Showing posts with label Ross Rhodes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ross Rhodes. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 24, 2013

'TIS A PUZZLEMENT! WHO TO NAME AS THE 2013 "LUMP OF COAL WINNAH?"



UPDATED:  1:14 PM

Oh my!

There are ever so many among Stark County's elected officials and public figures that the Stark County Political Report could selected as the "2013 LUMP OF COAL" (LOC) AWARD WINNER.

But whom to select, that is "a puzzlement."

Over 2013, the SCPR has published the better part of 300 blogs.

So there are many to pick from.

POSSIBLE PICKS

GEORGE T. MAIER
JOHNNIE A. MAIER, JR
STARK CO DEMOCRATIC PARTY CENTRAL COMMITTEE
(SCDP-CC)
CHAIRMAN RANDY GONZALEZ


Interestingly enough, as early of January 8th, the Maier brothers (George T. & Johnnie A. Jr) had surfaced as candidates for LOC winners.

George, being pushed by Dems' chairman Randy Gonzalez & brother Johnnie, Jr) who came out of nowhere (according to interim Sheriff Tim Swanson), as a candidate to replace Sheriff-elect Mike McDonald (November, 2012) who could not take office as schedule on January 7th because of an illness that regrettably and lamentably cost him his life on February 22nd.

George was quoted as saying:


George was picked by 92 of 167 voted counted members of the Stark County Democratic Committee on February 5, 2013.

As we know know, his statement was "a lot of phony-baloney" and arrogant bravado inasmuch as the Ohio Supreme Court on November 6th said he was unqualified to be the pick and was ousted "as never having been the legal sheriff."

As if to say "in your face" to the high court, the Dems on December 11th (101 of 166 SCDP-CC members)  once again, under Chairman Randy Gonzalez's leadership, selected George T. Maier.

It appears that Tim Swanson is likely to file a new quo warranto seeking Maier's ouster for a second time.

Moreover, he has asked the Stark commissioners to reimbursed him nearly $34,000 in legal fees.

And, since they are bulking at doing so, the SCPR is being told that he might retract his statement that he will not seek to be paid for the time he should have been drawing a sheriff's salary ($88,511.75) as interim sheriff while (according to the Ohio Supreme Court) George Maier usurped the office.

The SCDP-CC February 5th appoint may end up costing Stark County taxpayers about $130,000.

Hmm?

Will the loses get doubled to $260,000 or thereabouts with the December 11th re-appointment of Maier?

FRANK FORCHIONE
ROSS RHODES


Who can forget another ridiculous statement ("it would be a complete waste of time") made by a Stark County public official/figure Ross Rhodes (assistant Stark County prosecutor) in saying that Stark County citizen Tom Marcelli's demand through his attorney demanded that the prosecutor's office recover $5,000 in fine money for the Stark County taxpayers diverted from the county treasury by Stark County Court of Common Pleas judge Frank Forchione for the benefit of the victims of the December, 2012 Newtown, CT elementary school shooting.

After Marcelli filed his lawsuit, guess what?

In no time at all, Judge Forchione was scrambling to recover the $5,000 to the Stark County treasury.

Want to say that again, Prosecutor Rhodes?

CANTON MAYOR WILLIAM J. HEALY, II


Not a year goes by that Canton mayor William J. Healy, II is not a serious contender for the SCPR "Lump of Coal" Christmastime Award.

And  2013 is no exception.

Who can forget the furor Healy unleashed within the Stark County Council of Governments (SCOG) when he orchestrated the changing of the rules of the Stark County Crime Lab so that non-scientist and political pal Rick Perez (a former and "retired" Stark County chief deputy sheriff [operations]) could become the crime lab chief on February 5, 2013.

Healy tried to blame his safety director Tom Ream.

But nobody was buying Stark County's master manipulator politician Healy's.

STATE SEN SCOTT OELSLAGER
STATE REP CHRISTINA HAGAN


At Canton City Council's February 11th meeting, President Allen Schulman let go with a barrage on Stark County's delegation to the Ohio General Assembly for standing by and letting Ohio's urban areas (Canton is Ohio's eighth largest city) get gutted in their local government funds (which includes the formal local government funds, the inheritance tax and a utility tax) from the state of Ohio

Representative J. Kirk Schuring (R - Jackson) and Stephen Slesnick (D - Canton) did respond to Schulman's call to come to council to answer questions.

