, such has never happened.  Stark County unions have been the captive of Democratic candidates.  And in closely contested races, it has proved more often than not to be a difference maker.

Such appears to the SCPR to have been the case in the contest between Republican Larry Dordea and Democrat Mike McDonald as to whom among the two was going be be elected this past November 6th as Stark County sheriff.

The one part of union movement that Republicans can have some success with are the fire, police and teachers unions.

That is until Senate Bill 5 (State Issue #2 - November, 2011 election) and its perceived "anti-public-worker" stance.

Now, it appears, that opportunity may be evaporating.

In the case of the Stark County sheriff face off, The Report believes that Chief Deputy Sheriff Mike McDonald was able to capture the overwhelming allegiance of local fire and police unions and therefore get the edge over Dordea.

To be sure, other arguments can be/have been made as to the reasons why McDonald defeated Dordea.  The SCPR deals with these "other" factors in a prior blog. And there are likely a number of them that contributed in a significant way.

However, It became apparent to the SCPR in conversations with both Dordea and McDonald that the "police/fire endorsement" thing was a "really" big thing with the two candidates.  And in the judgment of The Report, for good reason. 

Why so?

Because such endorsements are way more powerful and effective than, let's say, newspaper endorsements.

In fact, in the Dordea/McDonald match up, The Repository endorsed Dordea.

And Dordea tried to capitalize on it in campaign literature, but there is not any capital to be had from newspaper endorsements these days.

The Rep also endorsed Democrat Bill Smuckler over Republican Richard Regula in their competitive commissioners race.  The winner?  Regula.

Moreover, Smuckler has never been a favorite of the Stark County union movement.  That William J. Healy, II was able to capture the loyalty of Stark's unions was likely a huge difference maker in their mayoralty competition back in the May, 2011 Democratic primary.

Smuckler was clearly organized labor's choice over Regula, but not with the vim, vigor and vitality necessary to make a candidate a winner.

There are endorsements and then there are endorsements.

A typical voter, no matter how diligent, has a difficult time knowing who is the better qualified in certain types of election contests:  judges, prosecutors and sheriffs come to mind as prime examples.

So what are these voters to do?

In the case of sheriff candidates, everybody knows a cop.

Answer:  ask your acquaintance, friend or relative who is a cop for a recommendation.

That is why the fire/police endorsements were such a crucial matter to Dordea and McDonald.

More importantly than the campaign finance factor, is "boots on the ground."

A policeman or Stark County sheriff deputy telling a voter his/her choice for sheriff played large in the McDonald/Dordea race.

In the end, the SCPR believes that the fire and police endorsements (the McDonald advantage, if you will) made Chief Deputy Sheriff Mike McDonald - Sheriff MIke McDonald.

2012 GENERAL ELECTION LESSONS: (1) CANTON-BASED POLITICIANS CANNOT WIN COUNTYWIDE WITHOUT DIVINE INTERVENTION (SMUCKLER) & BEWARE WHO ADVISES YOUR CAMPAIGN (DORDEA)?

The Stark County Political Report's take-away from last night's election from a local politics standpoint is twofold:

1. Confirmation that Canton-based politicians cannot win countywide, no matter how good of a campaign they run (e.g. the Smuckler/Regula commissioner match up), and
2. One should be very careful as to whom they take campaign advice from (e.g. the Dordea/McDonald sheriff race)

First, Smuckler versus Regula for Stark County commissioner.

Earlier this year, Stark County Commissioner Pete Ferguson decided not to run for re-election.

Long time Canton politician Bill Smuckler (as a Canton councilman) ultimately became the standard bearer for Stark's organized Democrats to succeed Ferguson.

Former Commissioner Richard Regula (who served from 2003 through 2006 and son of former long time congressman Ralph Regula [the 16th when it included all of Stark County), became the Republican candidate.

What Smuckler knew and failed to overcome is that there appears to be an antagonism between non-Cantonian voters and Canton-based politicians.

Witness the strong likelihood that former Canton Democratic councilman, law director and Healy administration chief of staff Thomas Bernabei would not have been elected in his candidacy for commissioner in November, 2010 had an independent and conservative candidate not been in the race. The Report believes that the independent drained off votes from Republican candidate and Jackson trustee James N. Walters and thereby was critical to Bernabei's election.

Ironically, Walters who figures into the Dordea/McDonald sheriff contest as Dordea's campaign manager which the SCPR analyzes below.

The Report followed Smuckler's campaign closely and is convinced that he ran very hard.

However, he did not have a divine-esque intervention type factor going for him that Bernabei had going for himself and therefore The Report was skeptical that he could win.

