The Report has been writing for the better part of two years that Reinbold has been contemplating retirement as Stark County clerk of courts and predicting that there would be a Giavasis to Reinbold to Giavasis cycle materialize.
Nancy Reinbold got the job in the first place on the recommendation of her former boss Phil Giavasis when he in 2008 prevailed on the Stark County Democratic Central Committee (Johnnie A. Maier, Jr. the-then chairman of the Stark Dems) for the area covering the Canton Municipal Court District to appoint him to succeed retiring long time clerk of courts Tom Harmon. Harmon himself went on to be a Stark Dems' appointed county commissioner.;
Jumping from the county to Canton brought Phil Giavasis substantially more annual income which of course builds into a much more lucrative retirement.
Some Stark Countians thought that the Phil Giavasis vacancy was open for the general Stark County public to apply for.
One such person was Lawrence Township trustee Mike Stevens.
[W]hen Lawrence Township Trustee Michael Stevens heard of the apparent vacancy; he went and talked to Giavasis to express an interest in succeeding Phil.
As Stevens tells it, Giavasis became visibly annoyed and upset that Stevens would be interested.
Apparently, Phil had let it be known through Stark County Democratic Party chairman Johnnie A. Maier, Jr., that he already knew who his successor would be and that person would be Nancy Reinbold (wife of retiring Stark County Court of Common Pleas judge Richard Reinbold).
One has to believe she has been a mere caretaker for Family Brothers Giavasis until the brother Louis of her benefactor Phil could put himself in a credible position to succeed her.
She gave Louis his start in 2008 after she took over.
A thank you to Phil for recommending her for the job?
Of course, Ohio law prevented Phil himself from hiring a relative.
Undoubtedly, Nancy has a "best person available" story on her hiring of Louis Giavasis someone like Democrat Stark County recorder Rick Campbell had at the ready when he hired politically connected Kody Gonzalez as his chief deputy.
There are many, many inside jobs in Stark County Political subdivision government involving both the Stark County Democratic Party and the Stark County Republican Party.
For the most part, the Stark County taxpaying public can forget applying for Reinbold type jobs that come open.
What audacity! A politically unconnected person applying for a taxpayer paid for job? You have to be kidding, no?
The foregoing thinking, The Report believes, is typical entitlement thinking that many leaders of Stark County political subdivision governments engage in.
One of the funniest "hiring politically connected" persons for taxpayer supported took place when Stark County Board of Elections (BOE, Board) director Jeff Matthews appeared at county commissioners' work session to discuss the BOE's 2014 budget.
In the discourse, Matthews let it be known that the Board would be soon hiring some new personnel.
Would the BOE, Commissioner Regula wanted to know, be posting the positions?
As a matter of Ohio statutory law, the Ohio General Assembly has made the guardians of the integrity of our democratic-republican elections a partisan political structure.
This morning beginning at 09:00 a.m., we witness Commissioner Thomas Bernabei's attempt to get certified as an independent candidate for mayor of Canton at the BOE headquarters located at 3525 Regent in Canton.
Next Monday morning, it will be former Massillon mayor Frank Cicchinelli, Jr attempting to get certified to run as an independent for mayor of Massillon.
To say the least, independents are not favored by either the the Democrat or Republican BOE members and both Bernabei and Cicchinelli have a tough road ahead of them.
And to say it again, the Republicans and Democrats have no problem at all using your money and my money as members of the taxpaying public to support perpetuating themselves and their inside-the-political-beltway-connected friends in office.
No wonder that increasing numbers of citizens are opting out of our democratic-republican system even at the basic level of voting.
The Report believes that the office holding Reinbolds, Matthewses, Giavasises, Harolds, Maiers, Zumbars, Harmons and their ilk are slowly but surely eating away at the public's confidence in the integrity of local institutions of government in terms of the general public's access to taxpayer supported jobs which over time will coalesce with other "the public be damned attitudes" on the part of elected officials and thereby undermine the health of our cherished democratic-republic.
Undoubtedly, these folks will be pointing the finger at others as it becomes more and more apparent that public support for the the American government as administered in waning.
No mirrors allowed in the offices of these folks!
The Stark County Political Report loves the reported magnanimity of Louis Giavasis.
If he gets appointed to succeed Reinbold, he is going to resign as Plain Township trustee.
On Sunday, The Stark County Political Report began a multi-part series on the filing on Monday, May 4, 2015 (the day before the Stark County political subdivision primary election) by sitting Stark County Commissioner Thomas Bernabei as an "independent' candidate for mayor of Canton.
Bernabei, had, prior to his making moves over the past week or so to position himself as a political "independent," been a lifelong Democrat.
"Yes, I am a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat who serves with two Republicans. I'm not a closet Republican -- although some infer that. However, ultimately (getting the job done) is about hard work, sound management principles and hiring the best people as well as finding the middle ground ... "
Mind you, not just a Democrat. But a "dyed-in-the-wool Democrat."
Kind of reminds you of Nancy Pelosi, - a "dyed-in-the-wool" kind of Democrat that comes to the mind of many of us, no?
Can you imagine her suddenly announcing she's has had a conversion and has become - not a Republican, but rather an "independent?"
Probably not.
And undoubtedly Democrats who have known Commissioner Bernabei for years and years are disbelieving and therein lies the rub for his pulling off a Stark County Board of Elections (BOE) certification that he has done so lawfully.
It will be interesting to note how the vote goes.
The Republicans to certify; the Democrat not to certify?
Republican secretary of state Jon Husted being a guy who is on record being in favor of "letting the people vote" breaks a tie in favor of a Democrat (err "independent") once again?
Below are links to blogs done by the SCPR on the question of whether or not Bernabei would in fact file as an "independent."
Later on in this series, you will see/hear Bernabei's take on the issues (ditching his political party affiliating/his residency) of his having filed and whether or not he thinks his candidacy "will fly."