But not Scott Oelslager (R - Plain) and Christina Hagan (R - Marlboro).

Oelslager, through an aide, said he was "too busy" to come to Canton in Stark County to account to Canton council and, Christina Hagan, she simply blew those Stark County city folk off.  After all, she is Stark County
s "rural" area representative.

And, what's more, though she not say she was too busy.

But it is highly likely she is.

According to an Akron Beacon Journal article of October 5, 2013 she is waiting tables (in addition to being state representative) to pay off an astronomical $80,000 student loan.


So two of Stark County's four legislators have no time for financially troubled Stark County communities?


Wow!

CANTON COUNCIL MAJORITY LEADER DAVID DOUGHERTY


Canton Council's Democratic majority leader David Dougherty (Ward 7) comes across as being an intelligent guy.

And that may be.

But as an adept politician among his colleagues, he comes up way short.

The word is that because of his abrasive manner with his fellow council members he will no longer be majority leader as of January 6, 2014.

And as far as the SCPR is concerned, he has only himself to blame.

Of course, internal politics like that are no reason to consider Dougherty as potential "Lump of Coal" award winner.

However, there is an aspect of his apparently abrasive manner that is deserving of consideration of being the SCPR's 2013 LOC awardee.

The SCPR opined on February 8, 2012 that Dougherty did not have "a good bedside manner" when chairing a Canton City Council meeting of February 6th.

One of the most important things that any government body or official does, is to hear their constituents on their concerns and questions respecting the operation of government.

A forum in which those concerns/questions are made known are generally titled on meeting agendas as being "public speaks."

Canton City Council has such an agenda item each and every meeting.

On the 6th, Dougherty appeared to be unnecessarily brusque with several citizen-presenters at Public Speaks.

Fortunately, in the view of the SCPR, Dougherty infrequently - as majority leader and hence vice president of council - chairs a council meeting.

One would think that he would have paid attention to the SCPR February 8, 2012 blog on The Report's observation of his apparent lack of an appropriate "bedside manner" in conducting meetings.

But he didn't.

Councilman Dougherty was back at it with his brusqueness on August (the 26th) of this year.


Hence, the SCPR considers David Dougherty for the 2013 SCPR "Lump of Coal" Christmastime award.

ALAN HAROLD, STARK COUNTY AUDITOR
PHIL GIAVASIS, STARK COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS

Republican Alan Harold ranks up there as one the Stark County Report's favorite Stark County public official.

Alex Zumbar (also a Republican) is probably number one, but Harold is a close second.

A main difference between the SCPR and other Stark County media is that The Report just as easily critiques public officials/figures who impress in an overall sense as readily as The Report pans those who seem to consistently come up "short of the mark" on quality public office/function performance.

Scrutiny of the public sector is about good government; not being a respecter of persons.

One of the things that his predecessor (Democrat Kim Perez) got "raked over the coals" about (no pun intended) was a perception by the folks on the editorial board down at 500 Market Avenue, South that Perez (when he defeated Republican Brant Luther in 2004 [Luther had been appointed by the Stark GOP to replace Janet Creighton as county auditor when she took office as mayor of Canton on January 1, 2004] - when he took office - appointed his Democratic Party political cronies to positions within the auditor's office.

Not to be too harsh on my "editorial board friends," there is some evidence that their concerns had some validity (e.g. Jimmy Babcock and Kevin Fisher).

However, The Report thinks those editorialists are way too selective in singling out Perez.  Those folks are strangely silent when others appoint politically connected persons to office.

It seems that Democrats get lambasted to the exclusion of Republicans.

Hmm?

Well, as we all well know, Democrat Kim Perez got knocked off by Harold in November, 2012 because he was perceived by a majority of Stark County voters of having too politically close to Stark County treasurer Gary D. Zeigler (1999 - October 19, 2011) (see this LINK for background information as to why that perception likely developed).

As readers of the SCPR know, even if The Report likes a particular government official, if The Report thinks there is a transgression by "the favorite," a critical blog is going to come fast and furious.