The only hope for Smuckler was that perhaps this being a presidential year and Democrats having a tendency to come out in greater numbers in presidential years, he could win especially if the Democratic presidential candidate (i.e. Obama) runs strong.

Obama not only did not run strong in Stark, the final numbers (when the provisional ballots are counted in two weeks) will probably show that he loses the county.

So there were no Obama coattails for Smuckler to latch on to.

Moral of the story?  A Canton-based politician cannot win countywide given the current Stark County political climate without a stoke of good luck.

Second, Dordea versus McDonald for Stark County sheriff.

Another case of an incumbent deciding not to run for reelection; namely, Sheriff Tim Swanson.

Dordea had run against Swanson in 2008 and made a respectable showing.

As it turns out, it appeared that Dordea would be the odds on favorite to defeat Swanson's hand picked candidate Chief Deputy MIke McDonald which according to sources what actually Swanson's third choice.

And the campaign started out well enough for Dordea.

There was a general consensus among a number of Stark County political observers that both candidates were well qualified and that it would be a highly competitive race but conducted at a high level.

The turning point in the campaign terms of becoming vitriolic may well have come a number of weeks ago when the Dordea  campaign, apparently acting on the advice of his campaign manager Walters, went off on a negative track in alleging:

• that McDonald was receiving longevity/vacation pay in contravention of Ohio law,
• that he was insensitive to the death of a young lady who had just been released from the Stark County Jail (McDonald is chief of the jail division of the sheriff's department) due to being hit by a motor vehicle as she walked along the busy four lane highway in front of the jail,
• that Swanson in endorsing McDonald, and further that Swanson has a history of supporting former Stark County Treasurer Gary Zeigler, somehow connects McDonald to Zeigler,
• the point?
• a not too subtle effort to bring out the political memories of the Stark County electorate, large numbers of whom undoubtedly remain upset with the way Zeigler managed the Stark treasury insofar as sufficient infrastructure, policy, and practices are seen by the public as having not been in place so as to have prevented his former chief deputy Vince Frustaci from having stolen upwards of $3 million of Stark County taxpayer money.

The SCPR believes that what appears to be Walters inspired advice to not have been a wise course for Dordea to follow.

While McDonald did his own bit of negative campaigning (e.g. "Dordea is not qualified to be sheriff," and "he (Dordea) is a politician, but I am not,"  it seems to The Report that it was mostly reactive to allegations of the Walters-led Dordea campaign and does not appear to have the same stridency about it.

A supporter of McDonald's (who says he had no official role in the campaign and confirmed by McDonald) did go after Dordea in a "letter to the editor" making certain allegations of four facts (LINK).

There may be a remote chance in the counting of provisional ballots that Dordea could end up being the winner.  It will depend on how many of those ballots there are.

But if not, could it be that the well-respected Larry Dordea ends up having lost because he took some ill-advised campaign strategy advice?

Did he get counterproductive advice that cost him the election?

UPDATE: (11/06/2012-3:32 PM) HAS NATE SILVER OF THE 538 BLOG GOTTEN IT RIGHT? OBAMA HAS 90.9% CHANCE OF BEING REELECTED. ALSO, A 91% CHANCE TO WIN OHIO. WILL HE WIN STARK AND HELP McDONALD (SHERIFF) & SMUCKLER (COMMISSIONER) WITH THE "COATTAILS EFFECT?"

Better than predicting today's election result is to deal with "probabilities" a la Nate Silver (LINK) of the 538 political blog located on the NY Times website.

The SCPR only pays attention to two organizations that deal with polling of elections.

The second in line is Charlie Cook's "Cook's Political Report.  But first in line is Nate Silver's 538 political blog.

In the 2008 presidential election, Silver corrected called the probabilities for Obama in 49 of 50 states.

This year he is at 90.9% in terms of "probability" that President Obama will be reelected.

 

Almost matched by his "forecast" (note:  not a prediction) at the national level is his "probability" (91.8%:  up from the 87% forecast just yesterday) that Obama wins Ohio.

And he has Democrat Sherrod Brown "probably" defeating Republican Josh Mandel.  And a high "probability" indeed:  96%.

As reported by the SCPR on Friday, the Healy-Abrams (Democrat)/Gibbs (Republican incumbent) race is thought to be safe for Gibbs.

However, the Renacci (Republican incumbent -16th) and Sutton (Democrat incumbent - 13th) race, who are squaring off against one another in the "new 16th" congressional district because of decennial constitutionally required redistricting because Ohio's loss of population results in Ohio losing two congressional seats, is truly "too close to call, meaning that the probabilities are 50/50 across the district.

The SCPR does believe that Renacci will win in Stark.

Why?