Months ago, the SCPR received a tip from a highly reliable source that Bernabei was thinking about running against Canton mayor William J. Healy, II (for whom he had served as service director/chief of staff January, 2008 through January 2009 [unceremoniously fired in January, 2009]) presumably in the 2015 Democratic primary.
On being asked about the speculation by yours truly, Bernabei merely laughed the suggestion off.
And the SCPR thinks that he was not spoofing The Report nor Cantonians in making the denial at the time of the posed question.
Obviously, things have changed.
One who has not masked her enthusiasm on the prospect of a Bernabei candidacy as an "independent" candidate for mayor this coming November has been fellow Republican Commissioner Janet Weir Creighton.
She and several other notable Stark County Republicans were among the 16 circulators circulating petitions (collecting some 267 signatures) on Saturday and Sunday a week ago from this past weekend.
Note the list included former Creighton administration officials:
A.R. "Chip" Conde (ran against Healy in 2011 and is currently employed by Stark County Auditor Alan Harold), and
Joseph Concatto (currently is [on reduced hours basis] and over he past several years has been StarkCounty's 9-1-1 CAD project manager),
Auditor Alan Harold (a staunch Republican) also circulated a petition for Bernabei.
The Stark County "organized GOP" has no candidate in Canton's November 3, 2015 mayoralty race.
However, with Creighton, Conde, Concatto and Harold being involved in Bernabei's candidacy; some might think of Bernabei as being the de facto Republican candidate?
CREIGHTON'S PETITION
CONDE PETITION
CONCATTO PETITION
HAROLD PETITION
As cited above (Ujhelyi's article), Bernabei himself understands that with some Democratic leaders (i.e. Healy and company) he looks like a Republican.
His having key Republican leaders circulate his petitions adds credibility to the pro-Healy Dems (and perhaps even other Democrats) likely claim that he is a de facto Republican.
There were two noteworth Democrats who circulated for Bernabei:
REINBOLD PETITION
The only major Democratic Stark County officeholder known so far to be supporting Bernabei's "independent" run is Stark County Clerk of Courts Nancy Reinbold.
The SCPR thinks that others will surface over the next five months (assuming he overcomes legal challenges) and act as a counter to the likely forthcoming claim that Bernabei is nothing but a Republican hiding under the "independent" label.
HAWK PETITION
Canton Councilman Greg Hawk (Ward 1) that is.
Somewhat of a surprise to The Report inasmuch as this is what yours truly wrote in a recent blog:
Councilman Greg Hawk part of an effort to salvage the mayoralty of William J. Healy, II?
You have to be kidding?
For it was Healy who had to be behind the move that put Hawk out of his treasured chairmanship of council's finance committee in the aftermath of the November, 2011 elections, no?"
Answer: You know the adage - "politics makes for strange bedfellows."
And there is more.
A SCPR source says "no way" was Greg Hawk a part of the Mack and Mario effort.
Hawk is said to have wanted to be Canton treasurer when Bob Schirack announced that he was resigning before the end of his term in 2013. Had he done so, Councilman Hawk, being the solid Democrat he is, stood a good chance to be appointed treasurer over Kim Perez and thereby get a head start on Perez in his quest to get the nomination in May, 2013 in the Democratic primary election.
However, The Report's source says that Mayor Healy intervened to persuade Schirack to stay on until the end of this term (probably because of the Hawk/Healy historic animus) and that consequently Hawk holds a grudge against the mayor.
That could be, but the SCPR has another source saying that as between Perez and Healy (remember the Bernabei candidacy did not get rolling until May 3rd and 4th), Hawk loathed Perez more than Healy.
After all, Kim Perez is the treasurer of Canton. A position that Hawk once coveted.
Perez had to know that Hawk very much wanted to be Canton's treasurer. But of course Kim Perez's first priority is Kim Perez.
Why Healy's intervention?
Probably to do Perez a favor in helping him land a position, any position, after losing his county auditor spot to Alan Harold and thereby - hopefully - dissuade him from running for mayor, no?
That's how the SCPR thinks Healy operates.
Perez probably was "all too happy" to let Healy think that being treasurer is all he cared about being.
These two deserve each other.
Hopefully, the people of Canton won't have to have either.
BACK TO THE CREIGHTON FACTOR
Creighton, who the SCPR considers as being Stark County's foremost and powerful Republican in terms of proven vote-getting ability on the basis of her having been elected/re-elected:
as county recorder,
as county auditor,
as mayor of Canton (2004-2007), and
as a Stark County commissioner
It indeed was somewhat surprising that she lost to William J. Healy, II in November, 2007 as she sought a second term as mayor.
But there is one big reason why it should not have been surprising.
Registered Democrats as part of the body politic of Canton out number Republicans about 9 to 1.
A sign that the Healy defeat (or perhaps any Democratic candidate including a second run by long time hugely successful candidate in Canton proper William Smuckler) was to be seen in the numbers she won by over the non-charismatic Smuckler in November, 2003.
Had she lost to Smuckler in 2003, she would not have liked it, of course, but The Report thinks she respects Smuckler and therefore would not have harbored the bitter feelings the SCPR thinks she still has as a consequence of her lost to him in November, 2007.
The Report believes Creighton does not respect Healy by virtue of his being perceived by herself and many other Cantonians and Stark Countians as being a consummate, oily politician with state-of-the-political-art-skills at spinning this or that screw up on his conduct as mayor individually and in his role as the city's chief executive.
Moreover, for quite a time after Healy took over as mayor, guess who he blamed for "all that ails" Canton?
Of course, the immediate preceding mayor: Janet Weir Creighton!
Undoubtedly, in the days preceding their both being elected as county commissioners in November, 2010 in a "save Stark County mode" growing out a "crisis of confidence" in Stark County government as a consequence of what local attorney and civic activist Craig T. Conley has termed as being "Zeiglergate" (LINK), Creighton as a local government official interacted from time-to-time with one Thomas Bernabei.
