WHICH IS IT WITH "NEW" CANTON MUNY COURT "CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK?

If you ask Stark County recorder Rick Campbell and Clerk of Canton Municipal Court Phil Giavasis  (ran unopposed in November, 2013, which undoubtedly explains his arrogance as a public official) to apply the SCPR above-posed questions to one Kody Gonzalez (son of heretofore Canton Municipal Court Chief Deputy Randy Gonzalez) they definitely would say "cream always rises to the top."

Giavasis was very upset when the Stark County Political Report contacted him on Wednesday to ask about a tip The Report had received earlier in the morning that Kody had been installed as chief deputy of the Canton courts this past Monday (November 18, 2013) as a replacement for his father Randy whose last day, The Report is told, is set for January 1, 2014.

Why was Phil Giavasis upset?

First, because he knew (from past SCPR blogs involving his being Stark County clerk of courts days) that I was going to ask some direct questions.

On May 1, 2008 (a mere 45 days or so after I began the SCPR), I wrote a story about how it appeared to me that he had cut off any competition (in favor of Nancy Reinbold, wife of the-then Stark County Court of Common Pleas judge Richard Reinbold) to whom his successor was going to be when he decided for himself that being clerk of courts for the Canton Municipal Court was a "greener pasture" than continuing to be the Stark County clerk of courts.  

Secondly, and undoubtedly, because he knew that the Stark County Political Report would not necessarily buy his line that "cream always rises to the top" in terms of his employing Kody.

Any more than the SCPR did when Stark recorder Rick Campbell pretty much used the same line when asked by The Report about Kody's leapedfrogging over longer-serving employees at the recorder's office (with only two years -  right out of college - of job experience [as a Plain (2005)/Jackson (2006) schools "entry-level" teacher]) to become the chief deputy recorder.

"How dare," Giavasis, Campbell and father Randy protested, that the Stark County Political Report would raise the question that, perhaps, Kody became an overnight Stark County/Canton government phenom because of the intervention of "it pays to be "politically" connected."

Randy said he was as surprised as anyone that Kody ended up with the next-to-the-top county recorder's job.  No doubt, it is a repeat "I was the-last-to-know" on Kody being handed Randy's soon-to-be "old job."

Don't you just love it when one of Stark County's most politically attuned and astute persons claims to be completely uninformed when a next-of-kin gets a top notch government job with everyone else being cut off from applying?

Giavasis told me in a telephone conversation on Wednesday (see a more detailed account of the conversation below) that Randy only learned after-the-fact that Kody had been hired.

What a coincidence?

As an "entry-level" teacher back in 2005, Kody (who graduated from Ohio University in 2005) was likely making somewhere in the low to mid $20,000s.

As Campbell's chief deputy less than two (2) years later, he likely was at $49,000 (according to the Stark County auditor) in cash salary and you can figure another $15,000 or so in fringe benefits.

As of October 10, 2013, he was making $54,461.60 plus, of course, the fringes.

So in the matter of six (6) years Kody received an increase of about 10% from beginning to end on his "uncompeted for" recorder's office chief deputy job.

Remember that this is a period of time that many other county employees were getting "zilch" in annual increases.

Probably because Recorder Campbell did not want to risk losing an employee who spontaneously emanates par excellence abilities, no? 

As Canton Municipal chief deputy clerk of court Kody Gonzalez will start out at $64,000 according to the Canton auditor's office.  Do not forget that the fringes boost the total take to about $90,000 per annum.

Hmm?

Since entering county/city "public service?," Kody has had an increase of 30%. 

I raise the "public service" issue because Randy claims that for the Gonzalezes working in the public sector is a family tradition of doing public service.

My response?

Well, it is certainly is "well-paid" public service.

Kody Gonzalez has to be the envy of many county/city employees.

Perhaps, that was what motivated a SCPR tipster to notify The Report of Kody's new hire status in a Wednesday e-mail.

The only time the SCPR gained any appreciation of Kody's work product was at the Stark County commissioners' annual  upcoming fiscal year budget hearings which occurred in January, 2013 for fiscal year 2013.

There was definitely "a spit and polish" (i.e. a fancy Powerpoint presentation) aspect to it that the SCPR will concede is beyond the apparent (to The Report) capabilities of Recorder Campbell himself.

However, I couldn't make "heads or tails" out of how much Stark County general fund funding for "new" (i.e. to be hired in 2013) recorder's office and microfilming employees was being asked for.

As the video in the linked blog above shows, Kody's work on the numbers appeared to be confusing the commissioners.  Especially, Commissioner Tom Bernabei.

If memory serves me correctly, the recorder's office had to do an follow-up presentation to clear things up.

But, perhaps, the budget presentation was an example of the proverbial "having a bad day" and not typical of Kody's day-in, day-out performance.

Anybody who knows anything about Stark County politics know that Randy Gonzalez is chairman of the Stark County Democratic Party and has been since 2009.   Moreover, he has been a Stark Dems kingpin for quite a few years before becoming chairman.

"Father" Gonzalez seems to have his hand in nearly everything political and governmental in Stark County over many years.