Because he and Betty Sutton only has Jackson Township, Lawrence Township (Canal Fulton) and part of Lake Township to deal with.  All of these parts of Stark County are known to be Republican indexed and therefore The Report believes he will best Sutton in the Stark County part of the district.

And he likely wins in Wayne County and the parts of Medina County in the 16th.

But it may be a different story over the rest of the district, especially in the northern and northwest parts of the newly configured district.

If Obama has polls well in the 16th overall, then he might well pull Sutton through.

When Statehouse Republicans (including Marlboro's Christina Hagan [the 50th House District] and Plain's Scott Oelslager [the 29th Senate District]) did their gerrymandering redistricting (but not Kirk Schuring who is running in the "new" 48th), they helped carve Stark up into three congressional districts:  the 7th (Bob Gibbs/Joyce Healy-Abrams}, the 13th (Tim Ryan/Marisha Agana) and, of course, the 16th (Jim Renacci/Betty Sutton).

Christina Hagan, in particular, said the slicing and dicing of Stark County was a good thing when it happened.

In her warped and highly partisan way of thinking.  Former 16th District congressman Ralph Regula takes great exception to her as did Schuring.

Ryan will win easily in the 13th over Agana.

But how about local to Stark County contested races?

The SCPR sees that there are only two contests that could go either way.

The commissioners face off between former Stark County commissioner and Republican Richard Regula and former Canton councilman and Democrat Bill Smuckler is one such race.

The other is the sheriff's match up of Republican Larry Dordea and Chief Deputy Sheriff Mike McDonald (a Democrat).

Who is likely to win in these two races?

In the opinion of the SCPR, it depends on whether or not President Obama wins Stark County, and, if so, by how much.  A comfortable Obama win (let's say five percentage points, which The Report thinks is unlikely) would likely mean Smuckler and McDonald wins in a high degree of Silver's "probability."

Any thing less that five percent, it could mean that we will not know on election night which of the candidates for commissioner and sheriff have won.

If Romney wins in Stark, then the SCPR thinks there is a high probability that Regula and Dordea win.

There you have it folks.

Have a great election day and BE SURE TO VOTE!

SHERIFF RACE: "FIGHT TO THE FINISH!"

What started off as a "Marquess de Queensbury rules," gentlemen-esque campaign has gone over the line and turned into a knock down, drag out "Fight to the Finish!"

To review recent history of this race and what appears to be the last round of the fight, a few days ago (LINK), Democratic sheriff candidate Mike McDonald told the SCPR:

"I do not beleve [Larry Dordea] is qualifed to be the sheriff, I don't think he knows what he is talking about."

And, to boot, he added in a flyer he sent out at the end of last week:

Hmm?

Dordea is a politician but "candidate" McDonald is not?

On Friday last, yours truly received a highly inflammatory campaign mailer from Republican candidate Larry Dordea's  campaign, to wit:

and

Hmm?

Who believes that Mike McDonald was (as implied) insensitive to the lady's death?

Swanson endorses McDonald and that Swanson has a history of supporting former Stark County Treasurer Gary Zeigler somehow connects McDonald to Zeigler?

Tortured and convoluted logic, no?

Such is a not too subtle effort to bring out the political memories of the Stark County electorate, large numbers of whom undoubtedly remain upset with the way Zeigler managed the Stark treasury insofar as sufficient infrastructure, policy, and practices are seen by the public as having not been in place so as to have prevented his former chief deputy Vince Frustaci from having stolen upwards of $3 million of Stark County taxpayer money.

So the rough stuff is flowering unabated in the final days of the campaign.

All the political vitriol began to surface with the Dordea's forces (i.e. Dordea campaign manager and Jackson trustee James Walters), complaining/alleging to county Auditor Alan Harold that McDonald and his fellow chief deputy Rick Perez have been/are being overpaid on longevity/vacation pay when they retired/rehired within the sheriff's department.

Quite a fight, no?

On top of what the candidates themselves have said, their supporters have weighed in also.

Julie Jakmides (Republican Alliance councilwoman) for Dodea and Derrick Loy (president of Alliance Area Democratic Club) for McDonald.

The SCPR received an e-mail from Mister Loy (who sent a copy of a letter to the editor alleging certain facts about Dordea LINK) denying that he is a "surrogate" of McDonald's (as is the opinion of the SCPR in a de facto sense), to wit:

I am not involved in Deputy McDonald's campaign any more than I am with Sherrod Brown's campaign. I am not on Deputy McDonald's committee, I have not knocked a single door or made a single telephone call for Deputy McDonald's campaign. I do not speak for or represent the McDonald campaign in any fashion, including as a surrogate as you've referred to me.