Little did they know in those days that one day they would come to share a common bond of hatred of "all things William J. Healy, II."
But with Bernabei's having worked for Healy as service director and chief of staff and his humiliating firing in January, 2009 and with Creighton reeling from her 2007 polls defeat to Healy; it was bound to happen that as commissioners, though of different political party identities, they would unite in their disdain for Canton's current mayor.
So it should not be surprising that Creighton as shown in yesterday's blog and repeated in today's blog a SCPR video showing the ebullience she brought to last Wednesday's regular commissioners' meeting as evidenced in her celebrating the Bernabei filing on the prior Monday as an "independent" candidate for mayor.
As one of the circulators and likely a coordinating factor in obtaining other Republicans (as noted above) to participate in circulating Bernabei petitions over last weekend, Janet Creighton is likely to be a major player in asking Cantonians to vote for "independent" candidate Thomas Bernabei for mayor should he survive legal challenges that are sure to come.
And here is a video of what Bernabei had to say in last Wednesday's interview as to Creighton's involvement in his effort.
It appears that Bernabei and Creighton are attempting to do for Canton what they have teamed up to do for Stark County in restoring public confidence in local government processes and substance.
In 2010, it was Stark County government involving both of them running for office.
In 2015, it is Canton government with Tom Bernabei being the point person.
Tomorrow's SCPR blog: Part III - "How Bernabei came to decide to run and how the 'last minute' effort unfolded."
A SCPR reader (in an email earlier today) makes an important point
about certain pay increases to some county employees. These are
employees under union contract with Stark County. Their raises ARE NOT
SUBJECT to the commissioners 2% guideline because, of course, they are
determine by contract language.
Sheriff George Maier was in to see the commissioners yesterday with his budget presentation.
He
informed the commissioners that nearly all the sheriff department
employees (except for about a dozen non-bargaining employees) are
subject to the terms of a collective bargaining agreement. So the
numbers for sheriff department employees posted by the SCPR (LINK) in
the January 15th blog fall into the category indicated in the readers
email, to wit:
I appreciate your thoroughness in digging into the county's finances. I am a daily reader who usually enjoys your posts.
However, I think you may be missing something about these list of people. You state that the names on the list are those who received more than a 2% raise. What you seem to fail to recognize, is that these are contracted raises, which where set in motion years ago before the 2% guidelines ever existed, and approved by these very commissioners, save Regula.
Take the Sheriff's office for example. The Corrections, Communications, Maintenance workers, and others received raises based on a contract going back 3 years. Accordingly,neither the employees nor the Sheriff have any control about the percentage they received for these last 3 years. Once the contract was signed, and again, agreed upon BY THE COMMISSIONERS, it was set in stone.
And these aren't outright raises. Most of the percentage comes from step increases based on time served in the position, until they reach the positions top-out pay rate. So an employee who gets a 1% raise, and also gains a step due to years of service, will appear on your list as getting a 7% raise. Very misleading.
This goes for many of the department heads you seem to be lambasting here on your blog. How could they possibly abide by a 2% guideline, when such a guideline didn't even exist back when the union contracts were approved...by the commissioners?
They are locked into giving these employees the agreed upon percentage, no matter how much the commissioners scold them.
I know you look out for the common taxpaying citizen, so perhaps you would bring this little fact up to the commissioners. that they are actually the ones responsible for these percentages, as they were the ones who approved them in the first place.
A SCPR thank you to this reader.
============================
ORIGINAL BLOG
THE BACKGROUND
In the continuing Stark County Political Report series, today's coverage of the Stark County commissioners' budget hearings focuses on:
P.S. Murthy of the Coroner's office,
Tammi Johnson of the Public Defender's office,
Gary Ickes of the Veterans Service Commission,
Alex Zumbar of the Treasurer's office,
Nancy Reinbold of the Clerk of Courts, and
Tim Warstler of Stark's Emergency Management office
SCPR Note: The listing of department employees presented in today's blog is based on information collected by Chris Nichols of the commissioners' office for use by the commissioners in understanding "trends" of raises in the offices as they review budget matters with department leaders.
The list is not intended to list each and every department employee and the SCPR has pared it down to include only those receiving more that the 2% commissioner recommended raises for fiscal year 2013.
As the commissioners gain experience and hear the "tales of woe" from many of the the department heads, to wit:
employees have not had pay raises in 3, 4 or 5 years,
pay raises are "a must" to prevent an exodus of employees,
the pay raises do not come out of general fund money,
such and such employee is critically important above all others in the operation of the department, and,
the department is returning "unused" money from last fiscal year
SCPR NOTE: The commissioners suspect that in some cases department heads over request in a given year so that the are always returning money and thereby give the illusion they are being frugal
they are developing rejoinders that effective blunt the justifications all of which seem to be on a "list of reasons" that seems to be circulating among department heads as a sort of "cheat sheet" or "talking points" when a particular department head appears before the commissioners.
One thing that The Report notices about the commissioners is that one of the three, sometimes a couple of them, do seem to bore in on some officials with just a little extra "umph" over others.
Readers will see in the coverage of Treasurer Alex Zumbar and CEO Gary Ickes of the Veterans Service Commission that the seeming extra "umph" is in play whereas others get more benign treatment.
SPECIFIC OFFICEHOLDERS (ELECTED & UNELECTED)
CORONER P.S. MURTHY
It was a sight to behold as the commissioners parried back and forth with Coroner P.S. Murthy.
As readers know from the January 15th opening blog in this series, the focus of the budget hearings is on the percentage of raises that is given in each department of Stark County government.
The commissioners and Murthy are seen in the following video contending over a raise given to one of Murthy's "key" employees (John Williams) getting an 8% raise in 2014 out of the general fund (in violation of the commissioners' guidelines of 2%) with a proposal for another 10% raise in 2014.
