KIRK SCHURING TO SCPR: THE OHIO DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES MEETING LOCATION ON HYDROFRACKING HAS BEEN CHANGED!

UPDATE:  12/10/2010 AT 1:48 PM

 

UPDATE:  12/10/2010 AT 12:22 PM

ORIGINAL POST

Louis Giavasis and Scott Haws (Plain Township trustees) have been working for several months to get a handle on hydrofracking and what, if any, harm the procedure poses to the drinking water supply for Plain Township residents, should natural gas drilling companies obtain mineral right leases from area residents and choose to drill for natural gas encased in subsurface rock.

Hydrofracking is widely defined thusly:

Hydraulic fracturing or fracking (vertical or horizontal) is a means of natural gas extraction employed in deep natural gas well drilling. Once a well is drilled, millions of gallons of water, sand and proprietary chemicals are injected, under high pressure, into a well. The pressure fractures the shale and props open fissures that enable natural gas to flow more freely out of the well.

Gas drilling companies are active in Stark County obtaining mineral leases and are thought to be planning to begin hydraulic fracking in the county including Plain Township.

Accordingly, Giavasis and Haws have seized the initiative to gather information on the process in terms how Ohio regulates and what local governments can do to protect their water supplies (if it is determined that fracking threatens the safety of drinking water) and thereby lookout for the health, safety and welfare of their residents as they have a fiduciary duty to do given their status as elected officials.

All was going well with the joint effort and the two had set up a meeting for December 14, 2010 at 5:30 p.m. at township hall located at 2600 Easton NE for area residents to attend in order to get their questions answered by Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) officials and area Ohio General Assembly members (Senator Kirk Schuring as well as Representatives Scott Oelslager and Todd Snitchler).

However, all that changed between the hours of 11:00 a.m. and noon yesterday as Trustee Giavasis appeared on WHBC1480 AM's Points to Ponder (Ron Ponder, host) and made statements which were deemed by Giavasis' fellow trustee Haws,  Senator Schuring and ODNR officials to be prejudiced against the drilling companies.  In addition to Giavasis' comments on Points to Ponder, Senator Schuring told the Stark County Political Report that he understood that Giavasis has a resolution ready to go which is indicative that Giavasis has prejudged whether or not hydraulic fracking is a safe practice and that therefore a meeting at Plain Township Hall with Giavasis (as president of the Plain Township Board of Trustees) presiding would not be a proper forum for ODNR officials to engage.

Accordingly, Schuring has made arrangements for the meeting to be relocated to the Plain Community Branch of the Stark County District Library located at 1803 Schneider St NE in Plain.  Schuring says the meeting room holds about 100 persons (seated) but that there is standing room should an overflow crowd show up.

Schuring said he respects Giavasis' right to have an opinion of the efficacy of the hyrdraulic fracturing process, but in expressing that opinion on the air waves and in written form (i.e. the prepared resolution), he forfeited the right (and have state officials present) to have the meeting at township hall.  ODNR officials agreed to Schuring's request that they come to Plain on the condition that the session be moderated in a neutral setting by a neutral moderator.  According to Schuring, ODNR understands that there will be members of the public in attendance who will asking tough questions and that they (the Stark County delegation to the Ohio General Assembly and ODNR officials) do not object to same.

Giavasis' supporter Chris Borello of Plain Township and president of the Concerned Citizens of Lake Township (CCLT) disputes that the meeting has been changed and challenges Schuring's authority to effect the change in an e-mail (sent at 10:30 p.m. last night) to Executive Editor Jeff Gauger, to wit:

CANTON REPOSITORY      cc;  Akron Beacon Journal

Jeff Gauger, Managing Editor,   The Canton Respository  

Edd Pritchard, reporter covering Plain Twp.

Dear Mr.  Gauger:

WHY does the headline in the  Friday's edition of the Canton Repository state incorrectly that the meeting location for the Gas Hydro Fracking issue has been changed, when this is patently untrue?!  It appears a dirty trick is being played to thwart citizens from attending this important meeting dealing with an issue that could affect their health and welfare -  and we are truly outraged!

.I just spoke to Plain Trustee, Lou Giavasis, this evening, who will be chaIring this meeting, and he informed me that when he was called this afternoon by your newspaper reporter, Edd Pritchard, and informed that Mr. Schuring (for apparently arbitrary reasons)  took it upon himself to change the location( to a smaller venue),  Trustee Giavasis reportedly informed Edd Prichard of the paper that Mr.Schuring had NO authority to change this meeting location -that it had been called by Plain Twp. Trustees, and Mr. Pritchard was informed that it would indeed, REMAIN at the same time and place - at the Plain Twp. Hall , 2600 Easton Street, Plain Twp. on Tues. Dec. 14th at 5:30 pm.

