NORTH CANTON COUNCIL TO TRYING "TO FOOL THE PEOPLE 'ALL OF THE TIME''

Shame on North Canton City Council and the council's president Jon Snyder (Republican - Ward 4)!

Who does Snyder think is going to believe his statement to area media, to wit:

Council President Jon Snyder, Ward 4, says most ordinances are passed as emergencies because they’re administrative actions and officials want to avoid cumbersome delays. He said he has never attached an emergency clause to a bill to avoid a referendum (Emergencies routine for North Canton council, Wang, August 12, 2013) (emphasis added)

Apparently, Snyder and his fellows on council think that the North Canton citizenry are made up of a bunch of naive, unsophisticated rubes who do not know "up from down," "backwards from forwards" or "how to come in out of the rain" and the like.

Most people (except perhaps former president Bill Clinton of "that depends on 'what is is'" fame) know when they have been caught on deceit, own up to it, apologize and move on.

It seems to the Stark County Political Report that all of North Canton Council has been caught by council's nemesis and seemingly perpetual and eternally persistent Chuck Osborne in what most folks most certainly have to believe is a bold face lie.

Only a fool would believe that North Canton has had 90%, 93%, 83% and 90% from 2013 (so far, the year is not yet over) back through 2010 of its legislation to be of an authentic emergency nature.

Those are the numbers that Osborne cites in a lawsuit he filed against council on August 5th in the Stark County Court of Common Pleas to invalidate council pay raises passed as an emergency ordinance with the emergency being articulated as being necessary "to meet the Stark County Board of Election's deadline for the November 5, 2013 general election."

As Osborne points out in his lawsuit, these council members have been on council since 2011 and could have moved on the legislation way, way before getting into an emergency situation.

It was "all to convenient" for council to induce an emergency and thereby avoid a vote of the people of whether or not future councils will be getting a raise.

As readers of the SCPR know, while yours truly treasures folks like Osborne who are eternally vigilant in keeping Stark County's villages, cities townships and boards of education on the "up and up," he himself has been the subject of critical blogs in terms of his motivations for doing this thing or that than vis-a-vis North Canton Government (e.g. his initiative petition to make the mayor of North Canton a full-time position, which The Report thinks is a thinly veiled attempt to in effect oust political enemy David Held from office).

But in filing this lawsuit, Osborne is performing an extraordinary public service.

While it has been pointed out that as the law of Ohio stands now, the odds (in the opinion of yours truly) are against Osborne prevailing on getting the courts to invalidate the recent pay raises, The Report applauds the effort.

Applauds the effort?

Yes, not so much because the SCPR thinks the raises are undeserved, but for the reasons that yours truly:

• does believe that the legislation was an end run around North Canton's voters on being to put the matter of the raises on the ballot for voter determination, and
• does believe that the pay raise was a consequence of the passage of an initiative referendum by Osborne whereby part-time North Canton elected officials (i.e. North Canton's councilpersons) are not eligible for health care benefits at city of North Canton expense.

Because of the "in your face" via disingenuousness attitude of Snyder in his public comments, a remedy that North Cantonans should avail themselves of this fall is:

• one, for North Canton's fourth ward voters to replace Jon Snyder as the ward's councilperson (Hillary Mueller is his opponent), and
• two, to replace one of North Canton's council-at-large candidates (Kiesling, Cerreta or Griffith - all of whom have consistently voted for what the SCPR believes to be largely "phony" emergency legislation) with newbie Jamie McCleaster.

The election of Mueller and McCleaster will go a long way in ensuring that future bogus use of emergency legislation will be vetted far better than the current make up of council is able to do.

Osborne's lawsuit is likely to have ramification across Stark County's skyline of local governments whether or not it achieves its specific goal.

And, should it make its way up the legal trail to the Ohio Supreme Court, it may have a major impact on governments throughout Ohio.

No matter how the suit fares before Stark County Court of Common Pleas judge John Haas, we should all earnestly desire that the losing side appeal the case first to the Fifth District Court of Appeals and beyond that step to the Ohio Supreme Court.

As matters stand now, some take the position that existing Supreme Court articulated law to - in its essence - stand for the proposition that though Ohio statutory law requires written specificity be part of any ordinance designated as being an emergency, the mere statement of some superficially plausible reason is enough to carry the day.

Others, obviously, including Osborne's legal counsel Robert Cyperski, argue that such is not the case. That there is, in the mix of Ohio Supreme Court cases, law to the effect that Ohio's courts are to look into the actual facts and circumstances of legislation being designed as an emergency and to make a determination on a case-by-case basis as to whether or not the procedure as been exercised lawfully so has to deprive the citizenry the right to overturn a given piece of legislation by an initiative referendum.

The argument as outlined above makes it imperative that the issue be resolved "once and for all" by Ohio's "court of last resort."

In the meantime, this November (it is highly unlikely that Osborne's suit will be settled before then) North Canton voters have an opportunity in Ward 4 and "at-large" to make their presence felt.

McCleaster and Mueller should make the over and indiscriminate use by council of emergency designation in legislation as being an overriding issue that strikes at the very heart of the integrity of the processes of our democratic-republican system of government.

It does appear that Councilman Snyder and his fellows are trying to play North Cantonians for "being the fool."

It is up to North Cantonians to take the opportunity in November to drive home Abraham Lincoln's point:  "you can't fool all the people all the time."