He is a one time Jackson trustee and currently fiscal officer and believed by many to be the foremost politically powerful person in Jackson Township who is "the-power-behind-the-throne" and effectively controls the likes of John Pizzino, Jr, Todd Hawke and James "Jamie" Walters.

The amazing thing about Democrat Gonzalez's clout in heavily Republican Jackson Township is that two of the three trustees (Hawke and Walters) are currently registered Republicans and Pizzino, Jr (a cousin to former Massillon mayor Franchis H. Cicchinelli, Jr) is a former Republican.

A couple of years ago in a conversation that I had with Trustee Walters, it was astounding to hear how Walters believed that Gonzalez was his political friend.

But that was not what I was hearing from Randy Gonzalez himself.

Which goes to say that the SCPR believes Gonzalez has honed a skill of being all things to all people (a considerable political skill) dressed in a cloak of finesse which can be beguiling.

Beguiling to many, except, of course, to the Stark County Political Report.

But suffice it to say, the SCPR believes the Gonzalez political factor has been instrumental in friends and family (direct or indirect on from key Stark officials ingratiating themselves unsolicited) in getting placed into government positions in various Stark County political subdivisions.

Gonzalez gets very angry when The Report writes such opinions.

While The Report thinks his preferred way of dealing with such situations is to "turn the charm on;" he is quite capable of and does play political hardball the equal or superior to the very best Stark County practitioners of the politics.

He has tried both with the Stark County Political Report.

When the SCPR wrote a blog questioning how son Kody was enshrined by Stark County recorder Rick Campbell as second-in-command in the recorders office in (June, 2007; no competitive interview conducted), father Randy contacted me to express his marked displeasure that I would suggest that he had anything to do (as Stark Dems chairman) with Kody's meteoric rise from relative obscurity as a "entry level" schoolteacher to becoming one of Stark County's very top public officials.

It could be that he had no direct involvement in the hire.

But it's certainly in the category of "who is going to believe that?"

Is anyone going to believe that Randy's role as party chairman had nothing to do with Campbell picking Kody from "out of nowhere" to become his chief deputy recorder.

There is no doubt that Randy has the requisite political skills not to "leave his fingerprints" on having anything whatsoever to do with his son's recorder office employment and now his landing a $10,000 increase in his move over to the Canton Muny Court position.

One local civic activist tells me that Randy Gonzalez is perhaps Stark's most highly skilled politician.

And I never argue the point.

Randy is a very likable guy with a terrific set of social skills, but, of course, with the Stark County Political Report, the blogs are never about whether or not I personally like/dislike this politician/government figure or that one.

For my money, "personality wise," he has it all over Stark Dems executive vice chairman Johnnie A. Maier, Jr (chairman from 2003 through 2009).  However, the SCPR views Maier, Jr as the real power within the Stark County Democratic Executive Committee and from whom Gonzalez gets his marching orders.

But now back to the Kody Gonzalez hire as Canton Muny Court chief deputy clerk.

When public officials will talk to me, (some won't because of my incisive questioning style), I always hone in on "cut-to-the-bone" questions.

In a Wednesday phone call (I think I caught him by surprise that I knew about Kody's hire), I asked Giavasis whether or not he considered folks other than Kody to replace Randy.

Answer:  No.

Question:  Why not?

Answer:  Because I do not have to.

Question:  Whom contacted whom about the job?

Answer:  I contacted him.

Question:  Well, how about Stark County's (in this case Canton Muny court district) taxpayers?  Are they entitled to compete for the job?

Then he went on what I view as a rant about how one-sided the SCPR is as evidenced (according to him) by a blog I did on the Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS) that was not pleasing to him and Randy Gonzalez.

Stark Democratic Party stalwart Reinbold in 2012 was running for re-election as Stark County clerk of courts and I had written a blog wherein her opponent (Republican Jeff Heimbaugh) critiqued CJIS.

Consequently they invited me over to the the Canton clerk of court offices to take a first-hand look at CJIS in operation.

And I appreciated having been invited to see first-hand the Giavasis/Gonzalez cameo-esque presentation.

However, they should have known (as anyone who reads SCPR blogs know), I  always go to any such occasion with my full critical faculties intact.

Notwithstanding Heimbaugh's criticism, I am well-taken with CJIS which is largely Randy Gonzalez creation.  But I am not ready to coronate it as being "the best that it can be."  Apparently, that unwillingness has stuck in the craw of Giavasis, if not Gonazalez.

Randy's work on:

• CJIS,
• Stark County's 9-1-1 "broken" (according to a 2008 report) centralized dispatching system, and
• His very recent  effort to bring Jackson Township, Plain Township, North Canton and Canton into a collaborative economic development mode

is impressive.

Seemingly, single-handedly, Gonzalez has "kept hope alive" that some day in the foreseeable future he will realize his dream of Stark County achieving a "state of the art" 9-1-1 dispatching system.

From what I have seen of Kody Gonzalez, I he think is a "work-in-progress" with potential for leadership but not yet ready for prime time.

He has always been civil and courteous to me notwithstanding my inquiring blogs.

I think it is a fair question that Stark Countians should consider as to whether his ascendancy is due to:

• a case of "it pays to be politically connected," or
• a case of "cream rising to the top"

I cannot say that Kody's father mirrors his son's demeanor and temperament.

