YET ANOTHER TEST FOR GEORGE T. MAIER?

UPDATED:  12:55 AM

NOTE:  Attorney Conley tells The Report that only about 6% of cases filed on appeal are accepted by the Supreme Court.  Within one to three months the court will determine whether or not to accept Swanson's appeal.

ORIGINAL BLOG

What is the saying?

"There is no rest for the wicked?"

The SCPR wouldn't exactly characterize Sheriff George T. Maier as being wicked, but in the mind of yours truly he is certainly deserving everything he has gotten in terms of litigation he has had to deal ever since he usurped (per the Ohio Supreme Court in ruling on a Writ of Quo Warranto) to the office of Stark County sheriff on February 5, 2013.

On November 6th, the Supreme Court removed from office whereupon he was reappointed by the Stark County Democratic Party on December 11, 2013.

Since then he as been challenged in the Ohio Supreme Court with a Writ of Prohibition on his eligibility to run for sheriff in November, 2014; a proceeding he won.

Now its a trifecta for Maier, perhaps?

On Friday, yours truly was notified that former Sheriff Timothy Swanson's legal counsel (Craig T. Conley [also the attorney in the Stark Board of Elections/Ohio Supreme Court case of March, 2014]) will be filing with the Supreme Court an appeal of an adverse 5th District Court of Appeals on a civil liability suit filed by Swanson against Maier in Stark County Court of Common Pleas Court in 2014 (which Swanson lost) for Swanson to be compensated (as Ohio statutory law seems to provide for) for the pay that was paid out to Maier for the time period he was a usurper.

Later today check back for a copy of Conley's Memorandum in Support of the Ohio Supreme Court accepting Swanson's appeal from the Fifth District Court of Appeals (see the adverse to Swanson decision immediately below).



One thing about Swanson legal counsel Craig T. Conley is that he as long as his client keeps the faith with him is never, ever going to let go.

As far as The Report is concerned, to say it again, Maier deserves everything he get.

Yours truly thinks he and his brother Johnnie A. Maier, Jr. (a former Stark Dems' chairman) are political bullies of the first order who do not respect the processes of law insofar as they may conflict with their personal political ambitions.

It is always nice when folks such as George and Johnnie have to experience some of what they dish out!

NOTICE OF APPEAL



MEMO IN SUPPORT OF JURISDICTION

GEORGE T. MAIER RESURFACES IN LITIGATION. IS HE ABOUT TO HAVE TO PAY THE PIPER?

Last Friday, if one were in the presence of Stark County Democratic Party sheriff appointee, George T. Maier one might have heard "one BIG gulp" as Judge Linton D. Lewis, Jr of DeRolfe school case fame, ruled that Maier's motion to dismiss former Stark County Sheriff Tim Swanson's lawsuit for damages is overruled, to wit:

On February 18, 2014, Swanson filed a lawsuit against Maier, the purpose of which was articulated by Swanson attorney Craig T. Conley (in a press release) thusly:

Today, Timothy A. Swanson timely filed an O.R.C. 2733.18 action against George T. Maier demanding recovery from Mr. Maier personally of the salary and fringe benefits to which Mr. Swanson, as the rightful Acting Sheriff, was entitled during the time period of Mr. Maier's usurpation and unlawful holding of the public office of Stark County Sheriff.
...
In bringing this statutory action against Mr. Maier, Mr. Swanson is seeking justice, not any personal enrichment, noting that this litigation will not cost the taxpayers of Stark County anything. 

Therefore, assuming he prevails, Mr. Swanson will pay out of his recovery against Mr. Maier any applicable taxes and attorney's fees (in this action and in his successful quo warranto action against Usurper Maier) and will donate the entire net balance to "Wishes Can Happen" for the benefit of seriously ill children.

Consequently, the question that surfaces is George T. Maier about to have "to pay the Pied Piper?"

"Paying the Pied Piper" is an idiomatic expression which is defined by the Free Online Dictionary as follows:

pay the piper-

to accept the unpleasant results of something you have done to pay the price

Well what did George T. Maier think that might mean he has "to pay the Pied Piper," in this case former sheriff Timothy Swanson?

Answer?

According to the Ohio Supreme Court, he usurped the office of Stark County sheriff in assuming office on his appointment to the office by the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee (SCDP-CC) on Februry 5, 2013 by virtue of the finding by Ohio's "court of last resort" that he was not qualified under Ohio Revised Code (ORC) Section 311.01 as of the 5th to be county sheriff.

As the SCPR sees it, once Maier's attorney files his answer (which likely will be pretty much everything he filed in the "motion to dismiss"), the case is likely to be ruled on rather quickly.

Although Judge Lewis has set the trial date for the case for January 15, 2015, The Report is told by Conley that the case is likely to be decided by the filing of summary judgement motions filed by the respective parties long before that date.