So why does your paper's headline convey something entirely different? Unless the reader happens to read all the way down to the last sentence, they will clearly be misled and therefore show up at the wrong location Tuesday night!    We request that  the newspaper in the following edition , same page, provide an equally large headline -  that will correct this and properly inform the public to the right location - so that all that want to attend can and will know where to go. 

.

Chris Borello for Concerned Citizens of Plain and Lake Twp.s,

Apparently, The Repository's Edd Pritchard (a Repository reporter) got himself into the middle of the scheduling of the meeting dispute by virtue of two earlier communications he had with Borello.

The latest was on December 3rd email, to wit:

From: Pritchard, Edd <edd.pritchard@cantonrep.com>
To: crborello@aol.com <crborello@aol.com>
Sent: Fri, Dec 3, 2010 7:24 pm
Subject: Your Schuring question

Chris,

At the Nov. 23 Plain Township trustees meeting, Scott Hawes and Louis Giavasis announced plans for a work session and hearing on Dec. 14 about hydraulic fracturing. We had a brief about the meeting in the Nov. 24 paper.

During the meeting, Haws and Giavasis both mentioned that Haws had been organizing the meeting with the help of Ohio Sen. Kirk Schuring. Apparently Schuring's role was talking with ODNR and Ohio EPA officials to find people from their departments who can attend the meeting.

At this point, based on an announcement issued by the Plain trustees on Monday, Schuring, Scott Oelslager and someone from ODNR will attend the meeting to address concerns related to Chesapeake Energy and hydro-fracking.

I hope that clears up your question from you conversation with Jack Richards. Have a good weekend.

Thanks,
Edd

And then there was "apparently" a phone call he had with a citizen calling The Repository in which he is alleged to have said that the meeting was Kirk Schuring's idea, to wit:

From: crborello@aol.com
To: shaws@plaintownship.com
Sent: Fri, Dec 3, 2010 4:24 pm
Subject: Meeting on 12/14 to discuss Fracking Ban

Hi Scott,

I received a phone call last night from a concerned citizen involved with the fracking issue, and he informed me that he got a phone call yesterday from the Canton Rep reporter, Edd Pritchard, about your meeting on the 14th..

The strange part is, Edd told him that Kirk Schuring was putting this meeting together.  What gives?  I thought you had called the meeting.  That's what your Administrator told me yesterday. Please clarify. This is about our residents' concerns and our Twp. right? 

 Did you get a chance to watch GASLAND yet?

We hope you will find the time, because you will see what Americans have to say about this matter, citizens that have already had up close and personal experiences, after being smoozed that fracking was just fine, all the claims that we are sure to hear.....vs. the truth of the matter...  Have a nice weekend.

Chris  (emphasis added)

It appears to the SCPR that Schuring has reasserted (?) control of the scheduling and the conduct of the meeting.  Moreover, it seems that The Report's original blog on this matter was right on the mark.  There is a dispute between the two on the issue of fracking with Giavasis having made at the very least a preliminary determination that he believes those who say that fracking threatens the fresh water supply and therefore needs to protect Plain citizens and their water supply, whereas Haws questions the reliability of the opinion out there (in the public marketplace) supporting Giavasis' statements on Points to Ponder and his planned action via Township resolution.

The Report believes that the Schuring involvement was not originally to schedule and control the meeting, but, rather, to help Trustee Haws in his efforts.

However, being the Republican allies they are; when Giavasis (likely, he along with Mary Cirelli - a Canton councilwoman, the most populist official in Stark County) made it obvious on Points to Ponder that he was going to more or less be against any fracking in Plain Township on top of having attacked Republican Governor-elect Kasich for having supported - when he was in Congress - the former Vice President Dick Cheney's Halliburton amendment (exempting hydrofracking from regulation), then the two (Haws and Schuring) got their heads together and decided that Schuring would come out as taking over the scheduling/locating of the meeting to take the matter out of Giavasis' hands.

Folks, there is nothing "neutral" about this issue.  Environmentalists like Borello have already determined that the risks in fracking are too great to be permitted to be implemented widely across America and therefore are on a national campaign to get a reversal of the Halliburton amendment and, what's more, to gain authority for locals like township trustees and village/city councils to place moratoriums on fracking operations.  Environmentalists enjoy the support of many Democratic office holders.

On the other hand, the drilling industry is working through Republican office holders to stop the burgeoning anti-fracking sentiment that is threatening to sweep the country by storm.

Scott Haws is trying to clothe himself as being some kind of objective person (as is Schuring) in the argument that is in process.  But in the opinion of the SCPR, they are not any more objective than Giavasis and Cirelli.