He gets more than a bit snarky with me when I write in a fashion displeasing to him.

Campbell, Phil Giavasis and Randy Gonzalez can try to cajole or bully (the most used technique) the SCPR "until the cows come home," but such efforts have been and will remain "all in vain" as long as I write the Stark County Political Report.

The Report understands that a father is going to react to questions raised as to how his son got to where he has gotten in the public sector.

President Harry Truman on December 18, 1950 did so when a music critic panned his daughter's piano recital, to wit: (Source:  Wikipedia)

I have read your lousy review of Margaret’s concert. I’ve come to the conclusion that you are an eight ulcer man on a four ulcer job … Some day I hope to meet you. When that happens you’ll need a new nose, a lot of beefsteak for black eyes and perhaps a supporter below. 

Margaret, of course, was not a public employee.

Kody Gonzalez is.

And, accordingly, he is open to media scrutiny as to how he got to where he has gotten.

Readers of the Stark County Political Report know that The Report will continue to raise questions, to repeat myself, such as was a given hire:

• "A case of  'being politically connected'" or
•  A case of  "cream rising to the top"

I do express my opinion in my blogs but the deciders who count in terms of the persuasiveness of my opinions are the readers of the Stark County Political Report.

No amount of flattery or flack from the subjects of my blogs or their supporters alters the SCPR's "cut to the core" observations.

As a "for instance" on the flack side, the SCPR has little personal regard for Stark County prosecutor John Ferrero as a consequence of his attack on me and my constitutionally protected right of free speech as a media type and as a citizen of Stark County under the guise that I happen to be a lawyer.

I am still waiting for his apology.

Nevertheless, I have blogged that I consider him to have been "a stand up guy" for the "rule of law" in the instance of his having filed an affidavit in his capacity of Stark chief interpreter of the law that he considered George T. Maier "unqualified" under Ohio statutory law standards.

Ferrero must have been the recipient of Maier-partisan's ire ever since.

When one is a "political insider" like Ferrero is within the Stark County Democratic Party politics (Stark County Democratic Party chairman from 2003-2009); it takes a lot of moxie to do what he did on February 5, 2013 in filing the affidavit for consideration by assembled Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee members.

In my view, Chairman Gonzalez humiliated Ferrero in suggesting that Ferrero was a "fly in the ointment" of the chairman's desire that the members appoint Maier as sheriff.

The SCPR says "kudos" to Prosecutor Ferrero for sticking up for "the rule of law."

Agree or disagree with me; like me or dislike me, readers of the SCPR get my candid assessment of Stark County politics and politicians and other Stark County public figures.

A big Thank You! for reading the Stark County Political Report.

Like no other Stark County media outlet, the SCPR keeps the Stark County public informed on the seamy side of Stark County politics and government.

POLITICAL PARTY FACTOR IN SELECTION OF JUDGES DAMAGES PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF INTEGRITY OF OHIO JUDICIARY, NO?

SUBTOPICS

THE O'CONNOR INITIATIVE

THE "O'DONNELL" APPOINTMENT
IN
FRANKLIN COUNTY 

STARK COUNTY CONNECTION

- MORE OR LESS -

BENEFITING 

FROM

POLITICAL I.D. 

IN

BECOMING

JUDGE?

Farmer

Hall

REPLACING JUDGE LEE SINCLAIR

WAITING IN THE WINGS?
COREY-MINOR SMITH

THE O'CONNOR INITIATIVE

Few have ridden the coattails of political partisanship to personal public office holding success than Ohio Supreme Court chief justice Maureen O'Connor.

As a Republican, she began her rise to be lieutenant governor of Ohio and ultimately being chief justice gaining an appointment from now retired Republican Summit County probate judge Willard F. Spicer in 1985 as a court magistrate.

An interesting political phenomenon in American history is how various public figures who have benefited from partisan or ideological ties/positions, have become advocates for considerations of factors based on merit or "realpolitik" once they reach the pinnacle of their personal partisan-politically based achievement.

No better example of this marvel of political flip-flopping exists than the Richard M. Nixon (as congressman) turnaround from being virulent witch-hunting anti-communist of the 1950s into the Richard M. Nixon (as president) who in 1972 opened U.S. doors to the Peoples Republic of [Communist] China.  (LINK)

Generally, Americans accept these "Road to Damacus" conversions even if skeptically.

And the SCPR advocates that Ohioans (necessarily including, of course, Stark Countians) should do the same thing for Chief Justice O'Connor's embrace of less politics and more merit in the selection of Ohio's as articulated by her in a speech at the May, 2013 Ohio State Bar Association (OSBA) convention (LINK) held recently in Cleveland.