PUBLIC DEFENDER TAMMI JOHNSON
Compared to what Stark County area attorneys make in income, Stark's public defenders are clearly underpaid.
Consequently, the commissioners seem sympathetic with the "in excess of 2%" raises (2013 as seen above) in apparent violation of the commissioners' guideline and did not - in the opinion of the SCPR - "bring the hammer down" (a well known quip uttered by Cleveland Cavalier analyst Austin Carr) on top Public Defender Tammi Johnson.
Moreover, the Defender's plan for 2014 is projected at 2% "across-the-board" increase which had to ingratiate them with the commissioners which is likely another reason why Director Johnson did not get any flak.
VETERANS SERVICE COMMISSION DIRECTOR GARY ICKES
Ickes has only been the head guy at the Veterans Service Commission (VSC) since January 1st, but he had a pretty rough outing with the Stark commissioners in the commission's budget presentation.
But there is a history between the commissioners and former executive director Bob Toth.
To get a full appreciation of what the SCPR thinks is "bad blood" that exists between the commissioners and the VSC, readers of this blog need to read The Report's June 8, 2011 blog (LINK).
While much of the accompanying video is an amiable exchange between Director Ickes and Diane Caswell (executive secretary) and two of the VSC's board members, Commissioner Creighton gets pointed with the VSC representatives (see video at 13:30 mark) over his "history" based frustrations on dealing with the Veterans Service Commission.
STARK COUNTY TREASURER ALEX ZUMBAR
Probably of all the budget hearings, the one between the commissioners and Treasurer Alex Zumbar was the most contentions.
At one point n the discussion, Commissioner Bernabei remembered that in addition to being president of the Board of Stark County commissioners, he is an attorney. For many years Bernabei was Canton's law director.
He honed in on Zumbar and kept coming back with question after question after question in what he thought was smoking Zumbar out in terms of forcing him to give a direct answer on projected pay increases for 2014 and the source of those expected raises as between the county general fund (which Zumbar is accountable to the commissioners on) and "special revenue resources" (i.e. DTAC: "Delinquent Tax & Assessment Collection" funds) which he is not.
Commissioners Creighton and Regula also joined in on grilling Zumbar.
The SCPR focuses on the sharp exchanges in the following video.
The SCPR talked with Zumbar a day or so after the budget hearing and The Report's recalled impression is that Treasury Zumbar was not a very happy camper as to the way commissioners treated him. The Report has gotten the sense that Zumbar is not the only county - independent of the commissioners - "elected" official who feel like they are being "grandstanded upon" on the "raises" issue and are more than "just a little ticked" about how the hearings are being handled.
Particularly troublesome and irritating to these officials is the commissioners pulling out the 2013 raise schedule provided to them by the auditor's office under parameters devised by Budget Director Chris Nichols.
As noted, the "note" above, the 2013 schedule is not designed to deal with the nuances of why certain employees (not all) getting raises got them (e.g. a promotion, a reconfiguration of job title and the like) or any other factor (e.g. Coroner Murthy on "how utterly important and heretofore "under paid" employee John Williams is).
The SCPR's take is that "the unhappy campers" are distressed at the commissioners' focus on numbers to the exclusion of extenuating circumstances is "on-the-face-of-it" unfair.
The Report's take on the commissioners is that they are listening to the justifications given on the "excessive" (in their minds) raises but that they are skeptical and suspicious that some officials are "playing games with them" which is somewhat like the proverbial "shell game."
CLERK OF COURTS NANCY REINBOLD
Clerk of Courts Reinbold "takes the prize" has being the most aggressive department head in terms of asking for "more money" with which to give her employees an "across the board" 5% increase.
And this is on top of many of her employees receiving a 3% increase last year.
Of course, the commissioners turned her down and will be sticking to the 2% guideline they have told department heads that they were going to have to be satisfied with.
Like other department heads, Reinbold had the "stock" reasons why her employees deserve the 5%.
However, she did have a novel one. That being that her employees are "more important" than others because they deal with critical matters (e.g. the courts handling criminal defendants).
The commissioners did make it clear to her that there would be no 5% and she told the news with ease in saying "Well, if you don't ask you're not going to get what you think you ought to have" (paraphrase).
The SCPR heard before she was reelected in November, 2012 that she would be retiring not too long after she took her new term of office.
And this week conjecture about her retirement surfaced anew. However, this time there was more specificity. What is being said is that she will wait until after the May primary election before making the announcement.
Division Administrator and Plan Township trustee Louis Giavasis (brother of Canton clerk of courts Phil Giavasis [a former Stark County clerk of courts who The Report designated Reinbold as his successor when he moved over to Canton]) tells the SCPR that Nancy has never told him that she plans on retiring, but if she does, he says that he is going to contend to be her successor.
The Report hears that another well connected Democrat is being set up by his high political connection to succeed Reinbold, should she retire according to the speculated timetable.
It could be that Stark Countians will see another occurrence of political infighting within the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee for the appointment if Reinbold does not serve out a full term. CONCLUSION
While the commissioners' scrutiny of the pay issue appears to be bewildering if not irritating to some of the officials who appeared before Bernabei, Creighton and Regula, that the commissioners' dig in and persist in getting answers should be reassuring to Stark County taxpayers.
One can understand that department heads are under pressure from the employee base to find money for raises, however, the fact of the matter is that Stark County went bare bones in asking for a 0.5% sales tax increase in November, 2011 and the county is ill equipment in terms of available revenues to do much on that front.
Under the spartan funding situation that Stark County finds itself in, it seems to The Report that the commissioners have embraced "being the cop on the beat" (as uncomfortable as it surely is for them) in dispensing discipline over the funds they control (i.e. "the county general fund").
Six years down the road will come sooner than anybody now thinks.
The question then will be up to the voters of Stark Countians.