The SCPR has never said that Loy has an "official" role in the McDonald campaign.  The use of the word "surrogate" is intended in a nuanced sense.  That is to say, in the opinion of yours truly, Loy's effort has the effect of what a representative  (i.e. surrogate) of a campaign does for a candidate.

Whatever!

The Report always gives subjects of SCPR blogs an opportunity to respond when there is disagreement.

The Report will not accept/agree with any implication that Loy is somehow a disinterested citizen whose only concern is that Stark County get a quality Stark County top cop elected in Tuesday's election, to wit:

I didn't create the public records, newspaper articles, and facts, they are what they are. Information for interested citizens and voters to consider as they evaluate candidates for public office. Some people choose to deflect from the facts when the facts are not in their favor.

Thanking you for the opportunity to clarify and expand upon the items in my previous communications with you.

 Finally, this from Loy's e-mail:

The information provided to me by the City of Alliance as a result of my initial request for Alliance Police Department payroll records didn't clearly distinguish between base wage and overtime monies paid. 

So I am providing you the message below, which contains accurate Alliance City information that Mr. Knowles provided me yesterday in response to my recent request for two particular items of importance. 

Also shown is Mr. Dordea's former and current campaign treasurer's brother's [Andrew Zumbar, brother of Dordea campaign treasurer and Stark County Treasurer Alex Zumbar who is running for election as treasurer], wage prior to Dordea sponsoring and voting to approve the amendment to Alliance City Ordinance 101-11. 

The amended ordinance raised the Law Director's wage from $31,961.31 to $45,920 beginning January 1, 2012. Those figures reflect an increase of $13,958.69 annually. 

This significant increase to one particular employee of the City while the City's hardworking rank-and-file employees take pay freezes and other Alliance elected officials receiving a 3% pay increase. 

Mr. Dordea may not take me serious, but the tax-paying citizens of Alliance and Stark County should be concerned and view this type of fiscally irresponsibility VERY SERIOUS! 

Can the people of Stark County afford Mr. Dordea!

Here is a copy of an e-mail sent by Alliance Auditor Kevin Knowles [who has written to the SCPR in support of Dordea] to a public records request by Loy.   (Note:  Dordea was not the Alliance police chief in 2008, so why does Loy include 2008 in the request?)

So the fight goes on right up to election day.

But the SCPR has never wavered.

Notwithstanding the heavy fighting going on between McDonald and Dordea and their supporters, The Report's take is that either would do a fine job as Stark County sheriff.

This race is definitely a "pick 'em."

But can there be any doubt that the victor will be tarnished by the turn from a model thoughtful campaign to a back alley "fight to the finish?"

SHERIFF RACE: CONTINUES TO DOWNWARD SPIRAL IN TERMS TONE McDONALD SURROGATE NOW CALLING DORDEA A HYPOCRITE AND A FLIP-FLOPPER! HMM? DORDEA RESPONDS ON LONGEVITY PAY ISSUE. WILL HE RESPOND FURTHER TO LOY'S CHARGES?

UPDATE:  11/03/2012 - 09:15 AM

From Derrick Loy:

I am not involved in Deputy McDonald's campaign any more than I am with Sherrod Brown's campaign.

I am not on Deputy McDonald's committee, I have not knocked a single door or made a single telephone call for Deputy McDonald's campaign.

I do not speak for or represent the McDonald campaign in any fashion, including as a surrogate as you've referred to me.

 From the SCPR:

The SCPR has never said that Loy has an "official" role in the McDonald campaign.  The use of the word "surrogate" is intended in a nuanced sense.  That is to say, in the opinion of yours truly Loy's effort has the effect of what a representative  (i.e. surrogate) of a campaign does for a candidate; hence a de facto surrogate.

Whatever!

The Report always gives subjects of SCPR blogs an opportunity to respond when there is disagreement with yours truly.

The Report does not accept/agree with any implication that Loy is somehow a disinterested citizen whose only concern is that Stark County get a quality Stark County top cop elected in Tuesday's election.

The SCPR does however appreciate Mr. Loy's participation in recent blogs on the Dordea/McDonald race.

ORIGINAL BLOG

The SCPR would never have "thunk it" just a month ago.

It appears that in the contest to determine who will succeed Timothy Swanson as sheriff, a once model campaign in terms of civility, has lept off the cliff into a morass of uncivility and negativity.

For some reason the Larry Dordea (Republican of Alliance) campaign has seized on the decision of Swanson to make an agreement with chief deputies Democrats Mike McDonald (Dordea's opponent) and Rick Perez to provide them with longevity pay of 4% of their base salaries of $88,000 which they carried over from their respective retirements (2008 and 2004) into being "new" employees with their rehire a day after their retirement.