O'Connor posed her proposal for changes in a question format, to wit:  (LINK)

• Ohio Courts 2013:  A Plan for Strengthening Judicial Elections:

1. Should Ohio Change the Law So Judicial Races Are No Longer Listed at the End of the Ballot?
2. Should All Judicial Elections be Held in Odd-Numbered Years?
3. Should Ohio Centralize & Expand the Civic Education Programming and Institute a Judicial Voter Guide?
4. Should Ohio Eliminate Party Affiliation on the Ballot in Judicial Primaries?
5. Should Ohio Join the Other States that Have a Formal, Non-Partisan System for Recommending Nominees to the Governor to Fill Judicial Vacancies?
6. Should Appointments to the Ohio Supreme Court Require the Advice and Consent of the Ohio Senate?
7. Should Ohio Increase the Basic Qualifications for Serving as a Judge?
8. Should Ohio increase the Length of Judges' Terms? (emphasis added)

However, O'Connor - apparently - as indicated in the case of fellow Justice Terrence O'Donnell (see below) and - clearly - in the instance of Justice William O'Neill (see below) has work to do in convincing her fellows on the high court that her proposal has merit.

THE O'DONNELL APPOINTMENT

Word came down on May 9 of this year (LINK) that Republican Governor John Kasich had appointed Republican Colleen O'Donnell (daughter of Ohio Supreme Court Associate Justice Terrence O'Donnell) to the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas.

To the SCPR, this obviously was a "political connections-based appointment."

Colleen O'Donnell's qualifications for the appointment are very unconvincing to yours truly.  Just take a look at this Columbus Dispatch piece that details her legal career history (e.g. she has just barely over the minimum 5 years as a lawyer to be eligible for a judgeship in the first place) and by implication her political connections (LINK).

While undoubtedly her father uttered not a word to the governor that he ought to appoint daughter Colleen to the bench of Ohio's second largest county, it is obvious to those of us who populate the hoi polloi that he did not have to.

Kasich and his advisers were surely well aware of who Colleen is and notwithstanding any denials that the governor may make to the significance of her political and legal pedigree in her gaining the appointment, such denials fall in the category of "who in the whole wide world would believe them?"

For example, locally, Stark County Democratic Party chairman Randy Gonzalez denies that he had anything to do with son Kody being appointed Rick Campbell's chief deputy recorder in 2007.

To which the SCPR responds:

That may be and probably is the case.  However, like in the O'Donnell situation, direct advocacy is not needed.  Those in a position to appoint are all to aware of whom they are appointing and the SCPR believes that it is fair to question that motivation to appoint reeks of being politically based and not on the basis of merit.  In the Gonzalez case, Recorder Campbell insists to yours truly that the Gonzalez political overlay had nothing whatsoever to do with the appointment.  Nonetheless, the SCPR simply is not buying the denial.

The Report believes that when such appointments take place, the appointing authority creates a public perception that merit was not the primary criterion in making the appointment.

Over time and repeated as often as politically inspired appointments are done across the American governmental landscape, drip-by-drip public officials undermine their own credibility and inch-by-inch make it more difficult for themselves and their appointees to govern.

Inevitably, the politically connected who get public jobs primarily because of their political connectedness find occasion to comment on and lament upon how unruly the American public is becoming in terms of wielding the authority of their offices and having it respected by the governed.

The SCPR for one does not want to hear their bellyaching.

They do it to themselves and just plain have to live with the consequences of having participated successfully in a sort of political sweepstakes.

The SCPR senses an undertone among the American electorate which is growing increasingly alienated from the governing class and manifests itself in subtle resistances.

So it is helpful for the health of our democratic-republic for a figure such as Maureen O'Connor to step forward and in effect to say "enough is enough."

Indeed, the Ohio Supreme Court should be the catalyst for implementing something like the "Courts 2013 Plan and in the process Centralize & Expand the Civic Education Programming and Institute a Judicial Voter Guide.

Moreover, voters should focus on those who appear to have obtained public positions through political influence and make that a prime factor in determining whether or not to vote for that person at the next succeeding election as well has the person doing the appointing.

STARK COUNTY CONNECTIONS TO THE QUESTION OF JUDICIAL REFORM

THE KRISTIN FARMER (BAIR) APPOINTMENT

Stark County has its own history of judges who appear to have obtained gubernatorial appointments to the Stark County bench through primarily political factors and not so much on the merit of their qualifications.

In the opinion of the SCPR, the prime appointee who fills that category is Kristin G. Farmer (Bair) who is the daughter of Fifth District Court of Appeals Judge Sheila Farmer.

Last year Judge Charles Brown announced his retirement from the Stark County Court of Common Pleas bench.

Farmer (Bair) does have more legal career seasoning than does O'Donnell, but it is far from impressive.

In his appointment of December 21, 2012 (she was sworn-in on January 18, 2013), Kasich cited that as a matter of legal experience she:

• served as a magistrate (Judge Sinclair/Sara Lioi) and law clerk in the Stark County Court of Common Pleas

And that's it!

Actually, she does have a bit more in her resume.  But not much.

Area media reports cite her serving as assistant prosecutor for the first two years out of law school for Alliance law director and Republican Andrew Zumbar who is the brother of Stark County treasurer and Republican Alex Zumbar.

So two years out of law school she is a Common Pleas Court magistrate (a job that some lawyers wait years to obtain) on her way to becoming a judge herself.

Of course, it does not hurt that your mother is a former assistant prosecutor in Canton and Cleveland and is a judge in the Massillon Municipal Court and the Stark County Court of Common Pleas.