Hence back to the SCPR's original blog.  Giavasis and Haws (as trustees) are at polar opposites.  No matter what the two of them say for public consumption.

So where will the meeting with ODNR officials actually take place?

If at all, The Report believes that Schuring will prevail.  For he is the person (being an Ohio elected official) who has the ear of the ODNR.  All he has to do is make a phone call to the ODNR and tell them, as he has obviously done, that the meeting has been relocated and they will show up to the site he directs them too.

Sure.  Giavasis can go ahead with his planned meeting.  But do not expect Schuring, Oelslager, Snitchler and the ODNR folks to show up!

Again, despite the Giavasis and Haws protestations to the contrary, the SCPR stands by The Report's original assessment:  there is a split between Haws and Giavasis and it does threaten to unravel the years of unity that have been emanating from Plain Township Hall.

WAIT UNTIL STARK COUNTY EDUCATORS HEAR THIS ONE. KIRK SCHURING & THE OHIO RETIREMENT STUDY COUNCIL ASLEEP AT THE SWITCH AGAIN?

Stark Countians have witnessed how many U.S workers have worked a lifetime to have retirement benefits only to loose them when companies go into bankruptcy.

Could the same thing happen to the professional class in America?

When Enron went belly up a number of years ago, the State Teachers Retirement System (STRS) lost millions of dollars. Some of us wanted to pointed the finger at the then state Representative Kirk Schuring (Republican - 51st) chairman of the Ohio Retirement Study Council (ORSC) for not putting in safeguards in place to prevent the losses.

Yours truly has never seen Schuring madder.

At a meeting at the North Canton Community Christian Church to explain to Stark County's teachers what responsibility he bore for the oversight malfunction of STRS investors; the red faced, angered Schuring vehemently denied any neglect.

Mad or not, the SCPR believes that Schuring and his fellows on the ORSC were asleep then and, perhaps, the slumber continues.

Today, the SCPR received an e-mail from STRS that indicated that a statutorily mandated requirement that it be able to fund teacher pensions out 30 years had slipped to 41.2 years as of July, 2008 and now in 2009 to - get this - INFINITY!

Here's the quote from the e-mail:

Even with these changes, the funding period for the pension fund stood at 41.2 years on July 1, 2008.  This means that based on the value of investment assets at that time, we expected to pay off all unfunded liabilities over the next 41 years by achieving an 8% annual rate of return and meeting all other actuarial assumptions.  However, due to the recession, the market value of our investment assets declined by about $24 billion over the past two fiscal years.  As a result, STRS Ohio's unfunded liability almost doubled in just one year and the funding period now stands at "infinity." (emphasis added) 

It wasn't until May, 2009 that Schuring and his fellows at the ORSC caught on.

In May according to the STRS e-mail:
[T]he Ohio Retirement Study Council, which is the legislative oversight body for Ohio's five public pension systems, instructed each system in May to present board-approved plans for achieving or maintaining a 30-year funding period at the ORSC's Sept. 9 meeting.
What are the options that the ORSC will be considering for STRS?

Here they are:

• Increasing contributions from the current 10% from active teachers and/or 14% from employers.
• Instituting a minimum retirement age or years of service for retirement.
• Increasing the number of years used to calculate final average salary to five from three.
• Changing the formula for calculating pensions.
• Changing the cost-of-living adjustment (COLA).

No action is expected by the Ohio Retirement Study Council until its October, 2009 meeting.  Even if ORSC acts in October, it could take months before corrective legislative action can be taken and enacted into law (getting the governor's signature) before the "infinity" timetable has a finite number put on it.

What will the finite number be?  50 years?  60 years?  70 years?

Kirk Schuring and Scott Oelslager (who likes to invoke his teacher parents as proof he looks out for teacher interests) have been roundly criticized by yours truly primarily because they violate the "spirit" of Ohio's term limits (switching back and forth between the 29th (Ohio Senate) and the 51st (Ohio House).

But there are other reasons why this duo need to be via election term limited by Stark Countians.

Of course, there is Schuring and his "failure to protect" the retirement of Stark County's teachers.

And, there is the failure to be in the lead in fixing the funding of Ohio's public schools ruled unconstitutional four times by the Ohio Supreme Court (DeRolfe) What is particularly galling about this pair is that they were members of the majority party (supermajority - veto proof) with a sitting Republican governor for a good portion of their time in the Legislature.

Moreover, the larger picture is that only thing that this duo has produced of consequence over their years in the Ohio General Assembly is Oelslager's work on open records.

Does anyone remember Schuring's "I'm going to fix the public schools funding problem" by way of constitutional amendment that never got off the ground?  It was a pipe dream from the beginning.  Even if it had gotten through the Ohio General Assembly, Governor Strickland was going to veto the provision because he had to protect his "I love him like a brother" protege John Boccieri.