What is at stake?

$30,000 plus in Stark County taxpayer funds, that's what.

Dordea's folks (which is pretty much to say his campaign manager James N. Walters [Jackson Township trustee and a Republican who some say is angling to get a job with a Dordea administration of the sheriff's department], wrote Republican Stark County auditor Alan Harold an e-mail (which the SCPR has obtained through a public records request) on October 25th making serious allegations that the payments made so far (i.e. the $30,000 plus) are contrary to law.

Here is that e-mail:

Thursday, October 25, 2012 9:46 AM

From: "Jamie Walters" <jamie.walters@gmail.com>
To: "Alan Harold" <acharold@co.stark.oh.us>

Dear Alan,

Several months ago I requested from your office payroll info for all employees of the Sheriff’s office, as well as the Auditor’s Active payroll report. Thank you for providing those public documents.

I also requested the bi-weekly county time card records including all paid work hours, sick/vacation, etc and any other compensated time for Chief Deputies McDonald and Perez.

You indicated that those records would need to be obtained from the Sheriff’s office.

I have requested those records from the Sheriff’s office, and while they have provided the leave balances for 2010, 2011 and 2012, they have not provided the reports themselves.

In addition, while the payroll reports your office have provided show the salary amounts for Chief Deputies McDonald and Perez, the Sheriff’s office has not provided me the documentation that actually sets the Chief Deputies salaries.

As such, I am requesting from your office the documentation and/or directive from the Sheriff’s office that sets the Chief Deputies salaries.

I am also requesting copies of both Chief Deputies McDonald and Perez payroll files.

In addition, it appears to me from the limited information the sheriff’s office has provided, that there was no break in service as required by state law when Chief Deputies McDonald and Perez retired and were rehired.

Are you aware of this?

Lastly, ORC section 124.181 (E)(2) states that retired employees are not to have prior service time credited for purposes of longevity pay.

It appears that both Chief Deputies McDonald and Perez are receiving longevity compensation contrary to state law. Are you aware of this?

Alan, you have been very helpful in responding to my requests, but it is frustrating to me that I have been directed back and forth between the Sheriff’s Department and your office.

Taxpayers shouldn’t have to be put in this position.

It is clear that a directive of some type had to have been issued by the Sheriff to instruct you to pay Chief Deputies McDonald and Perez the salaries they currently receive.

While your office has this directive, it most certainly should be at the Sheriff’s Department as well.

I simply cannot understand why the Sheriff’s Department refers me back to you, but I am making this final effort to fully exhaust all possibilities prior to taking any other action to secure these public records.

If you would prefer, I am available to come in to your office and review the entire employment files for both Chief Deputies. [sic]

I look forward to your prompt response.

Thank you.

On Walters' allegation that "[i]t  appears that both Chief Deputies McDonald and Perez are receiving longevity compensation contrary to state law," Auditor Harold referred the matter for a legal opinion on the allegation.

A couple of days ago, according to Harold, Assistant Prosecutor Deborah Dawson made a public statement that there was nothing illegal about the Swanson agreement with McDonald and Perez.  However, Harold tells the SCPR that an official written opinion has not been sent to him by Dawson.

Matter dropped?

Apparently, not so quick.

In a conversation with Harold yesterday, he indicated that Walters is holding on to his interpretation of the cited stated (Walters is not a lawyer) notwithstanding Dawson's interpretation.

In about six weeks McDonald and Perez are due payments under their agreements with Swanson, so the SCPR asked Harold whether or not he was going to make the payments as scheduled in light of the Walters inquiry.

As the SCPR understands Harold's response, it is as follows:

• "I haven't been asked to do anything yet on this topic, so I would say
  any decision is premature...,"
• that the question may become moot with the results of the election coming up next Tuesday, and
• that accordingly his "final" decision is in flux notwithstanding the Dawson statement.

The Report did e-mail candidate Dordea as to whether or not his campaign planned on making a formal request that Harold not make future payments to McDonald and Perez.

And this is his response:

From:  "larry dordea"  

To:  "Martin Olson"   

Martin,  

I still have not seen anything in writing that justifies a "new hire" to receive a 4% longevity payment or an extended vacation benefit.   

I also have no idea whether or not the other employees who have retired/rehired are treated to a similar benefit. 

Perhaps I will be enlightened before such a request would need to be made, we will have to wait and see.   
Larry Chief Lawrence A. DordeaHartville Police DepartmentAlliance City Councilman-at-LargeCandidate for Stark County Sheriff

Stay tuned folks.

It could be that Chief Dordea or his cohort Walters will force Harold to make "a final determination" as to whether not to pay the Swanson negotiated retire/rehire longevity pay and vacation benefits.