And such was the case with Harold in his appointing A.R. "Chip" Conde to a lead position in the auditor's office.


Conde is a politically connected Republican who ran against incumbent Democrat William J. Healy, II in 2011 for the mayoralty of Canton.

While The Report thinks Conde is a highly capable guy (which is Harold's defense), there are lots of "highly capables"  and for Harold to hire him to the position (based on political connections - a SCPR opinion) is a breach of he public trust.

Wait a minute!  Harold did advertise the position.  How can you think the Conde hire has political underpinnings?

The Report thinks that Harold is more politically astute that either Campbell or Giavasis.  It appears to the SCPR that the advertising was a sop to the likes of The Report and that nobody except Conde was ever, ever going to get that auditor's department job.

The Report roundly criticized Democrat Rick Campbell for doing the same in hiring son - Kody Gonzalez - of Stark County Dem chairman Randy Gonzalez (who denies he had anything to do with the hiring) as his chief deputy recorder several years ago without seeking competitive candidates.

And, as if he lives a charmed life or something; the SCPR was again critical this year as Kody Gonzalez once again was the recipient of jumping from chief deputy recorder to being chief deputy clerk of courts (Canton Municipal Court) - again "no competition" - at the hand of Democrat Phil Giavasis - the elected Canton clerk of courts.  Kody succeeds father Randy as chief deputy as if the position a family heirloom.


Moreover, the Kody Gonzalez transition was made at - what the SCPR considers to be - a huge increase.  From $49,000 as beginning chief deputy recorder to $64,000 as beginning chief deputy clerk of courts over the course of about five years.

Undoubtedly, father Randy denies having anything to do with the appointment.  The SCPR did not bother asking Randy because the expectation is that all that is forthcoming is "a political spin" that matches or exceeds what comes from Mayor Healy.

Father Gonzalez has tried to sell the SCPR on the notion that "public service" is a Gonzalez family tradition.

The SCPR's rejoinder is a always a sarcastic "oh yes, 'well paid' public service."

Of course, a denial could be true.  But who is going the believe it?  The SCPR certainly has and will not.

To the SCPR, the Harold, Campbell and Giavasis moves reek of partisan politics and when they occur they have been and will continue to be roundly criticized by The Report.

To boot, such conduct will always be prime candidates as being worthy of consideration for the annual SCPR "Lump of Coal" Christmastime award.

Public officials wonder why public skepticism and even cynicism is on the rise?

As an aside - while we are on the topic of "political connectedness and public jobs" - the SCPR is hearing that Randy Gonzalez (who is retiring in January from the Canton chief deputy clerk of courts job) is being considered by newly re-appointed Sheriff George T. Maier as a replacement fiscal officer (Gonzalez is the elected fiscal officer for Jackson Township) for the most recent fiscal officer who resigned last Friday some two days after Maier's reappointment.

It may be that Maier was trying to "grease the skids" for Gonzalez this past Wednesday evening at a holiday gathering of the Stark County Police Chiefs Association when he was telling them "how devastated he was" to lose his fiscal officer.

Hmm?

One can't do without a fiscal officer very long, no?

One has to get one as soon as one possibly can, no?

Does anybody know of anyone who might soon be available?

Another side note.  Readers of the SCPR will recall the blog in which The Report revealed that before he was abruptly removed as sheriff on November 6th by Ohio's court of last resort, Maier was in negotiations with Warren Price (legal counsel for Chairman Gonzalez and the SCDP-CC in Darrow/Maier v. Gonzalez/SCDP-CC mandamus action)  for Price to come on board as either a direct employee/contract employee as the sheriff's legal counsel/human resource director.


Well, one has to wonder whether or not those Price negotiations are on again.



The SCPR has e-mailed both Gonzalez and Maier asking for confirmation of the reports, but neither have responded.

Don't hold your breath, but if they do, of course, the SCPR will supplement this blog to give them their due.

CHUCK OSBORNE
JON SNYDER
MARCIA KIESLING
TIM FOX
NORTH CANTON CITY COUNCIL

When Darryl Revoldt was North Canton Council president, the SCPR used to think that this council was one of the Stark County's better councils.

But no more!

While council President Jon Snyder is a pretty smooth guy, he does not possess the skills of Revoldt.