If he is made to pay, what is George T. Maier likely to have to pay?

From Conley's complaint:

9.  During his unlawful tenure as and usurpation of the public office of Stark County Sheriff, Maier was, as set forth in the attached Exhibit A, paid a total of $88,511.75 in wages and fringe benefits for the time period February 5, 2013 through November 6, 2013, during which same time period said public office was unlawfully withheld from Swanson, the rightful claimant thereto.

If George T. Maier has to pay Timothy Swanson a dime, it will be more than a touch ironic.

Days before the filing of the Swanson "personal liability lawsuit" against George T. Maier (Feburary 11th), the SCPR wrote, in part:

The SCPR thinks it should get the alarm bells ringing in George T. Maier's head that Judge Lewis said in his dismissal of the Maier motion:

•  the Defendant makes references to numerous matters that are
• either outside the four corners of Plaintiff's  (Swanson) complaint)
• and/or not of record in the case at bar

That language may be a prelude to a forthcoming judgment that?

You've got it!

George T. Maier may soon have to be paying the Piper to the tune of mega bucks, no?

Recall folks, George T. Maier is the man who told a local reporter that when he applied to become Stark County sheriff, he guaranteed that he would be qualified.

To this very date, the SCPR thinks, there has never been a definitive ruling that George T. Maier is fully qualified under the provisions of ORC 311.01 that he is qualified to be sheriff.

Even if elected in November, he may be subject to further litigation under the provisions of the above-cited statutory law.

But for now, it appears that - to repeat - he might well be preparing "to pay the Piper!"

GEORGE MAIER SHOULD BE BEGGING TIM SWANSON TO FILE A SECOND QUO WARRANTO?

UPDATED AT 12:00 PM

SWANSON LETTER TO FERRERO OF 12/13/2013 SUBSTITUTED IN

After thinking about it again, the SCPR thinks that there is a case for "a changed mind" about whether or not the George Maier ought to be begging Swanson not to file a new quo warranto.

A few days ago, The Report wrote:

So The Report thinks that the establishment [Gonzalez et al] leadership should have been more conciliatory on Wednesday to Darrow's supporters and, even now, should be rushing to conciliate with Swanson before he goes off on another quo warranto mission.

But on second thought, perhaps not.

It would, of course, be politically devastating to Maier to lose again in the Ohio Supreme Court.

And, depending on the timing of a negative on qualification outcome, could make it impossible to be deemed qualified even in a primary election scenario.

If he doesn't get in front of the court again at interim Sheriff Swanson's initiative, his next trip to the court might have to be at his own initiative.

And it could be an effort that comes too late for him to be certified as a qualified primary election candidate or, alternatively, one in which the general election comes and goes without the court having made a decision.

How's that?

If Swanson does not challenge Maier via a "by what authority he holds office" a second time, Maier's next qualification test will be at the hand of the Stark County Board of Elections (Board/BOE) as part of Ohio's "election of a sheriff qualification process," for the primary election set for May 6, 2014, to wit:

311.01 Election and qualifications of sheriff

(F)(2) Each board of elections shall certify whether or not a candidate for the office of sheriff who has filed a declaration of candidacy, a statement of candidacy, or a declaration of intent to be a write-in candidate meets the qualifications specified in divisions (B) and (C) of this section.  (emphasis added)

So?

The Stark County Board of Elections "ain't" the Gonzalez/Johnnie A. Maier, Jr controlled Stark County Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee.

And, without a favorable to George T. Maier ruling from the Ohio Supreme Court on his qualification before they rule, it is not hard to see the two Republican members of the Board voting "not to certify him" thereby making him ineligible to gain the Democratic Party nomination.

Okay. Let's see. There are two Democrat BOE members who, undoubtedly, will vote that he is certifiable as qualified and the two Republicans, who, likely, are to vote that he is not certifiable.

Hmm?

Two to two, the candidate wins the tie!

Not so quick.

There is a tie breaker vote provided for in Ohio's statutes.

Hmm?

Who is the tie breaker?

The Ohio secretary of state who is REPUBLICAN Jon Husted.

Hmm?

Might be a problem for George, no?

So maybe, just maybe, George would be better off getting the matter resolved sooner than later with one more effort to convince the Supreme Court that he is qualified.  Courtesy of guess whom?

You've got it.

Interim Sheriff Tim Swanson!

And indications are that Maier may be accommodated by Swanson.

Friday is the "drop-dead" date on whether or not a second Swanson challenge is in the offing, the SCPR is told.

On December 10th,  the Maier legal team has filed a motion with the Ohio Supreme Court for it to dismiss Swanson's Writ of Mandamus filed on November 18th and under which the court refused (on December 10th) to order the removal of George Maier's name from consideration at the Stark County Democratic Party's central committee (SCDP-CC) selection meeting last Wednesday.