And that question will be whether or not the voting public thinks that county officeholder leaders have been frugal stewards of public monies and therefore deserving of the public's trust for a continuation of the 2011 Justice System Sales Tax.
From the SCPR's perspective, the commissioners are slowly but surely getting the frugality/efficiency model firmly implanted in the minds and more importantly, the practices of department heads and in achieving such should have the county in good stead with Stark's voters come 2019.
Back on October 12th, the SCPR did its last (LINK) of a succession of blogs on the Stark County clerk of courts race between Democrat and incumbent Nancy Reinbold and Republican challenger Jeff Heimbaugh.
Readers of this blog owe it to themselves to take a few minutes to click on the LINK and get up to speed on the back-and-forth between Heimbaugh and Reinbold (and her emissaries) so as to appreciate the significance of this particular blog: "Who Gets the Last Word?"
The October 12th blog was given life when The Report was contacted by Stark County Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS) project manager Randy Gonzalez (who also is Stark County Democratic Party chairman) who invited yours truly to go to the Canton Municipal clerk of courts office (run by elected-Clerk Phil Giavasis [former Reinbold boss]) to see the "spit and polish" of CJIS "up close and personal." (The Report's words, not Gonzalez's)
And, indeed, the CJIS operation is impressive.
Apparently, the invitation and the schooling on CJIS was supposed to put the "perfect squelch" on anything that Heimbaugh could possibly say as a rejoinder and would lead the SCPR to conclude that any additional Heimbaugh responses should be ignored.
Well, that is not quite how the SCPR operates.
Needless to say, over the nearly five years that the Stark County Political Report has been published, yours truly has received complaints/observations from time-to-time that "there is more to the story."
The Report's response?
Fine, send in an e-mail to tramols@att.net composed "in your own words" and the SCPR will publish it word-for-word.
Quite a few Stark County public officials and other subjects of SCPR blogs have taken advantage of The Report's open invitation.
Those who decline should be thought of as being whiners who are trying to put the SCPR on the defensive and perhaps affect the tone, the critique, of future blogs merely by virtue of having whined.
Kind of like the player or coach who complains to the referee not because he thinks the call will get reversed. Rather he hopes the next call will go in his favor merely because he protested. Protest is in and of itself is designed to make the referee see that he has somehow been unfair.
In the sporting event context, one suspects that whining works on occasion.
However, not with the SCPR. But The Report has a fullproof way to deal with a complainer/observer.
The Report opens up the pages of the blog to let the "offended" person state his/her case. The readers of the blog will then decide whether or not he/she has made his/her case.
Stark County prosecutor John Ferrero comes to mind as a local public official who consummately bellyaches about how unfair the SCPR is to him.
But not one time has he ever had the fortitude to come on the blog with his counter to the blogs he complains about.
Apparently, he thinks his performance in office is immune to scrutiny as evidenced by his bellyaching.
Justices of the United States Supreme Court get roundly criticized for their work on the bench, if not lambasted, by not only media types and by members of the bar who make it clear that they are speaking as members of the profession.
Only last week, yours truly saw Justice Scalia on a CNN program defending and explaining himself.
Hmm?
Justice Scalia, who draws perhaps more scrutiny and criticism than any other jurist, takes the criticism in the spirit of public debate that better informs the public.
But John Ferrero, what does he do? He sulks and seeks to silence his critics.
The Report does not look for it to happen, but it would be "sweet indeed" for Stark County if Stark County voters were to unseat Ferrero in favor of Republican Mike Grady on the 6th of next month.
Thankfully, Ferrero is an exception among Stark County politicians and elected office holders; not the rule.
Heimbaugh has been the latest in a long line of SCPR subjects to take up the continuing SCPR to respond to a blog "in his own words."
Today, The Report presents Randy Gonzalez's response to an SCPR inquiry and (partially) a Heimbaugh's e-mail of October 12th (published as an "update" to the blog of same date.
The Report's inquiry:
From: Martin Olson <tramols@att.net>Subject: CJIS budgetTo: "Randy Gonzalez" <randy.gonzalez@cantonohio.gov>Date: Thursday, October 11, 2012, 1:19 PM Randy,
I forgot to take the copy of the CJIS budget that you printed out for me yesterday.
Would you please e-mail it to me (or fax it to 330 838 2342).
As I indicated I would, II did check out the point we discussed as to whether or not was Heimbaugh was calling for "off-the-shelf" software to take care of CJIS and other court-related. It appears to me that you and Phil are correct in your take on Heimbaugh's position.
Heimbaugh does talk about a plan to upgrade the CJIS system to enable e-filing of court pleadings and that there might be a module with "of-the-self" [sic] software that could make it much cheaper to do than if CJIS were to be upgraded.
Is there such a plan (i.e. upgrade CJIS to include e-filing)? If so, when is it to be done? If so, what is the projected cost? If so, would Yates be the person doing the programing for such an upgrade? If so, is the work to be included in the $85,000 per year contract price?
Thanks, Martin/SCPR
Gonzalez's response:
Re: Fw: CJIS budgetTuesday, October 16, 2012 10:43 AM
From: "Randy Gonzalez" <randy.gonzalez@cantonohio.gov>View contact details
To: "Martin Olson" <tramols@att.net>
Martin, attached is the budget you requested. Also by all the Courts working together with CJIS it gives us the ability to shop pricing for products like ORACLE and drive the prices down for all by using they get all or no contracts from Stark County. Also the CJIS server can serve as an additional back up for all the courts and information request for all courts come from one place instead of 4 separate request.
In addition to court management systems CJIS also includes:
Population control for the jail package
Prosecutors package
Probation Package
Pre Trial Release Package
Compliant maker for law enforcement package
Line-ups for law enforcement
Online Payments
Complete Warrant data base for all courts and law enforcement.
Jail Photos
Reports all 4 court centrally to State agencies. (Supreme Court, BMV, BCI and so on)
Coming soon will be paperless uniform traffic tickets.
