AS IF THINGS COULDN'T GET WORSE FOR STARK CO TREASURER GARY D. ZEIGLER? AMENDED COMPLAINT FILED BY MARCELLI (CONLEY) AGAINST HIM. TOP ASSISTANT LEM GREEN RESIGNS. WILL STARK'S ORGANIZED DEMOCRATS SUFFER FALLOUT?

REVISED & REPUBLISHED 07/13/2010 AT 10:22 AM

INCLUDES ZEIGLER RESPONSE TO MARCELLI/CONLEY TRANSFER ALLEGATIONS GIVEN TO ALLIANCE REVIEW REPORTER

For Stark County Treasurer Gary D. Zeigler, today (July 12, 2010) probably ranks up there with the last few days in March, 2009; April 1, 2009 (when Zeigler says he first learned of the Frustaci theft) and June 25, 2010 (when the U.S. attorney filed the federal government Bill of Information against Vince Frustaci (the former Chief Deputy in Zeigler's office.

How so?

First, his long time (obviously now. former) confidant and friend Attorney Lem Green (staff attorney for the Stark County treasury) resigned today.

Second, Bethlehem Township resident Tom Marcelli through his attorney Craig T. Conley has filed an "amended" verified complaint with the Stark County Court of Common Pleas against Treasurer Zeigler setting for allegations that Zeigler has transacted on three properties owned or partially owned by Zeigler which, according to Conley's allegations, are in fraud of Conley's expectation that he - if allowed to proceed on the case - will obtain a judgment (hence the caption nomination:  creditors fraud) against Zeigler for Marcelli (standing in for the Stark County taxpayers).

Here is a copy of a key paragraph is the amended verified complaint:

Here is an excerpt from the Alliance Review's Laurie Huffman who did an interview with Zeigler last night in response to the Marcelli/Conley allegations on real property transfers:

 Those who want Zeigler to resign have to have a grudging admiration for Zeigler's spunk.  Who in Stark County could remain in office under the pressure Zeigler is being subjected to?  Nonetheless the SCPR stands by a previously issued calls for Zeigler to resign.

However, as Green is saying, Zeigler's fastidiousness may be more than just a personal stress factor.  It could be spilling over into Stark County government, in general.

And, of course, there is the political aspect.  Democratic countywide officeholders (all of them) have to be literally shaking in their boots about how what Attorney Conley is calling "Zeiglergate" will be affecting their continuance in office.

The most nervous has to be Stark County Auditor Kim Perez,  In the past he has proven to the most productive Democratic candidate vote getter in Stark County.  But will that save him this year?

 Perhaps not.

His opponent, Republican Alan Harold, is about as politically "greenhornish" as one gets for running countywide.  However, being politically innocent could bode well for him come November.

In terms of office function, Perez as auditor is the closest to Zeigler's treasury position.  And with Stark Countians looking at the qualifications for office, (e.g. Who's qualified, who isn't for countywide elected positions, Gayle Beck, Repository editorial board, July 12, 2010), Harold professional qualifications - MBA from The Ohio State University with an undergraduate degree in accounting -  (if not his political experience) puts him in an ideal place to defeat Perez.

If the Zeigler drama keeps going, the race might not even be close.  And the "winning going away" under these circumstances is not likely to be Perez.

Back to Zeigler's future.

The SCPR believes that even if he can weather the current storm he will not be able to survive a Democratic primary (which is surely to come) if he runs again.

The Report thinks that it is unlikely Zeigler is entertaining long term thoughts these days.  Rather, it is probable he is just trying to get from day to day.

With Green's exit and the Stark County executive committee having called for his resignation, it hard to believe that Zeigler can hang in there much longer.  Now, with the amended lawsuit by Marcelli, he is further besieged.  Undoubtedly, Marcelli's attorney is not just looking for real estate transactions to try to undo.  Conley, in the process of trying the case will be certainly looking for other assets to levy against if he is successful in getting a judgment for the money missing from the Stark treasury and not satisfied from other sources.

Who would of thunk that Stark Republicans could go from holding no countywide offices (non-judicial) to holding them all.

Really?

How about the coroner's office and engineering office?

Good point.

But if Stark County Republican Chairman Jeff Matthews can "strike while the iron is hot" (which the SCPR is skeptical that he can), then it could be a clean sweep by election night in November, 2012.

Finding a "qualified" Republican to run for "all" these offices could be problematical.  However, Democrat Coroner Murthy did have a challenge from a qualified Republican in 2008.  Could these new circumstances. though unrelated to the coroner's office, prompt a rematch?