The nemesis of North Canton's council is civic activist and former councilman (2000 - 2001) Chuck Osborne.


Revoldt, more or less, kept Osborne in line, but, on one occasion, had him removed from a council meeting for being disruptive.

The SCPR's take on Osborne is that "he is a mixed bag."

Osborne has appeal to The Report in that he is one of only a few Stark Countians who have the stomach for holding public officials' "feet to the fire" in being responsive to the needs of citizens over their own convenience and druthers.

However, he take on projects that the SCPR disagrees with.

One was his recent initiative to make the mayor's office in North Canton a full-time position.

For his nonsense approach on this issue, Osborne does earn the attention of the SCPR as a potential candidate for the 2013 SCPR "Lump of Coal" Award.

Osborne is not the only North Cantonian deserving of consideration for this year's award.

Council President Jon Snyder is another.  As is Republican Councilwoman-at-Large Marcia Kiesling.

In the run up to this year's council election both Snyder (Ward 4 [Mueller]) and Kiesling (McCleaster) decided to file campaign ethics charges.

The point of SCPR dissatisfaction with Snyder and Kiesling is their reported attempt to deny Hillary Mueller and Jamie McCleaster a right to have legal counsel (namely, Warren Price) represent them at the Ohio Elections Commission hearing.

Really?

That's what the SCPR heard.

It seems that the objection was that Warren Price had been in discussions about becoming North Canton's water plant superintendent.

So?  What does that have to do with whether or not he represented Mueller and McCleaster before the Ohio Elections Commission?

Exactly the thinking of the SCPR!

As The Report understands the matter, the contention was that Price had agreed to become a North Canton employee and therefore Price would have a conflict in interest in representing the Snyder/Kiesling political opponents.

The fact of the matter is, as it turns out, Price did not accept North Canton's offer.

And the SCPR fails to see how - even if he had - how such is a conflict-in-interest in representing.  It was not the city of North Canton, Price was opposing in his representation of the pair.  It was Snyder and Kiesling in their individual capacities as candidates for political office.

In the final analysis, Price went ahead with the representation.

The SCPR was so unimpressed purported attempt to interfere with this basic right of a person to be represented that The Report believes Snyder and Kiesling are deserving of consideration for the 2013 version of the "Lumo of Coal" SCPR Christmastime award.

Lastly, the SCPR has not been impressed with North Canton City Council (Republican controlled) and North Canton Law Director Tim Fox (a Republican) in:




Accordingly, put North Canton City Council on the list of eligibles for the 2013 6th Annual "Lump of Coal" Award.

A roll of the drums please!



THE 2013 SCPR "LUMP OF COAL"  WINNER



Friday, February 8, 2013

CHIEF CIVIL DIVISION PROSECUTOR ROSS RHODES SAID THAT MARCELLI LAWSUIT TO RECOVER $5,000 TO COUNTY GENERAL FUND IS"... A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME." REALLY?????



UPDATE:  10:00 AM

INQUIRY OF CLERK OF COURTS
NANCY REINBOLD

HER RESPONSE
********************************************

 BLOG TOPICS

Is Ross Rhodes eating his words today?

Conley:  correctly identifies his online detractor?

The Repository's "double standard!"

Judge Forchione's temperament? 

Conley has a motive? LINK 
 
****************************************
ADDED MATERIAL

Email from SCPR to Stark County clerk of courts Nancy Reinbold

>>> Martin Olson <tramols@att.net> 2/8/2013 9:12 AM >>>
Clerk Reinbold,

What do you plan to do with the $5,000 returned by the agent for the Sandy Hook Support Fund in response to Judge Forchione's request?

Do you have any indication [that Judge Forchione] is going to (or, perhaps, already has) amended his original order to empower/direct you as clerk to place the money in the Stark County general fund.