Again there is no charge to any agency for CJIS not the jail, law enforcement or any other user. It is paid for by user based fees established statutorily that created the Clerks of Court automation fund.
In answer to your question attached; Judge Heath went to a judicial seminar and became involved in pursuing e filing. She and Nancy started a committee which included the main users (attorneys). Yes they are not looking to reinvent the wheel and are familiar with a couple different successful system currently being used in Franklin and Montgomery Counties. The attorneys are also used to those systems.
CJIS will be the portal to the E filing system and yes Chris Yates will develop the interface with the vendor chosen at no additional charge, it is part of his job. Implementing E filing through CJIS, will include all 4 courts and again will keep the cost down by each not going off on their own while adding continuity of all users. 1 contract not 4!
Hope this answers your questions, although as I stated yesterday I believe Nancy has answered these questions and at our meeting Phil and I have also went over all of this. I trully [sic] appreciate your thoroughness so I hope this does it.
During The Report's one-on-two (with Gonzalez and Giavasis), Gonzalez made a point of saying that the above-budget is funded by a $10 per filing fee (to fund a court technology fund) attached to each and every new case filing with the respective listed courts. And, consequently, taxpayers do not pay for CJIS.
The implication, The Report believes, is that CJIS is free to Stark County taxpayers.
Hmm?
The SCPR begs to differ with Gonzalez, if that was his point.
The vast majority of those who file cases in Stark County courts are Stark County citizens who happen also to be Stark County taxpayers at various levels of local government.
Gonzalez's position is somewhat analogous to former Governor Ted Strickland raising fees for certain State of Ohio fees by $36 million across a number of state agencies several years ago. His spinmeisters maintained that the $36 was not a tax increase.
Hmm?
A final point.
It could be that this blog is "the last word" on the Reinbold/Heimbaugh race.
That is, if both sides cease weighing in on the toplic.
For like no other Stark County media, the SCPR is committed to allowing subjects to get their full point-of-view before the Stark County public.
However, the issues raised in the Reinbold/Heimbaum series of blogs go beyond the campaign itself.
The SCPR will be pushing the Stark County commissioners to fully vet whether or not it is in the best interest of Stark Countians to continue to contract with an out-of-county host/maintainer of CJIS when it comes up again next year.
... there are a few facts and additional comments that your readers should know.
1) $114,000 to run the system. Through an open records request I requested the names and salaries of the programmers etc in the clerk’s office. She provided the names of the two employees whose total salary is $100,000. With benefits Ms Reinbold stated the total cost is approx. $143,000. Add the $80,000 for the Utah employee and the cost of the system is closer to $225,000. That’s just for the clerk’s office.
2) From there patrol cars... The information that police can obtain is on a statewide basis is through the Supreme Courts “Ohio Courts Network”. A statewide information exchange system to enable courts and justice system partners to share the information necessary to make critical decisions. Stark County plugs into this system and shares its information with other agencies across the state. This system is available to all counties and agencies and is not unique to Stark
3) Ms Reinbold nor I can state that one system is superior to the other. Neither can we definitevly say there would be savings or additional costs if we switch to commercial software. I am making three points; A) If developing your own system is the way to go than why is Stark County only one of two court systems (general division) in the entire state operating their own system. (see attached) B) Common sense informs us the one department of County government is to small to be in the software business. C) Why we don’t look at the two systems and determine once and for all which is better for Stark County. What are they afraid of?
Finally, I find it odd that Ms Reinbold had to have Mr. Giavsis and Gonzalez with her to discuss her own operating system. Shouldn't she is able to defend her record herself. The court is currently looking at a $1,000,000 upgrade to the Clerk of Courts own system. The court rejected putting Ms Reinbold in charge. Wouldn't you think that the Clerks office who developed, maintains, and operates the system would be placed in charge? The Judges work with her every day so are they trying to tell us something? One doesn’t have to look far to see that Ms Reinbold isn’t capable of managing
ORIGINAL BLOG
It was quite surprising to the SCPR to learn from the perspective of Republican challenger Jeff Heimbaugh to sitting Clerk of Courts Nancy Reinbold (a Democrat) in a September 19th interview that he believes that not all is well with CJIS (Criminal Justice Information System).
One of Heimbaugh's main arguments is that Reinbold is overpaying for CJIS and that Stark County (CJIS serves the Alliance, Canton, Massillon clerks of courts as well as the Stark County Courts of Common Pleas and the Stark County Sheriff) could do better with off-the-shelf software.
Moreover, Heimbaugh points to a contract entered into between Stark County (approved by the commissioners on August 3, 2011) and a former Stark County employee (Chris Yates, now residing in Utah) for $85,000 annually as an additional unjustified expenditure for Yates' hosting CJIS and maintaining it from Utah on a day-to-day basis.
The SCPR has learned that the entire 2012 budget for CJIS is about $114,000 of which the Yates contract represents some 75%.
Yates apparently left Stark County employment in July/August of 2009 as August is the first month in which Stark County auditor records show his first $7,083.33 monthly contract payment.
Accordingly, the initial contract would have had to have been approved by then Stark County commissioners Todd Bosley, Tom Harmon (a former Canton Municipal Court clerk who retired and was replaced by Phil Giavasis).
It appears Yates got a $20,000 raise by transitioning from county employment to becoming an private sector independent contractor. Of course, with his leaving county employment, the county was relieved of future benefit payments to him.
For more depth on Heimbaugh points (LINK) and Clerk Reinbold response (LINK), before to sure to read the SCPR's first report on the Heimbaugh/Reinbold race (LINK).
Well, to say the least, Heimbaugh's point-of-view is not shared by those with key roles in the implementation and maintenance of CJIS; namely, Canton Clerk of Courts Phil Giavasis (also director of CJIS) and Randy Gonzalez (a Giavasis employee and CJIS project manager).