And a "Hats Off!" to North Canton civic activist Chuck Osborne for bringing this issue into focus.

"ANTI-DOUBLE-DIPPING" BY PUBLIC EMPLOYEES CRUSADE UNDERWAY?

A crusade?

Could be.

Ice Cream anyone?

That is the lure of the Robert Cyperski campaign to attract prospective petition signers to his event tomorrow (Sunday) from 1:00 to 5:00 p.m. at the Belden Village Holiday Inn located at 4520 Everhard Road, NW in Canton.

Cyperski has decided to attempt collecting 5,002 signatures by the filing deadline of March 5th to get on the ballot as an "independent" candidate against incumbent judge and Republican John Wise.

Wise has been a 5th Court of Appeals (5th COA) judge since 1995 and is now at the point that he wants to retire as judge at a retirement annual income of about $116,160 and then stand for re-election to the very same job and collect an additional $132,000 and thereby top out at about $248,160 or nearly "a quarter of a million dollars."  Hmm?  Not bad!

Will Cyperski takes offense at those numbers together with the reality that Wise, in running again, is freezing out the opportunity of younger aspirants to serve on Ohio's second highest court (second only to the Ohio Supreme Court).

Both Cyperski and Wise are well-qualified.  So, if he gets on the ballot, the issue will not be whether or not Wise has been an able judge or as to his qualifications.  It will be an opportunity for Stark Countians as well as the citizens of 14th other counties which comprise the 5th COA to vote on the issue of "double-dipping."

Cyperski's campaign, if he can get the mind boggling 5,002 signatures, will have an evangelistic fervor to it.  That's how passionately he is driven on making his mark against the infectious growth among public officials (mostly unelected ones) to double-dip.

As a sidenote here, the Stark County Political Report points out that candidates for either the Republican or Democratic nomination for this office is 50 signatures.  Yes, 50 signatures as compared to over 5,000 for an "independent" candidate.

It just goes to show how Republican and Democratic politicians conspire with one another to keep the political competition out.

The Ohio General Assembly (OGA) has changed Ohio's policies over the last 10 years or so to allow the retire/rehire phenomenon to flourish.

Judge Wise and the unelecteds are doing nothing wrong from a legal standpoint in advantaging themselves of retire/rehire.

But nonetheless the practice is not setting well with much of Ohio's voting public.

Trouble is for Ohio's voters is that they have to be frustrated that they have been provided with no medium with which to weigh in on the issue.

One has to wonder why the  OGA has shut them out of the process of determining what the policy of retire/hire or double-dipping or whatever one wants to call it ought to be.

A Cyperski/Wise match up on the issue provides Stark Countians with a unique opportunity to be heard on retire/rehire.

Legislation has been introduced in the current session of the General Assembly to stymie the retire/rehire growth, to wit:  House Bills 202 & 388. 

But the SCPR takes these measures as being a sop to the voting public because of the increasingly vocal outcry.

Unless and until something like a sitting judge gets defeated on the unmistakable fact that voters have said no on the basis of retire/rehire, The Report does not believe that most representatives and state senators are interested in seriously addressing the issue.

For the sake of discussion, here is a look at the two bills sitting in the legislative hopper of the Ohio General Assembly.

HOUSE BILL 202

House Bill 202 is opposed, of course, by the Ohio Judicial Conference.  Here is an extract from its website of the conference.

HOUSE BILL 388

The main problem with this bill is that it does not to affect elected officials which, of course, means the members of the Ohio General Assembly itself (which has upwards of a dozen members who fit the retire/rehire category), judges and obviously any other Ohio-based elected official such as Stark County Sheriff Tim Swanson, who, if the SCPR understands correctly prior statements he has made,  has three retirement accounts.

Nevertheless here are some excerpts of descriptive material (by WNWO Newsdesk) as well as a number of quotes by the chief sponsor of HB 388 (Republican Rex Damschroder, the 81st House District) as to the bill's "other" impact:

HB 388 will suspend, during the time of employment, the retirement benefits of a public retirement system retiree who returns to public employment. Under the bill, all government workers, including elected officials, will be prohibited from a practice often known as "retire/rehire"– where workers are permitted to receive their pension benefits while continuing to work in a public sector position.

NOTE:  Although the WNWO description says "including elected officials," a SCPR check of the actual language of the proposed legislation which clearly excepts out "elected" officials.

Damschroder quotes:

•  "The goal of HB 388 is to bring common-sense economic reforms to our public retirement systems." 
• "We have all witnessed or read about examples of double dipping in our local area and the public outrage that always follows."
• "For every instance of retire/rehire, one less job is available for new public workers.  Changing the current system is essential in order to save the integrity of Ohio’s five public retirement systems. Asking the taxpayers of our state to support double dipping in today’s economy is unrealistic.”

As written above, the SCPR believes that HB 202 and HB 388 are not serious efforts to deal with increasing public criticism of Ohio's retire/rehire phenomenon.

Accordingly, The Report endorses Cyperski's attempt to get on the ballot and encourages all Stark Countians to help Cyperski get on the ballot so that the issue of double-dipping can be addressed at the ballot box.

While some will still vote on Cyperski or Wise on factors other than retire/retire/double-dipping, the campaign that Cyperski will be running and which Judge Wise will be forced to defend is whether or not retire/rehire is a good idea.

Once the people have had an opportunity to have their say the legislature will have a true indicator of whether or not they need to re-legislate on the matter in order to truly reflect the people's desire on the practice.