MartinOlson/SCPR


Response from Clerk Reinbold:


It will be held on deposit on the Studer case until an order is signed and filed by Judge Forchione directing distribution.
Nancy S. Reinbold
Stark County Clerk of Courts
110 Central Plaza North Ste 160
Canton, OH 44702
(330) 451-7622
nsreinbo@co.stark.oh.us

ORIGINAL BLOG

First,  Stark County chief civil prosecutor Ross Rhodes said the judge had absolute immunity when there was speculation in the media that civic activist and local attorney Craig T. Conley would be filing a lawsuit on behalf of Thomas Marcelli seeking to compel Stark County Court of Common Pleas judge Frank Forchione to see to it that a $5,000 fine he ordered convicted criminal defendant Scott D. Studer to pay for the Sandy Hook shooting victims was repaid to the Stark County treasury and into the county general fund.

Secondly, in what the SCPR took as an implied intimidation to Conley proceeding with the lawsuit was Rhodes' statement to the effect that if Conley lost the case, he might be looking at paying costs of the action out of his (Conley's) own pocket.

The suit in declaratory judgment (LINK to SCPR blog providing more details of underlying facts of case) was filed on February 1st in the Stark County Court of Common Pleas.  And wouldn't you know it, guess who gets assigned the case by the court's lottery system of assigning cases?

Of course, who else, in a case of super-irony:  Judge Forchione.

Thirdly, after the suit was filed Rhodes said "[i]t was a complete waste of time."

Obviously, if the case continues on, the judge will be recusing himself as will the entire panel of Stark County judges.

Conley tells the SCPR that his/his client's intention was for the $5,000 to come out of the judge's pocket.  Moreover, he says for the judge to deprive the victims of the money already paid to the Sandy Hook Support Fund was disgraceful.

So when news broke last night (LINK) that the agent for the Sandy Hook Support Fund had returned the $5,000 at Judge Forchione's request, one would think that Conley would pack up the lawsuit as being moot and he and his client go away.

For any of us thinking that is not to know Craig T. Conley.

Conley is a guy who pretty much says what he means and means what he says.

His client's (under the counsel of Conley) primary reason for filing the suit in the first place was because of his all consuming passion to "the rule of law" in American jurisprudence.

And Conley is doing all of this pro bono (without charge - for the public good).

He has advanced $300 in filing fees to file the case which he may or may not recover as part of the resolution of the case.


And in filing the case, Conley has incurred the ire of at least a couple of Stark County attorneys (one of whom Conley says has a matter pending before Forchione and the other of which has received some four appointments to cases over the last year or so at the hand of Judge Forchione) and members of the general public.

To boot, Conley believes that Stark County Democratic Party chairman Randy Gonzalez chimed in on the comments section of The Repository in support of Judge Forchione under the screenname "warmsunshine."

The Report has asked Gonzalez whether or not Conley's suspicion was well founded.

Gonzalez answered with an emphatic NO!

Conley says that his suspicion is grounded in his belief that information shared in the comment was information that it is likely is uniquely ready at hand to Gonzalez.  Moreover, he points out that as an official in the Canton Municipal clerk of courts office, he thinks Gonzalez would have developed a government interaction relationship with Forchione as a consequence being a prosecutor in the Canton law department.

Conley indicates to The Report that he has put his mouth where his suspicion is as a testament to his certainty of the identity of the anonymous commenter.  He compiled a packet of information on the Judge's order and sent it to Gonzalez without comment.

Finally, Conley tells the SCPR that as far as he can determine, warmsunshine has not commented on the Forchione fine situation or any other Repository story since he transmitted the packet to Gonzalez.

Could be a mere co-incidence, no?

But Conely does not think so.

The Report repeats, that notwithstanding Conley's suspicion, Gonzalez has denied to the SCPR that Conley's speculation is true.

The main point of the foregoing discursive is to share with SCPR readers that folks like Conley are brought under enormous pressure by friends of those he holds to public account to back off.

And for a guy like Ross Rhodes to suggest that Conley's work "... is a complete waste of time" is outrageous for a person who is obligated to cherish the rule of law.

Lawyers 101 in law school is very clear in instruction that the way lawyers determine what the rules of law are, when disagreed upon, is through litigation.

Rhodes undoubtedly knows such to be the case and for him to suggest that Marcelli through Conley accessing the courts is "a waste" is the equivalent of placing himself in a three-in-one role of being jury, judge and executioner.  Pretty arrogant, no?

Nonetheless, Conley having an underlying motivation for participating in the filing the lawsuit merits examination.  This the SCPR has done.  Here is a LINK to that blog.