The SCPR sat down with Reinbold (who refuses to go on camera) political proxies Gonzalez (who doubles as Stark County Democratic Party chairman) and Giavasis (who was Reinbold's first employer and from whom Reinbold inherited the county clerk position via being the Stark County Democratic Party appointee when Giavasis replaced Tom Harmon as Canton Municipal Court clerk) to get a look at CJIS.
Indeed, CJIS is an impressive operation.
CJIS was Giavasis' brainchild some ten years ago or so. And Gonzalez has taken hold of the project and made it into the superlative system it is today.
Readers of the SCPR know that yours truly has been a frequently critic of Giavasis and Gonzalez on various topics over the nearly five year existence of The Report.
But on this project, both deserve accolades for putting this information enhancing and Stark County citizen safety enhancing computer mechanism together.
From their patrol cars, Stark County law enforcement officers can access critical information from CJIS on subjects they are dealing with as they are involved in day-to-day policing activities.
And, at any given point-in-time, Stark's judges can access information as to whom they have incarcerated as the Stark County jail, the gravity of an alleged offense as well as their criminal justice history.
This is to mention just a few of the impressive qualities of the computerized system.
As yours truly told Gonzalez and Giavasis, the SCPR has never doubted the value and quality of the CJIS system.
However, how the system is configured in terms of its staffing configuration is fair game for scrutiny and critique.
And this is exactly what clerk of courts candidate Heimbaugh is doing.
The baseline questions as raised by Heimbaugh are:
whether or not the courts could have the same quality at a lower cost?
why is it that the host/maintainer is a person who resides in Utah?
Gonzalez and Giavasis made a number of points to The Report in response to Heimbaugh's criticism and recommended fixes:
CJIS is not the sole creature of the Stark County clerk of courts. Rather, they say, it is a joint effort of the Stark County clerk (for the Courts of Common Pleas), the Alliance Municipal Court clerk of courts and the Massillon Municipal Court clerk of courts.
That it would be "to reinvent the wheel" (the SCPR's words not Gonzalez and Giavasis) to go to "off-the-shelf" software and that the result would not compare in quality to CJIS and, moreover, they believed at a much greater cost than Heimbaugh projects.
The decision to keep Yates on after he left Stark County for Utah was a joint decision of all Stark's clerk of courts on the basis that they felt Yates had acquired unique programming skills (having been schooled in criminal justice system particularities) and losing him would be felt within CJIS.
While CJIS can and will function effectively/efficiently without Yates (there are five CJIS programmers spread over the various clerks of court offices), Stark County has invested many hours of training in Yates and therefore has a vested interest in keeping him on.
Gonzalez went so far in one conversation to describe Yates as being at a genius level in his CJIS programming/maintaining skills.
Yates started his career with Stark County under Janet Creighton when she was Stark County auditor. When contacted by The Report, Creighton said that while her recollection of him is somewhat vague, she does remember him as a quiet person and being very bright.
So what does the Stark County Report make of "the back and forth" between Heimbaugh over and against Reinbold, Gonazlez and Giavasis?
Here goes:
Heimbaugh is doing what candidates for public office ought to be doing. He has examined the operations of the Stark County clerk of courts office and has spotted issues that he thinks need to be dealt with.
Next summer, the Stark County commissioners will undoubtedly be looking at a new proposal to retain Yates for another contract term.
As the SCPR recalls, there was no questioning on their part as to whether nor he should be awarded the $170,000 contract.
The Report finds this a little bit odd inasmuch as yours truly has witnessed quite of number of inquiries (particularly from Commissioner Creighton) when bids are awarded to "out-of-Stark County" contractors, so the question becomes:
Why not in this case?
In any event, the "oversight" in 2011 should be rectified in 2013 and the commissioners should use a work session to delve deeply into the justifications of the proponents of retaining Yates (as contrasted to finding a Stark County person).
Had Heimbaugh not raised the issue in this running against Reinbold, would 2013 be a repeat of 2011?
Implicitly, Heimbaugh has raised the question of whether or not Stark County ought to be dependent on one person as a "go to" for the hosting and maintenance of CJIS?
The SCPR thinks not and made that point repeatedly to Gonazlez and Giavasis in Wednesday's conversation.
Heimbaugh has distinguished himself as a political office candidate in asking probing questions.
In doing so, he casts a good model for others running for office.
There are all too many political contests in Stark County in which the non-incumbent candidates seemingly are just going through the motions of running for office.
To name a few names and races, for example: Butterworth (R) versus Campbell (D) for Stark County recorder and Blaser (R) versus Murthy (D) for Stark County coroner.
The SCPR thinks the odds are heavily against Heimbaugh unseating Reinbold.
Even if he loses, he has made a valuable contribution to the Stark County political landscape.
From the SCPR's perspective there is no such thing as a "holy cow" in Stark County/local government that no one can question!
This video on the Reinbold/Heimbaugh Stark County clerk of courts race is the first in a series that the Stark County Political Report will be running on Saturdays and Sundays between today and the election on November 8th.
This post is of the FULL video.
An earlier post (LINK), contains Nancy Reinbold's response to a shortened video of the first Heimbaugh post. Clerk Reinbold has been afforded the opportunity to amend her response to include the additional comments made by Heimbaugh in this full version of his remarks.
If she elects to amend, the SCPR will publish her amended response on this blog.
A quote from "Tax Day Tea Party - Canton, OH" organizer Jason Wise: "Ok...I hate to tell you guys but this is on City property and I'm getting non-stop emails and phone calls about this issue and people are now canceling on me."
This quote is in response to some posters on "the Wall" on the organizing group's Facebook page who were suggesting that perhaps Concealed Carry Weapons were in order for the Canton event to be held Wednesday at Central Plaza which is located immediately in front of the Stark County Courthouse (which houses the general division Common Pleas Courts) and in front of the Stark County Office Building which is home to many countywide departments of government.
The STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report/SCPR) has previously written about this event as being a test case as to whether on not the Stark Republican Party will be fielding a significant candidate against Democratic Commissioner Todd Bosley in November, 2010. Officially, this is being billed as a national event. But The Report believes that the event is being turned to an "anti-Bosley/imposed sales-use tax day."
Supposedly, Bosley is to debate Jason Wise on WHBC's (14180 on your AM dial out of Canton) "Points to Ponder" show (Ron Ponder, host). There may also be a radio event on WHLO (640 on your AM dial out of Akron - "a Religious right" radio station) featuring Bosley and Wise.
The Report understands that Ron Ponder (who The Report understands acknowledges he is close to the Stark Republican Party) is predicting that Jason Wise himself contemplates being Bosley's opponent in 2010.
Stark Republicans may want to rethink this one. The Report has been told that Wise carries a lot of political baggage some of which was revealed in a Repository report in coverage of Wise's failed campaign against Democrat Nancy Reinbold for Stark County clerk of courts.
All Wise and the Republicans have to do is to ask Richard Regula (an incumbent Republican commissioner that Bosley defeated in November, 2006) what kind of campaign Bosley runs.
Let's just say that "the gloves definitely come off."
The Report believes that Stark organized Republicans hate and fear Bosley above any other Stark Democrat.
All in all tomorrow could be an interesting Stark County political event.
The Stark County Republican Party is on life support these days. And this is not good for Stark County. With Republicans not holding any non-judicial offices countywide, Stark County is in the brink of being a politically non-competitive county and perhaps a mirror of Canton city government which is totally controlled by Democrats. At least in the countywide sense.
The STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report) has been probing some leading Stark County Republicans for answers on what is being done to rectify this political imbalance in Stark.
For the most part, there have not been any promising answers. In fact, one disturbing observation from a key Stark County Republican offers the possibility that Democrat Stark commissioner Todd Bosley will not face any meaningful opposition in 2010, unless the sales/use tax repeal effort gets up a head of steam and wins thereby signaling that the prime mover of the imposition of the tax (Commissioner Bosley) is vulnerable.
In other words, the Stark GOP is so down and out these days that it would take the equivalent of "a sign from Heaven" for the local Republicans to make a serious attempt to defeat Bosley.
Readers of The Report understand that yours truly thinks very well of Bosley. Nevertheless, no public official should ever skate into office with out a serious test.
Notwithstanding the bleak news about Stark Republicans, the SCPR did hear a glimmer of hope about activities and Stark Republican headquarters.
The Report hears from a source that Jason Wise has been an increasing presence at party headquarters. This could be good news for Stark Republicans, but more importantly Stark Countians who want to see the Stark Republican Party to once again be competitive. Political competition and the fear of being voted out of office, is the most effective way to avoid the abuses of "one-party-rule."
One-party-rule is not good for Stark County as it was not when Republicans controlled all statewide offices, the Legislature and the governorship.
Why might Wise be good news?
Here is a summary of why The Report thinks he might lead the way:
Wise ran against Democrat Nancy Reinbold for Stark clerk of courts in 2008. The result wasn't pretty. Wise took offense with The Report because his candidacy was described as being a "sacrificial lamb" candidacy. Nevertheless The Report thinks it was courageous for Wise to take her on - and - in a sort of way; the Democratic machine that now runs Stark County.
Reinbold had virtually been handed the county clerkship by self-appointed Democratic kingmaker Phil Giavasis (now Canton Muny Court clerk of courts - so he can earn more money and beef up his retirement). Giavasis took personal umbrage when Lawrence Township Michael Stevens met with him to express an interest running for the county clerk position. As an interesting aside, Nancy Reinbold hired Phil's brother Louis (Plain Township trustee) into the clerk of courts office not too long ago.
No doubt the now former Stark Common Pleas judge and husband of Nancy Reinbold placed a major role in getting his Nancy into the clerks office in the first place. For the most part, these jobs are not open to the public, but are set aside for party leaders for their relatives, friends or friends of their political insider friends. From there it would just be a matter of time until she had the top job.
The Report has roundly criticized former Stark Republican Party chair Curt Braden and his political twin Jeff Matthews (deputy director of the Stark County Board of Elections) for allow the Stark County Political Party to waste away to nothing.
The question now becomes with the information that Jason Wise is more and more of a factor as Stark County Republican headquarters is this: Can Wise spearhead a resurgence of Stark Republicans?
Why would The Report hold out hope that Wise has anything special about him that would make him more effective that the Braden/Matthew regime?
The answer: It may be in his genes.
He is the grandson of Carl F. Wise who ran as a "reform" Republican in November, 1951. He served from 1952 to 1958 and did what he promised. He hired a "no non-sense police chief" and together they cleaned Canton up.
So the question becomes:
Can he be to the Stark County Republican Party what his grandfather was to Canton in the 1950s? Will he turn things around?
Time will tell.
And the test will come next year on the county commissioner and county auditor races (Perez).
If it is left of to Matthews, Bosley and Perez will likely have only token opposition.
Could it be that Jason Wise with his heritage of having "fire in the belly," bring renewed energy and vibrancy to the Stark Republicans?
All Stark Countians should be hoping for this possibility.
Otherwise, Stark will sink deeper and deeper into the mire of political intrigue and abuse of power that one-party-rule brings.
B.A. - Political Science
J.D.
AN INDEPENDENT MINDED POLITICAL COMMENTATOR
Until 1976 I was a Republican. Since then I have considered myself a Democrat. So after long term stints of being a Republican, then a Democrat, I have come to the political position I feel most comfortable with - being an INDEPENDENT MINDED ANALYST who demands effectiveness of our politicians - Republican, Democrat or whatever.
I have changed my political affiliation to "non-partisan" by not voting in either political party primary election.