A prospect of a Republican clean sweep by November, 2012 has to be, one would think, a reason of a number why Green (being the stanch Democrat he is) made his move today.  And, it most certainly, has to be a prime reason for the Stark County executive committee's recent action in "demanding" that Zeigler resign.

Stark's organized Democrats have to feel like they are the political equivalent of BP.  They have a huge leak on their hands and are seemingly powerless to stop it.

In a bizarre twist of unfolding events, wouldn't the organized and officeholding Democrats be eternally grateful to Zeigler if he were to resign and to resign today?

WOULD THE POLITICAL RESURRECTION OF JANET CREIGHTON HELP STARK COUNTY?

Repository Executive Editor Jeff Gauger wrote an intriguing piece on former Canton Mayor Janet Creighton's possible return to Stark County political life. (reference: Creighton looks ahead

Not that Gauger offered any meaningful political insight insight on what a Creighton might or might not mean for the future well-being of Stark County.

Gauger is not a political writer and it shows in this piece.

He is first and foremost a newspaper administrator who has likely reached the zenith of his administrative career being EE at The Rep.

But the topic (Creighton's political future in Canton/Stark County) is an important one for Stark Countians to ponder. The past could have been left alone except for the anecdote about the "chance" meeting with Healy at WHBC.

Why?

Because her loss to Healy will drive Creighton to seek Canton/Stark County based political redemption in some way or fashion within the next two years.

You can be sure that there are a number of Stark Democratic elected officials who are shaking in their boots.

Who might that be?

Todd Bosley, Kim Perez and John Boccieri, that's who.

Why not Healy?

Healy is finished as a viable politician in Stark County, unless, of course, Slesnick wants to give up his Ohio House seat. Any Democrat wins the 52nd Ohio House seat. Even Healy.

Sure Creighton could become mayor again, even if Healy runs again - and easily. And the SCPR thinks Healy will run again unless certain circumstances unfold that would make It impossible for him. But don't look for that to happen. Healy is the envy of all of those "9 lives cats" that we all talk about.

But does she want to be mayor again?

Why should she? Healy will have totally wrecked Canton by the time the race comes up again. So, with Canton in a deeper hole than it was when Creighton was elected mayor, what would make her think she could be a difference maker and second time around?

She did have her picture taken with GOP gubernatorial hopeful John Kasich at this year's annual Stark County Republican Party McKinley event.

Why bring that up?

Think she going to be Kasich's running mate?

Could be, but not likely. There is another reason. A more Canton-esque reason.

Don't you folks remember?

When Creighton ran against Bill Smuckler her coup-de-gras and probably the difference in her narrow win over Smuckler was "special" relationship with Republican controlled state government and Governor Bob Taft, in particular.

She was going to tap into state government resources to help get Canton out of its economic swoon. Remember, now?

She won and Canton continued its downward trek and the state Republicans had their own problems and were unable to bail Creighton out.

If anything, Janet Creighton is a savvy politico and the SCPR believes she will pass on running for mayor again because of the impossibility of "turning - Canton - around" (thank you Governor Strickland) anytime soon.

Well, how about running against Bosley?

Not a chance!

Creighton is used to running her own show. She would go bonkers having to work with the likes of Tom Harmon and Pete Ferguson.

It's all Bosley can do to abide those two and he used to working with hangers-on (reference: his stint as Nimishillen Township trustee).

Janet is way too smart to get caught in the mire of commissioner politics (two Democrats at that).

Okay, okay. There is county auditor Kim Perez, right?

Maybe. When Creighton was county auditor, she was the the power of the Stark County Political Party. All, then chairman, Curt Braden had to do was follow orders from Janet.

She controlled a lot of political patronage during her stint as auditor and she used it to groom future Stark County Republican leadership. Stark County Democratic Party chairman (at the time) Johnnie A. Maier, Jr drooled at the thought of getting control of this office.

Kim Perez had done his best to emulate Creighton, but tax dollars are hard to come by these days and, accordingly, he is no match for the Creighton "auditor's-office-based-political-machine."

Sorry about that Kim!

In the Creighton days, the county actually had money to fund all those public salaries to stable the future of the Stark County GOP.

In the judgment of the SCPR, the auditor's office is the best place for Creighton IF she has any inclination at all to help the Stark County Republican Party out of its political morass.