Beyond Rhodes, there is the conduct of The Repository editorial board in its processing letters to the editors on the Forchione fine issue.

Conley alleges (and has provided substantiation to the satisfaction of The Report) that two attorney letter to editor writers have connections with Judge Forchione.

One, Conley says, has gotten case appointments from the judge.  The other has a case pending before Forchione.

For Gayle Beck (the chief) and her fellow editorial editors to allow those who have a connection to get "letters to the editors" published without the editors having vetted the writers on whether or not they may have a motivation to write the letters they write is astounding.  Had she checked them out and detected Conley's allegations, one would think that she would certainly had inserted an editorial board disclaimer.

For some "letter to the editor" writers, Repository instituted vetting hurdles they have to overcome seem beyond reasonable.  For others, it appears the bar is very low, if not non-existent.

In a one-newspaper-town and in a county which has one-countywide-newspaper; double standarding is unacceptable. 

To The Report, the leadership at The Repository have irresponsibly (from an editorial standpoint) handled their monopoly of Stark County sited media.

The SCPR does not begrudge those with ulterior motives getting their letters published, but the editor, if they are doing proper editorial board journalism, should ensure that letters include disclaimers detailing connections between the writer and the subjects so that readers can make an informed judgment as to how much credibility those writers should be accorded.

So shame on The Repository editorial board for not doing its due diligence!

As it turns out, the Stark County's general fund is ultimately going to get the $5,000 courtesy of Conley and his client Marcelli at no cost to the taxpayers.

A waste, Prosecutor Rhodes?

Judge Forchione's given reason for retrieving the $5,000 is so that the Marcelli/Conley litigation will fade away for mootness thereby saving Stark's taxpayers the expense of protracted litigation.

For Conley, this is not good enough.

He is insisting that the judge correct his order so as to be in compliance with ORC 2949.11 and thereby, at least impliedly, admit that he did not have the legal authority to do what he did in ordering Studer to monetarily assist the victims of Sandy Hook.

In a letter to Prosecutor John Ferrero, Conley lays you his requirements to resolve the declaratory judgment action:


Conley has filed an amended complaint so as to include developments whereby Forchione asked for and received (via the clerk of courts office) the Sandy Hook money back.

Conley says that it is his intent to, by legal redress, compel Judge Forchione to restructure the order so as to put Stark County Clerk of Courts Nancy Reinbold in a plausible legal position to deposit the $5,000 with the Stark County treasury on it way into the county general fund.

While he thinks such will not totally cure the problems with the order, he said that he and his client will not stand in the way of the matter coming to an end if the order is restructured.

At the end of this blog, the SCPR has placed a copy of those paragraphs of the amended complaint wherein Conley endeavors to give life beyond the mere fact that Judge Forchione recovered the money from the folks of Newtown, Connecticut.

For Prosecutor Ross Rhodes, he should issue a press release to effect that he misspoke when to termed the complaint as being "a waste of time," which by definition is not accurate witness the recall of the $5,000 by Judge Forchione owing to the Marcelli/Conley complaint being filed.

For The Repository Editorial Board, they should start applying the same vetting standard to all letters to the editor that appears in the pages of The Rep.

For Judge Forchione, he should reconstruct his order to be in full compliance with the provisions of ORC 2949.11 in such as fashion that Clerk Reinbold is on solid footing in terms of forwarding the $5,000 to the Stark treasury or deposit in the Stark County general fund.

Moreover, it would be helpful for Judge Forchione (who is held in high esteem by many Stark Countians) to admit point-blank that he overstepped his legal bounds.

But will his general disposition, his demeanor, his temperament allow him allow to do so?

Let's all hope that the Forlchione assessment of one highly placed Stark County elected official to the SCRP is on the mark (i.e. that Judge Forchione is a classy guy) and that Conley's is off-the-mark.

For therein lies a quick solution to what Craig Conley is now calling Forchionegate a la his 2009 - 2011 labeling  of Stark County treasury problems as being Zeiglergate.

Forchione's handling of this matter should go a long way towards answering the question of whether or not he gets re-elected when the next comes on the ballot.