The politically skeptical likely think that family political connects played into her becoming an Alliance prosecutor and then a Common Pleas magistrate.

The person who should have been appointed in the assessment of the SCPR - if legal experience (not political connectedness) is the primary criterion -  is Democrat and Stark County Assistant Prosecutor Chryssa Hartnett.

To her credit notwithstanding that she as a Democrat was beseeching a Republican governor, Hartnett did (LINK) apply with the Stark County GOP for a recommendation that Governor Kasich appoint her to replace Brown.  But politics being what they are, the Jeff Matthews-led Stark Republicans did not give her a smell.

These are the same folks that asked Democrats to put partisanship aside and appoint Republican Alex Zumbar (October 31, 2011) to replace Democrat Gary Zeigler when he resigned (October 19, 2011).

Very obviously the Stark County Republican Party Executive Committee does not care one whit about putting Stark's most qualified before the governor when it is their turn to be part of the public official replacement process.

But again, one does not want to hear them complain about the reality that more and more Americans are finding neither of the major political parties to be credible instruments of putting America's most capable and most professionally qualified citizens in public positions.

Both organized political parties are increasingly discredited entities in the eyes of many Americans which makes it more and more difficult for the parties to get everyday citizens involved in their activities.

Sure the parties are hurting more and more in terms of getting everydays involved.

Increasingly, Americans are eschewing party labels in voter registration roles.  And such is definitely the case in Stark County and across Ohio.  In most if not all Ohio voting precincts, non-party aligned voters outnumber registered Rs and Ds (often, even if combined).

And, one might say, who cares about the fortunes of political parties?

Unfortunately, the demise of the parties as being trusted agents of government in putting forth the very best that America has to offer in public service is highly damaging to the legitimacy of our most important institutions of government.

One remaining avenue to correct the parties' strong propensity to consider political connectedness and qualifications (e.g. "the name Farmer in Stark County) in obtaining and retaining office is the good old fashioned American election process.

Hopefully, Stark's Democrats will put up a worthy opponent (how about Chryssa Hartnett?) against Farmer (Bair) in November, 2014.

Note that though she is married to Sergeant David W. Bair of the Alliance Police Department.

But being entitled to a political/legal name like Farmer, no way she is running as Kristin Bair.

Kind of cements the political factor perhaps as having been prime, no?

THE ROSEMARIE HALL APPOINTMENT

Rosemarie Hall does much better on the credentials and experience side of things (LINK) than either O'Donnell or Farmer (Bair).

Appointed by Kasich in August, 2011, she boasts of having being a Stark County Family Court magistrate since 2004.  Moreover, she did have significant experience as a private practitioner of law in her husband's law firm on family law issues prior to becoming a magistrate.

She has gained recognition by her peers as being a jurist who thinks through the complexities of family life as she encounters troubled Stark County families who process through her court.  Two scholarly efforts grace her resume.

Hall clearly was the best qualified of all the candidates on the list submitted by the Stark GOP to Governor Kasich for consideration.

Other candidates (Kristin Farmer [Bair], Lori Flowers (who was serving as Judge Brown's magistrate at the time) and Brant Luther (who ran the Family Court's guardianship program).

The SCPR was certainly glad to see that Flowers did not get the appointment.

Why?

Her comment when vying with Hall, Farmer (Bair) and Luther:

(From a prior SCPR blog LINK)   

"She also said she has been a loyal Republican her entire adult life and is up for the challenge of keeping the seat, if selected."

What should being "a loyal Republican" have to do with being a judge in the Stark County Court of Common Pleas?

Hall has been validated by Stark County voters as having superior Family Court credentials.  In November, 2012 she bested Canton Law Department assistant prosecutor credible candidate Kristen Bates Aylward.

But kudos go out to Bates-Ayward for having tested Hall at the polls.  Maybe she will consider running against the expected "loyal Republican" Sinclair replacement to come soon from the desk of John Kasich?

THE SINCLAIR REPLACEMENT

Any day now, the Kasich administration will be handing down its decision on with who to replace the retiring Common Pleas Court judge V. Lee Sinclair.

It is upwards of five months since the local Republicans sent their list of three to Columbus.

If he follows merit over all else, Governor Kasich should select Jean Madden to be Sinclair's replacement from about the Stark GOP recommended list of candidates.

As stated above, second listee Lori Flowers sees herself as the most politically viable candidate in terming herself "a loyal Republican" which raises a red flag insofar as the SCPR is concerned.

It is hard to see how being CEO of the Stark Chapter of the American Red Cross Curt Werren (the third of three candidates) qualifies him as a top candidate for the judgeship.

Is he just another case of a candidate having a politically connected parent in his corner?

Madden, on the other hand, is an ideal candidate.

She has labored hard and effectively as a Stark County Public Defender.  Moreover, she is an Alliance Municipal Court magistrate.

Being a public defender, she does not quite fit the stereotypical Republican legal pedigrees.

And she has run countywide having taken on Frank Forchione in November, 2008.  The SCPR thinks that she did reasonably well against Forchione who for some reason unknown to The Report appears to be "the darling" of the Stark County legal establishment.

Yours truly has had enough contact with the two to assess that Madden would have been the better judge.