The SCPR believes that Schuring was never serious about the effort.  It was designed to get free ink for the impending campaign against Boccieri; nothing more.

Schuring's and Oelslager's legislative record is pathetic and if Stark Countians continue to send them back to Columbus, then we Stark Countians, are part of our own problem.

One out for the voters is that the Stark County Democratic Party has put sacrificial lamb after sacrificial lamb up against these two election after election after election.

Will current Stark Democratic Party chair Randy Gonzalez do better than the recently resigned Johnnie A. Maier, Jr.?

For the SCPR, this will be a litmus test as to whether or not Gonzalez is going to pay more attention to the electability  and the quality of the party's candidates than Maier did during his tenure.

From the looks of how Schuring and Oelslager have not looked after education-in-general and educators-in-particular; those with a vested interest in STRS ought to be demanding that Gonzalez and the Democrats over a serious alternative come November, 2009.

But will they?

Probably not.  That would mean educators getting their hands dirty in the messy world of politics.

That "above-it-all-attitude," even when self-interest compels action, is exactly what Schuring and Oelslager rely on.

IS OHIO'S GOVERNMENT LOOKING TO GET ITS HAND ON PUBLIC PENSION FUNDS? WILL THE STARK COUNTY DELEGATION FIGHT TO PROTECT PUBLIC PENSIONS?

The Stark County Political Report remembers when ENRON went belly up (2000/2001) and cost members of the Ohio State Teachers Retirement System $56.6 million. PERS lost $58.8 million.

One of the guardians of STRS and PERS was supposed to be state Senator Kirk Schuring (R - Jackson). At least that's what the SCPR thinks. Schuring gets very angry (which is rare for him), when yours truly makes this allegation.

Why does the SCPR assign Schuring the guardian role during the time the ENRON fiasco unfolded?

Because Senator Schuring was president of the Ohio Retirement Study Council (ORSC) at the time. And the SCPR believes the ORC failed many of Ohio's retired public employees in neglecting to uphold its obligations spelled out in Ohio Revised Code Chapter 717.

Now Schuring is vice chairman of the ORSC.

One has to wonder whether or not a repeat of ENRON is in the offing for Ohio's public employee retirees? If not, what has been done to prevent a repeat?

It would be reassuring for Ohio's public to hear from Senator Schuring that ORSC security is improved.

In 2009, it is not the private sector that bears watching. Now it is Ohio's government.

Governor Ted Strickland is desperate to have the money to keep Ohio going. Until the state budget god tight, Strickland was against expanding gambling in Ohio. But just days ago he signed an executive order command the Ohio Lottery Commission to begin installing slots at Ohio's racetracks.

Now comes word that he and the Ohio General Assembly took at look at "borrowing" money from PERS (Ohio's Public Employess Retirement System).

Although STRS (the State Teachers Retirement System) was not being eyed by the governor, his look at PERS was not lost on STRS:

Here is a few excepts from an e-mail that STRS sent out:

OPERS CONTRIBUTION REDUCTION PROPOSED TO HELP STATE BUDGET
On June 19, 2009, Gov. Ted Strickland proposed that the state's contribution to public employees' pensions be reduced from 14 percent to 8 percent for two years, with a payback to the Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS) to occur over the subsequent 10 years. This proposal was made as a way to help balance the state's budget.

...

While STRS Ohio and the other public pension systems in the state were not included in the proposal, the executive directors of STRS Ohio, School Employees Retirement System (SERS) and the Highway Patrol Retirement System sent a joint letter to the governor and the members of the Ohio General Assembly also voicing their opposition.

...

The proposal was eventually rejected by lawmakers and was not part of the state's final budget. Going forward, all the systems will need to be vigilant to ensure such proposals do not surface again.

How much would the proposed raid on PERS brought the governor in his frantic search for dollars?

Here is what Akron Beacon Journal Statehouse reporter Dennis Williard has to say (Scrutiny missing in state budget, July 19):

... Strickland's proposal to reduce the state's contribution to the Ohio Public Employees Retirement System ... would have been a $250 million raid on the pension plan.

The SCPR believes Stark's public employees should heed STRS's warning. The questions that Stark County's public employees should be asking themselves should include:

"Do I want my pension fund to be making a ten year loan to the state of Ohio?

And, if not: "Can I trust my legislator to stop this from happening?"

Now that we know he uses The Repository opinion pages to explain his votes; perhaps, the good Senator Schuring would explain why public employment retirees have no worries about the security of their pension. Seeing as he is an expert of sorts on protecting public employees pension dollars.

And for good measure, maybe Oelslager, Slesnick, Okey, Snitchler and Schiavoni will chime in?