Here is the core of the amended complaint:

Thursday, January 31, 2013

(VIDEO: COM'R BERNABEI) PROSECUTOR FERRERO REFUSES CONLEY DEMAND TO FILE SUIT AGAINST STARK COMMON PLEAS JUDGE FRANK FORCHIONE ON ORDER FOR STUDER FINE DONATION TO SANDY HOOK VICTIMS. WILL CONLEY'S CLIENT (MARCELLI) FOLLOW THROUGH WITH A SUIT OF HIS OWN?




 VIDEO
COMMISSIONER & BOARD PRESIDENT
TOM BERNABEI
EXPLAINS
WHY
EXECUTIVE SESSION CANCELLED

CRAIG CONLEY FORCED CANCELLATION?

From a January 25, 2013 SCPR blog:
Reacting to an order recently put on by Stark County Court of Common Pleas judge Frank Forchione in the Scott D. Studer case that as part of his sentence on having pled guilty in multiple counts Illegal Use of a Minor in a Nudity-Oriented Material or Performance [R.C. 21907.323(A)(1)](F2) included a requirement that he pay a fine of $5,000.00 "to be forwarded the victims of Newtown, Connecticut tragedy," [civic activist and local attorney] Conley fired off a letter (January 23rd) to Stark County Prosecutor John Ferrero asking him, on behalf of a client, to institute a civil action against Forchione to recover the money to the Stark County treasury.

Readers will recall as reported in local media that Studer (a former Jackson High School freshman basketball coach) had videotaped numerous student athletes (since 2005) taking showers.
Fast forward to today.

Conley was poised to have his office administrative person at the filing station of the Stark County clerk of courts this morning at 8:30 a.m. in order to file a law suit on behalf of client Thomas Marcelli against Forchione should the action demanded of Stark prosecutor John Ferrero go unheeded.

For more background on the demand, here are links to two prior blogs written by the SCPR detailing the reasons why Conley  has pressed Ferrero's office for action.
Well, yesterday at 2:15 p.m.  Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Ross Rhodes (chief of the civil division) wrote Conley this letter of refusal to sue Forchione:


Rhodes letter was enough to give Conley "pause for thought."

Why?

Conley says so that he has time to read and analyze the Rhodes legal citation of Wilson v. Neu (LINK).

Moreover, Conley says that if his analysis leads him believe that Rhodes is correct in his statement "it is doubtful that such an action can be maintained," then a suit will not be filed.

The case has to do with whether or not a judge is immune from lawsuit for the type of order that Judge Forchione made in the Studer case.

Other important language in the Rhodes letter for Conley to digest has to do with a possible determination that the prosecutor's office deems itself to have a conflict in interest (as previously posited by Conley and implication that the Board of Stark County Commissioners would become a party in interest because appointing a special counsel  (and the appointment of a visiting judge) would entail expenditures from the county treasury.

Presumably, Rhodes is setting up a justification for whomever serves as counsel to qualify to meet in executive session with the commissioners as the case proceeds.

The SCPR believes that impliedly he is suggesting to Conley that he could be responsible to reimburse the county for those costs should he proceed with the case and lose.

Another interesting development in the matter today was the cancellation by commissioners of a scheduled executive session to discuss the Conley demand.


On Tuesday Conley wrote the commissioners (excerpts) to wit:


Bingo!

The first thing asked by President Tom Bernabei when he convenes a commissioners meeting is whether or not any amendments to the meeting agenda are requested by parties to the meeting.

Chief Administrator Mike Hanke piped in that he did indeed have an amendment.  The amendment was to excise the executive session from the agenda.  (see video below).

Even if Conley concludes that he does not have an effective means to hold Judge Forchione accountable for what he believes the judge was not entitled as a matter of law to do, Conley performed a public service by raising the issue.

The Report believes that most everyday Stark Countians support Forchione's order.  So what Conley has stirred up is not a popular thing for him to have done. 

The Report takes Conley at his word.

He raised the issue not because he personally objected to a charity being benefited.  But because he is first and foremost dedicated to the "rule of law."

Even those who support what Judge Forchione did should honor our system of jurisprudence and respect those who have the courage to take unpopular actions.

After the meeting, the SCPR sat down and talked to Commissioner Bernabei about the decision to remove the executive session from the agenda.