IN THE WINGS:  COREY-MINOR SMITH?

Democrat and former Healy administration employee Corey Minor-Smith is taking on Republican Canton Municipal Court judge Richard Kubilus.

The Report is told that a number of Democratic attorneys are upset that Minor-Smith is making the challenge.

The SCPR does not agree with them.

Yours truly agrees with Chief Justice O'Connor who told the Plain Dealer (Ohio Chief Justice Maureen O'Connor says party labels have no place in judicial elections, Tom Feran, May 9, 2013):

We should elect our judges"  ...  "Voters have reaffirmed by large margins that they want judges to be accountable in competitive elections.

Though The Report likes Kubilus and thinks he stands "head over shoulders" above Minor-Smith in terms of experience and judicial attributes, every candidate for office - judges included - need to go through competitive elections in the context of a vigorous vetting process to help voters figure out who has real qualifications and who is primarily a political phenom.

The most disturbing thing that yours truly hears about Minor-Smith is that she is thought by some to be running at the urging of Mayor William J. Healy, II of Canton (she served as his Director of Compliance [January, 2008 - July, 2011]) not so much because he thinks she can knock off Kubilus, but rather that she put herself in position to get a Democratic gubernatorial appointment should the Democrat candidate in the November, 2014 election win.

Knowing William J. Healy, II as the SCPR does, it is quite believable that the Minor-Smith candidacy is his brainchild.

This is more of the same that the current system of governor appointments bring as we see in the O'Donnell and Farmer (Bair) appointments.

Judge O'Connor is right to suggest that Ohio needs a "[f]ormal, Non-Partisan System for Recommending Nominees to the Governor to Fill Judicial Vacancies."

The SCPR would go one step further.  And it might take an Ohio constitutional amendment (due to separation of powers concerns).   We (the people of Ohio) should REQUIRE whomever the governor is to appoint be from something like a "non-partisan system for recommending" list.

Stark Countians should be embarrassed to read what one of the Stark GOP nominees (Canton Municipal Court judge Stephen F. Belden) is quoted as saying what happened when he interviewed with the governor's people for opportunity to replace Judge Charles Brown, to wit:

Recounting his interview in Columbus for that position, Belden told the executive committee [as he was withdrawing his name for consideration for the Sinclair vacancy]  that he “crashed and burned.” 

He said one of the primary issues was the controversy that resulted from him ordering that the mouth of an argumentative defendant be muzzled with duct tape in 2009. The order was captured on the courtroom’s audio and video system. 

“Being the realist I’m supposed to be, I’m never going to get appointed,” Belden said. “And it would be selfish of me and unfair (to the other candidates) ... to send me (to Columbus.)”  (LINK)

Credit Belden at least for a moment of reflective honesty.

However, for him to say "I'm never going to get appointed" in our current system of putting names before the governor in the opinion of the SCPR is not necessarily so.

Undoubtedly, Judge Belden is a well-intentioned guy.

But from many reports that the SCPR gets from a number of attorneys, he should not be on the Canton Municipal Court bench.

In one assessment by a highly prominent Stark County attorney to the SCPR (in an effort to be kind), termed Judge Belden as being quirky.

Hmm?

Under our current system, The Report believes that there are all too many judges across Ohio who have no business being on the bench.

And, yes, Judge O'Connor, Ohio should " ... Centralize & Expand the Civic Education Programming and Institute a Judicial Voter Guide.

Ohioans need a reliable source to go to in order to determine "on the merits" (not political connectedness) who to vote for in judicial races.

The current system of local bar associations having its membership rate candidates for judge is wholly inadequate.

Take the impending Minor-Smith/Kubilus match up.

The Stark County Bar Association has released the results of its evaluation of the two, to wit:

"Fifty-five percent (55%) or greater of the total membership of the [Judiciary] committee present shall receive a 'recommended' rating."

Hmm?

Who thinks this kind of a rating system tells voters anything?

The SCPR could pose a thousand questions to the committee members to probe exactly what "recommended" or "highly recommended" actually means in terms of the likelihood that a given candidate will turn out to be a distinguished jurist.

But this is a system that the partisan political folks (i.e. Chris Redfern, chair of the Ohio Democratic Party and and the leadership of the Ohio GOP think adequately serves the voters?

What it serves is those political party types who want to insinuate into our system of justice partisan, biased people; presumably well-intended, who are ambitious to achieve the prestige of being a judge primarily to achieve personal satisfaction.

And it appears that the Redferns of the world primarily want to continue the system of political patronage in appoint judges.

Supreme Court Associate Justice and Democrat William O'Neill can criticize the O'Connor "Ohio Courts 2013:  A Plan for Strengthening Judicial Elections" plan all he wants, to wit:

Any serious proposal to change the elections must address the money issue.  Money and judges don't mix. The perception among voters is overwhelmingly that money buys influence in the judiciary in Ohio.

One who knows the political history of O'Neill has to think that his criticism in-and-of-itself may be an R & D thing rather than a well thought out opposition with a suggestion for improvement.

One would think that a sitting Ohio Supreme Court judge being specially situated would think he has an obligation to offer up improvements/additions to the plan.