Dordea, interestingly, poses the question of "other [retire/rehire] employees" possibly getting longevity pay and benefits that Walters has questioned the legality of.

If he is on to something here, to The Report it means that the issue may have a life beyond the election no matter who wins.

Of course, if McDonald is elected, the issue does become moot unless a Stark County citizen (e.g. Dordea or Walters) contests the payment in writing.

On the other hand, if Dordea is elected and presumably McDonald and Perez are no longer working as sheriffs, there may still be two issues for Harold to deal with:

1. Are there any longevity/vacation payments due them, and, if so, won't Dordea be compelled to challenge them in light of the Walters e-mail?
2. As to possible "other employees," if they exist, will Dordea just "bite the bullet" and not object to their payment?  Probably not, again:  reference the Walters e-mail.

For his part, Mike McDonald thinks that Walters' e-mail is "much ado about nothing" (The Report's words, not McDonald's).  He says that Sheriff Swanson was free to make any agreement he wanted with himself and Perez and that's that.

So it appears that the next move is up to Dordea and his campaign manager James Walters.

So was this a political strategem which has backfired on them and will be abandoned to never be heard of again?

Hmm?

Well, there are only five days left (including today) until regular voting opens on Tuesday.

If there is a next step and the Dordea forces wish to try to impact Tuesday's election with the issue, it would seem that Dordea et al will have to make their move today or tomorrow, no?

From the McDonald perspective (through apparent campaign surrogate Derrick Loy [president of the Alliance Area Democratic Club]), there remains the issue of Dordea's use of an Alliance Police Department (APD) confiscated luxury Mercedes-Benz SUV when he was still chief of the APD.

In a blog posted several days ago, the SCPR published a Loy "letter to the editor" in which he made an assertion:

FACT: As the Alliance police chief, Larry Dordea helped himself to a luxury Mercedes-Benz SUV that his own police had confiscated. Mr. Dordea called it “My Company Car,” but the taxpayers were footing the bill for his gas guzzler.

Dordea's response:

Helped himself?  This vehicle was a trophy vehicle well known to a portion of the criminal element of Alliance.  The vehicle was lawfully seized and the option was available to sell it or to use it.  I, with the input from many, decided to keep the vehicle as a visible reminder to those who were flashing their illegally earned wealth with fancy cars and the like may be next.  Also as a seized asset, it would have been auctioned to the highest bidder and brought in only a portion of its retail value.  Given it was in good condition it would hold up for years as a non-emergency vehicle and reduce the departmental needs to buy a new car at the time. When we were deciding how to use the vehicle, the officers who worked the case that led to the seizure of the vehicle were offered the opportunity to utilize it as an “unmarked“ cruiser but they declined because they felt it would be targeted in the field and they pushed for me to use it.  I did so reluctantly at first but when I received feedback that the former owner had stated that seeing me drive his vehicle was like a slap in the face, I knew we were sending out a very strong crime deterrent message.  Additionally, this vehicle was never used outside of legitimate law enforcement duties.  

Issue over and done with?

Not quite.

Loy followed up with the SCPR by sending a copy of an April 29, 2008 Alliance Review published "letter to the editor" by then candidate Dordea (running against Swanson in November, 2008), in which he lampoons Swanson for use of guess what?  You've got it:  confiscated vehicles.

An excerpt of the letter:

 Loy ends his follow up e-mail to the SCRP with this:

So now we have four separate issues to worry about with Mr. Dordea:

(1) Mr. Dordea used poor judgment in helping himself to a seized luxury SUV gas guzzler,

(2) Mr. Dordea obviously does not practice what he preaches,

(3) what kind of integrity does a candidate have when he attacks his opponent for doing exactly what the candidate himself has done?, and

(4) Mr. Dordea has flip-flopped and changed his position in a transparent attempt to justify his faulty judgment, raising even more doubts about his credibility.

So with the charges and countercharges, where are we left?

It will be interesting to see.

Will the Dordea campaign just drop any action with Harold and ignore Loy's charges of poor judgment, hypocrisy and flip-flopping?

On Loy, Dordea has already said that he does not take him seriously.

But if he wishes to respond further, he knows that the SCPR will update this blog to include his response.

If there is more to come, then the Dordea/McDonald campaign nose dive has new depths to plumb, no?

As far as the SCPR is concerned, the race to the bottom is an unfortunate twist.

Such is the course that highly competitive campaigns all too often take.

The candidates (even if they are thought to be high quality ones, as in this case) sense that it is neck-and-neck and seek an advantage, any advantage.

The struggle is to reach that 50% plus one vote.