If she doesn't and merely wants to finish her political career on a high note, then, perhaps she should consider running against Democrat Congressman John Boccieri.

Whoa, Martin. You have to be kidding!

Boccieri is methodically going about creating a political machine, the likes of which Stark County has not seen in modern political times.

This guy puts out press releases like he's handing out penny candy along a parade route. And all that "stimulus money" with more reportedly to come, how would Creighton compete with that? And do you think the Democratic National Congressional Campaign Committee is going to sit idly by and let the Republicans take back a seat that the Dems have only help two years over a life span seemingly forever?

I know, I know.

It would be tough.

But Creighton is probably the Republicans' only hope to take Boccieri out. Chances are great. With Kirk Schuring telling the SCPR as soon ago as Friday (the 17th) that Republicans who most people in the 16th have never heard of are "testing" the waters about opposing Boccieri, prospects are not real good for the GOP to take back the Regula seat.

If the Republicans don't take on Boccieri now and wrestle the seat back, the 16th is going to be a Democratic seat for long time to come - unless, of course, Boccieri does himself in a la some infamous congressmen have amply demonstrated is possible.

If Creighton were to take Boccieri on, it would be the fight of her political life.

Lose: "good try Janet," people would say.

Win: "what a political redemption!" She would be a national headliner. This time she would go to Washington - not as a refugee from the political storms.

But as a triumphant political overcomer!

A LETTER THAT STARK COUNTY CITIZENS RIGHT TO VOTE COMMITTEE MEMBER THOMAS MARCELLI MIGHT NOT LIKE TO BE WRITTEN?

In 1989 Stephen Covey wrote a classic entitled: The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People.

This is a book Stark County community activist Thomas Marcelli of Bethlehem Township would do well to read. Marcelli is a charter member of the Stark County Citizens Right to Vote Committee.

This committee is out and about Stark County collecting signatures to get an issue on the Stark County ballot come November as to whether or not a January, 2009 Stark County commissioners imposed 1/2% sales/use tax increase shall stand.

In today's Repository, there is a letter to the editor from Mr. Marcelli. It is, in the opinion of the SCPR, "a cart before the horse" letter.

In this letter, Marcelli is raising questions about the ability of the Stark County commissioners to compute. He gets into the 9-1-1 funding question and how the numbers do not square up.

Where Marcelli apparently wants to go with this letter but cannot quite figure out how to get there, is to point out that millions of dollars annually generated by the imposed sales/use tax increase will go to Stark County's general fund and a lesser portion will go towards the reconfiguring of s countywide 9-1-1.

But even if Marcelli was more articulate; he still misses the main point of quest of Stark County Citizens Right to Vote Committee: "get the repeal or not repeal the imposed sales/use tax issue" on the ballot. This is what Covey means in setting forth the "effectiveness principles" (i.e. Put First Things First) in his book.

A former member of Marcell's group recently told the SCPR that Marcelli is not a good public face on the group's effort because Marcelli doesn't get it.

You take someone like yours truly. Process is a priority with the SCPR. It is a worthy citizen enterprise to push to have citizens vote on whether or not a new tax in added to the public burden.

If "the right to vote" was the only argument advanced by the Citizens' group (and it may be with some of the other circulators), that, then, would be an example of "putting first things first." Such an approach along with having a walking list from the Stark County Board of Elections in hand, would pretty much ensure that Stark Countians have an opportunity to vote on the commissioners action in November.

The way the Citizens group is going now, who knows what will be the outcome?

In addition to being a big believer in citizens participating in the decisions of government, yours truly thinks that Stark County does need the money to fix 9-1-1 and does need the money for Stark County's general fund.

So if a petition circulator were to approach me on the substantive issue rather than the procedural issue, would I sign the petition?

What Marcelli has done in writing the referenced letter is to bring joy to the hearts of the folks he singles out: Bosley, Harmon, Ferguson, Perez, Zeigler and Swanson. Moreover, SCOG Governing Committee chairman Randy Gonzalez has to be jumping for joy as undoubtedly is 9-1-1 project manager Joseph Concatto.

They have found a new best friend in the quest to keep the 1/2% sales/use tax in place. Irony upon irony, it looks like Marcelli might be best hope to keep the tax the way it is.

So why wouldn't they sign on to the "love note" that the SCPR is suggesting might be in order.

The is no doubt about Marcelli's dedication and zeal. But he may turn out to be the undoing of the petition initiative.

Maybe Mr. Marcelli just ought to consider Stephen Covey's counsel?