If O'Neill has something to offer to solve the "[money and judges don't mix" problem (which the SCPR agrees is a problem), then what is his solution?

It has always mystified yours truly how sitting judges and candidates for judge can accept financial contributions from lawyers who have, do or who will be appearing before them.

In meantime, Ohio needs to take a cue from Judge O'Connor and get to work in reforming the way we select judges!

(VIDEO: RICK CAMPBELL - STARK RECORDER) MAN! DOES THIS GUY WANT FOUR (NO, NOT FOUR BUT SEVEN) MORE EMPLOYEES! OVERWHELMS STARK COMMISSIONERS WITH NUMBERS GALORE?

UPDATE:  12:15 PM

RECORDER WANTS TO GO UP "7" NOT "4" NEW EMPLOYEES 2012 TO 2013

This morning the Stark County commissioners held a work session on the upcoming 2013 county budget.

In the original blog today, The Report had understood that Stark County Recorder Rick Campbell was asking for an increase of four employees over 2012 for 2013.

Wrong!

That's how (to be charitable) confusing the department presentation was last week when made.

Apparently, the commissioners were confused themselves inasmuch as they had Campbell's chief deputy (Gonazalez) back in today to provide clarification as to the exact number of employee increase the recorder's office was requesting.

For the recorder's office itself the number is four (4), but when you add in an additional request for three (3) for the department's microfilming operation the grand total is seven (7).

Here is an excerpt from a document provided by Gonzalez today.

ORIGINAL BLOG

VIDEO:  SEE "TESTY" CREIGHTON/CAMPBELL EXCHANGE

What an experience!

Stark County Recorder Rick Campbell and his chief deputy recorder Kody Gonzalez putting the numbers on the Stark County commissioners.

Most people who know Stark County Commissioner Tom Bernabei think that he is "one smart cookie."

But yours truly detected that his eyes were glazing over as Campbell and Gonzalez presented their Powerpoint "fog of numbers" at last Tuesday's commissioner work session on the upcoming 2013 budget.

Alternatively, Bernabei was wrinkling his forehead as one typically does when things don't seem quite right and demand further scrutiny.

So what were Campbell and Gonzalez up to with their kaleidoscope of numbers?

How about "bury them (the commissioners) with carefully contexted numbers?"

The SCPR believes the  presentation was so "over the top" in terms of orchestration that Campbell and Gonzalez and therefore condescending to the commissioner that they will be lucky to get half of what they asked for.

Well, what did they ask for?

They asked for an increase of four (4) new employees to be hired in 2013.

(Update note:  recorder's office only, request includes 3 for the microfilm operation of the recorder's office for a total of 7)

How many recorder's office employees are there now?

Well, it took about 20 minutes for the actual number to come out.

(Update note:  it really wasn't clear until today how many total employees (recording employees and microfilming employees) work for Rick Campbell)

In the Powerpoint, a slide implied that there are four, to wit:

(Update note:  actually there are 7.8 [see update chart above]; as far as the SCPR can determine the chart below showing 4 does not square up with the new chart provided today by Gonzalez).

And its chest thumping time if you are Campbell and Gonzalez, no?

A 73% savings to Stark County! 

Well, the SCPR believes not exactly.

(Update note:  SCPR original skepticism turned out to be well-founded)

Notwithstanding that Campbell said at the beginning of Tuesday's discussion that they (he and Gonzalez) had worked hard to provide "accurate" numbers.

Apparently, the presenters didn't figure that the hearers and readers of their numbers just might have the ability to understand that while a given number (or numbers, as the case might be) may be accurate in a limited sense and certain contexts, when one factors in an out-of-appropriate-context presentation, the accuracy vanishes.

For instance,  in questioning initiated by Commissioner Bernabei (again, some 20 minutes into the presentation - see the video below), it came out that "no," there are more than four in the "total" of the recorder's department employment as one might imply (that is, the four number) from the chart displayed above.

How about 10 or 8 or maybe even 7 (depending on whether or not one counts Campbell and Gonzalez and another unnamed employee)?

So if the four seven requested 2013 hires are added to the existing number of employees (pick your number:  10, 8 or 7), then the total is either 14, 12 or 11 17, 15 or 14 to be compared to the 2010 level (one has to ask is that number accurate?) of 12 13 employees which means:  (see Update chart above)

Hardly a 73% decrease?

(Update note:  how about a 47% decrease [8/15]?)

Nothing like spinning (or burying) the numbers (the real numbers) so as to become incredible?

The SCPR does not see any reason why Campbell and Gonzalez should not be included in the total numbers on the job in the recorder's office.

If, however, one believes Stark County auditor Alan Harold, it would meaningless to count Campbell, in terms of his pitching in and helping out the working class employees of the office when things get dicey with vacations and sick days; inasmuch as Harold says that he estimates that Campbell spends relatively little time at the recorder's office.

How does Harold know that?  He didn't explain.  But knowing Harold, he has his "in a position to know" sources who are feeding him information. 

It does appear that Gonzalez is "the brains behind the operation" in the recorder's office.

As well he should be, no?