As The Report said from the outset of this campaign, no matter who gets elected as between Dordea and McDonald, Stark County will have a quality replacement for outgoing Sheriff Tim Swanson.

But undoubtedly this campaign will have an enduring legacy of being the model campaign which turned ugly when it came to crunch time.

SHERIFF RACE: ARE RETIRE/REHIRE "BED BUGS" ABOUT TO DO McDONALD IN - IN RACE AGAINST DORDEA? SHOULD FERRERO'S OFFICE HAVE RECUSED ITSELF ON GIVING ADVICE TO HAROLD ON MATTER?

UPDATE:  7:00 AM - The Alliance Review has posted an article this morning indicating that the Stark County Prosecutor's office has issued an opinion on the legality of retire/rehire longevity payments to Stark County chief deputies Mike McDonald and Rick Perez.

ORIGINAL BLOG

It appears to the Stark County Political Report that Chief Deputy (Jail Division) might be another Stark County victim of the controversial retire/rehire practice going on at many levels of government within the county, the state, and indeed, across the nation.

Some months ago a controversy broke out within Canton government about retire/rehire involving a number of city employees who it has been alleged were improperly rehired after having retired.  The ramifications of procedures implemented are still under review and appeal.  And, the process used, could be very costly to Canton taxpayers.  Some sources say as much as a million dollars.

A retire/rehire controversy has been ignited by the Larry Dordea for Sheriff campaign versus opponent Mike McDonald as the latest round of charge and countercharge between the two camps.

So what started out as a political love-in between Democrat Mike McDonald and his Republican opponent Larry Dordea (now Hartville police chief and Alliance councilman-at-large), has boiled over in recent days.

First, there was a letter by McDonald supporter Derrick Loy (a part of the Alliance political mix as president of the Alliance Democratic Club) that has been published in the SCPR (and other media) (LINK) making certain alleged factual allegations against Dordea which Dordea responded to point-by-point.

Next, there was a statement by McDonald to the SCPR asserting that Dordea is not qualified to be sheriff notwithstanding the fact that Stark County Court of Common Pleas Judge Taryn Heath had to (according to Ohio law) and did pass on both being qualified in the technical sense of the word.

Now, the retire/rehire matter.

For some time, Dordea tells the SCPR, his campaign has been seeking pay records from Stark County Auditor Alan Harold and from legal counsel for the Stark County Sheriff's Department as to whether or not McDonald and his fellow chief deputy Rick Perez were put on the appropriate pay status when they retired and were rehired in 2004 and 2008, respectively.

According to published reports in The Alliance Review (yesterday), Stark County taxpayers may have overpaid the pair a total of $30,000 plus in terms of pay level (longevity) and benefits.

Retire/rehire was thought to be a non-issue in the McDonald/Dordea match up because Dordea himself retired as chief of the Alliance Police Department in 2007 and subsequently hired on as a patrolman in Hartville.   He quickly rose through the ranks and is now chief in Hartville.

Dordea says that his retire/rehire is different from McDonald's.  Here is the list of differences from Dordea's perspective:

• his retire/rehire was from one unit of government (Alliance) to entirely different Stark County political subdivision (Hartville),
• McDonald and Perez, he says, had the same exact job waiting for them on the other side of retirement "apparently" at the same pay and benefits,
• Records indicate that they (McDonald and Perez) were "new" hires.  However, they have been paid, according to Dordea, at their base rate $88,000 per year,
• Those same records are said to indicate that McDonald and Perez were paid a 4% longevity pay (which is based on a sliding upwards scale) with 4% being the top grade of pay,
• he (Dordea) hired in at a patrolman's pay in Hartville,

Auditor Harold has put the question of whether or not Stark County has money coming back from McDonald/Perez to the Stark County prosecutor's office for consideration.

There is a provision in Ohio law (ORC 124.181(E)(2) which has generated the question, to wit:

An employee who has retired in accordance with the provisions of any retirement system offered by the state and who is employed by the state or any political subdivision of the state on or after June 24, 1987, shall not have prior service with the state or any political subdivision of the state counted for the purpose of determining the amount of the salary adjustment provided under this division.

The SCPR asked Dordea whether or not he feels comfortable with the prosecutor's office rendering an opinion on the matter given the fact that number of prosecutors have contributed to the McDonald campaign including the elected prosecutor John Ferrero.

Dordea's response:  "What choice do I have in the matter?"

And, he added, that he has no idea whatsoever whether or not an opinion will be forthcoming before the election which is one week from today.

The SCPR finds it understandable that Alan Harold has referred the matter to Prosecutor John Ferrero's office.  That's one of the functions of the prosecutor office.