A few years ago when the SCPR questioned Campbell on the Gonzalez hire as chief deputy recorder, he responded that it had nothing to do (as did Gonzalez's father) with father Randy being the chairman of the Stark County Democratic Party.  Rather, he said, it had to do with obvious leadership qualities and skills that were apparent to him in the course of his contact with him in the years before the hire.  And when you add in a family tradition of public service, it becomes a "no-brainer," no?

Coming full circle, it makes sense that a person who reeks of talent, skills and other employable qualities should be the brains of the operation, no?

He does appear to have a lot of talent.  Especially in constructing the numbers to support Campbell's insistence that the office needs four  seven more employees:  a 40% (4/10) 87.5% (7/8) jump in numbers of employees.  (see Update above)

For very close to a solid hour (most presentations last anywhere from 15 to 30 minutes), Campbell and Gonzalez did a tag-team act playing (in the opinion of the SCPR) "fast" with the numbers in order to "spin" a tale they hoped would be bought by the commissioners.

Moreover, time after time during the work session Campbell deferred to Gonzalez.

Who is the elected Stark County recorder?

One slide they had was "cute," real cute.

In it they tried to show that the department's request for 2013 of $655,590.71 was "in their imaginary world" was really the equivalent of being $472,782.90 which was under the 2011 budget appropriation of $500,856.11 thus saving the commissioners (and, by the way, Stark County taxpayers)  $28,073.21.

All one has to do to get down to the $472,782.90 is to remove from the $655,590.71 is to:

• deduct $13,460.51 (the 27th pay,  given the 2013 calendar pay cycle,
• deduct $4,901.31 (a 2% employee pay increase likely to approved),
• deduct $164,446.98 (cost of 4 new employees Campbell asks for)

Duh!  duh!  duh! duh! & duh! again.

Talk about circular reasoning that is like a cat chasing its tail?

The truth of the matter is not a savings, but rather a whopping! 62.6% increase over 2011 for 2013 if commissioners were to give Campbell his way.

Noticeably missing from the recorder's presentation was a historical chart showing the historical numbers compared to the requested 2013 appropriation.

The Report's recollection is that every other 2013 budget work session so included such a chart generated by the presenting Stark County department of government.

The SCPR is pleased to have put together such a chart which is displayed above.

Message to Stark County recorder Rick Campbell:  "Don't hire any new employees, just yet!"

Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II should note the "spin" skill that Campbell and Gonzalez demonstrated in the budget presentation and should seek to hire them immediately.

The duo demonstrated that Healy really does have something to worry about in terms of being Stark County's foremost spinmeister.

Commissioner Janet Creighton told the SCPR that she had seven employees and an office budget in a $180,000 or so range when she was Stark County recorder back in 1985.

And The Report understands that 2013 is not 1985.

But in Creighton's day as recorder (in the old Stark County Office Building [what used to be the Saint Francis Hotel] there was no technology to speak of and recording the official documents of Stark County was a highly labor intensive enterprise.

As if the number manipulation were not enough, Campbell went through a litany of reasons why the commissioners should comply with his request for four additional employees.

The list:

• [the recorder's office] has saved the county money in doing the microfilming work inasmuch as the alternative is outsourcing which is much more expensive in that the county would have to spend $4.3 dollars for outsourcing compared to $1.0 dollars (according to Campbell's Powerpoint graph) for the recorder's office to do the microfilming (outsource microfilming costs 30 cents a page, so says Campbell err Gonzalez),
• If the commissioners do not approve the additional employees for microfilming, then they will be costing the county more in the long run because the county will have to outsource for the microfilming overload,
• the more that is microfilmed reduces the amount to storage that John Runion of the records center has to come up with as well as the expense thereof,
• the recorder's office is recording/microfilming more documents with less people, (which Commissioner Creighton turned on Campbell)
• if a recorder's office employee gets sick or goes on vacation or is training other employees, it presents a huge staffing problem to the office,
• the recorder's office has plans to take on other projects (e.g. the Probate Court, the Stark County clerk of courts) for the county, if the commissioners agree to provide general fund funding for the additional employees,
• the recorder has to work existing employees through their breaks which puts us in violation of law and the office is vulnerable to being sued,
• it takes one and one half (1-1/2) years to train new employees and two years before they are as proficient as they are going to be,
• Stark County is Ohio's seventh largest county and the recorder's office needs to be staffed accordingly,
• the recorder's office has deferred on capital equipment (i.e. a new duplicator at a cost of $11,000, which, Gonzalez says, will pay for itself within two years in avoiding the need to outsource) purchases for five years and can no longer abide that situation

The kindest thing one can say about it is that in his zeal to protect his employment base Campbell with his presentation "oversold" his case and likely thereby was his own worst enemy in endeavoring to persuade the commissioners that it is essential that he be permitted to hire four new employees.

All-in-all, The Report's opinion of this presentation? It one of the most manipulative, intellectually insulting, and disingenuous reports that yours truly has ever witnessed.

But it is no surprise to the SCPR that Campbell would be behind such an effort.

In the end, it is likely to be counterproductive to presentation's intended purpose at least in terms of pushing the commissioners into doing his will.

Here is a highlight of excerpts of the back and forth between the commissioners and the Campbell/Gonzalez tandem.