Back when Gary Ziegler was reinstated by the Ohio Supreme Court to the Stark County treasurer's post in June, 2011, Harold had no problem whatsoever in deciding that, until he obtained and posted a bond as required by Ohio law, Ziegler was limited to what county owned equipment (e.g. computers/telephones et cetera) he could use and, moreover, that he would not be paid until the bond issue was resolved.

The prosecutor's office advised Harold (the SCPR is told) to pay Zeigler.  And that was a safe thing for Alan to do in terms of official accountability.

But in the end he felt that was not course he decided to follow.

Accordingly, he stuck his neck out on the block to do what his inner sense instructed him to do.  Zeigler did not get paid until he worked out a final settlement with the county.

And that folks is what makes Alan Harold such an outstanding county auditor.

The SCPR is told by Dordea that the documentation is clear:  McDonald and Perez were listed as "new" employees on resuming employment as "rehired" retirees.

Of course, the "clear" is in "the eye of the beholder;" namely, Dordea and his campaign manager

So it will be interesting to see what Harold does with the advice he gets from Ferrero's people.

John Ferrero is not going to like this, but the SCPR thinks this is another instance where he/his office should step aside and have a prosecutor from an adjoining county give the advice Harold has requested.

In the opinion of the SCPR, Ferrero should have stepped aside in the Devies (Marlboro police chief) case, the Zeigler case, and now ought to do so in this matter.

Checking McDonald's campaign finance report, The Report finds that Ferrero himself and several of his assistant prosecutors have contributed to the McDonald campaign, to wit:

• Ferrero himself to the tune of $200,
• his chief counsel John Kurtzman, $30,
• Ross Rhodes, $30
• Deborah Dawson, $30
• Mike Bickis, $60,
• Tim Andrews, $30.

On top of the contribution to McDonald's campaign factor, yours truly received the following political flyer that included Ferrero as a "team member" with McDonald, to wit:

It is John Ferrero and his assistants' right to make campaign contributions and to join in joint campaign literature with the likes of McDonald.

But having done so, The Report thinks that the potential conflict in interest factor is way too high for the office to be providing legal advice in a political controversy as is the case of the Dordea campaign allegations on McDonald.

Harold has never said so, but The Report believes the reason Harold ignored the advice from Ross Rhodes that he go ahead and pay Zeigler - again, the safe course for the auditor - (notwithstanding the fact he had not obtained and posted a bond with county commissioners), is because he understood the political ramifications (given Ferrero's historical political association with Zeigler) of doing so and accordingly followed his own wisdom on the matter having talked to a lot of different people.

The SCPR has always had a problem with retire/rehire.

To The Report, the problems consist of:

• a person retiring, let's say as a school superintendent, at $150,000 annually.  He/she retires and is immediately rehired (an inside job - general public denied opportunity) at guess what?  You've got it:  $150,000.  
• there is no competition for the job, no negotiating and substantially reduced salary (say at 60% of the $150,0000);  hence no financial advantage to the district.
• the school district does not get the advantage of
• a new perspective,
• presumably a younger person with greater energy, and
• a person more in touch with younger generations and new ideas percolating throughout the education community.

Some will say that this retire/rehire squabble is nothing but politics and a desperate attempt by Dordea to get an edge in his face-off with McDonald.

And there is no doubt on the part of the SCPR that there is political motivation here.  Not so much on Dordea's part, but at the initiative of his campaign manager and Republican Jackson trustee James N. Walters.

This flap over the proper pay for McDonald and Perez certainly is not going to be helpful to McDonald's campaign even if the decider-in-chief (Harold) determines that there was nothing improper and proceeds in six weeks (when the next longevity pay payment is due) on schedule with the next payment.

So it could be a case that McDonald is determined to be legally okay with the payments, but that the publicity surrounding the issue will tip enough votes to Dordea to elect him.

Of course, a lot of Stark Countians have already voted by absentee ballot and early voting.  For those folks, the question on the payments is a non-issue.

The Report's take on McDonald's response is that he is not all that concerned.

He says that he believes Sheriff Swanson can pay him whatever he want to.

Moreover, The Report infers from his reaction that he views Walters' initiative in digging into the matter to be along the lines of political harassment and of little, if any, consequence to his campaign.

It seems to yours truly that from the Dordea campaign perspective, the pay issue is a much more serious issue.

Who is correct?

It is hard to say.

For now, it seems that Chief Deputy McDonald has made his "retire/rehire" bed (December, 2008) and now has to abide the biting political bed bugs that have invaded his bed.

Certainly, this is a very close election.  So much so that anything including the retire/rehire pay situation could prove to be a difference maker.

The bed bugs might prove to have quite a powerful bite, no?