Maier went on to win his second appointment by a 101 to 65 vote over Lou Darrow.

Last Friday Tim Swanson sent a letter to Stark County prosecutor John Ferrero, to wit:

"I am again requesting that your office take whatever steps are necessary to begin legal action to determine if George Maier is qualified to assume the position of Stark County Sheriff." (emphasis added)

 

As emphasized by the green highlighting, Swanson added that should Prosecutor Ferrero find that Maier is unqualified then he wants a determination of "whether any improper expenditure of funds has taken place."

A well placed source tells The Report that it would reasonable to infer from his sending of the letter, that Swanson will file a second quo warranto to remove George T. Maier from office if Ferrero or a specially appointed prosecutor (Ferrero has maintained that he has a conflict in interest) fails to file.

Ferrero, in February, did not seek to have a special prosecutor appointed.

He sort of did when Craig T. Conley (on behalf of Stark County taxpayer Thomas Marcelli) demanded that he do so in order to recover to the public county treasury monies received (salary and benefits) and spent (on rebranding the office his name) during the time Maier was in office as a usurper as determined by the Ohio Supreme Court on November 6th.

However, the Stark County commissioners seems to the SCPR to be solidly behind Maier and waived aside Ferrero's suggestion that they and he might jointly accede to Conley's demand.

Consequently, Conley in late November filed Marcelli's civil suit against Maier.

One of Stark's commissioners is Republican Janet Creighton.  She "makes no bones about it," she is committed to supporting Republican candidates across Stark County who run for elective office.

There is no doubt with the SCPR that the person for the Republicans to run against Maier in 2014 is former Alliance police chief and current Hartville police chief Larry Dordea.

Dordea, in the judgment of The Report, is the only Republican law enforcement officer up to taking on Maier.

He ran against Tim Swanson (2008) and Mike McDonald (2012) and was very competitive in doing so in a county which tilts Democratic in countywide elections except if the Democratic candidate has political roots in the city of Canton.

But for some reason, Dordea does not seem to garner the enthusiasm of folks like Creighton and Stark County GOP chairman Jeff Matthews.

The SCPR had a discussion with Commissioner Creighton on the topic of a third Dordea candidacy about a week ago and she did indicate that if it came down to Dordea v. Maier, she would be supporting Dordea.

However, she inter-spliced into the conversation a comment that "there are other Republicans interested in contesting Dordea for the GOP nomination in May, 2014."

All of which leads The Report to believe that Dordea may only get "official" support from the likes of Creighton.  Hardly, a basis for rosy prospects for Dordea to defeat Maier if Maier makes it to the 2014 general election.

Could it be that if Swanson declines to challenge Maier a second time that one or, perhaps, both Republicans (William Cline and Curt Braden [a former chairman] on the BOE would join the Democrats to certify Maier as being qualified when even in the light of the November 6th Ohio Supreme Court decision to the contrary?

Perhaps.

But wouldn't Maier have a more certain shot at being deemed qualified in stating his case anew in a second Swanson Supreme Court challenge?

After all, the original decision was 5 to 2 in favor of Swanson.   Maier is only two votes away from having a smoother path to being elected as Mike McDonald's successor.

Readers will recall, of course, that the whole reason for this jockeying as to who will be Stark County's next sheriff is due to the fact that Mike McDonald, elected in November, 2012, could not take office on January 7, 2013 (as scheduled) due to an illness which turned out to be terminal (February 22nd).

Of course, there are two sides to that coin whereby Swanson files a second quo warranto and that is if it turns up  Maier "not-qualified" a second time.

Does anybody doubt George Maier would be finished as a candidate?

Even if the decision comes before the primary election, it is hard to see how even "unenthusiastic" (presuming Cline and Braden share what the SCPR thinks is Creighton misgivings about Dordea) Republicans can ignore two Ohio Supreme Court determinations that Maier is unqualified and vote (one or both) to certify him.

Certainly,with John Kasich running for reelection in 2014, one would think that Ohio Secretary of State would not want to aid the Democratic Party cause in Stark County in helping Maier to qualify him for office.

All of which would leave George T. Maier in the unenviable position of putting himself before the high court for a third time on the qualification issue in context of another Democrat (presumably Lou Darrow) being the party nominee.

So it seems to the SCPR - on rethinking the matter - that rather than discourage Tim Swanson from filing a second quo warranto, perhaps, the Maier supporters ought to be encouraging him?

SWANSON/MAIER POLITICAL WAR TO COST DEMS SHERIFF SEAT?

SUBTOPIC OF BLOG

HAS

SWANSON

MISSED SOMETHING 
IN HIS

HOUSE CLEANING 
OF

"ALL THINGS MAIER?"

On the surface, Sheriff Tim Swanson and "pretender" sheriff George T. Maier are the main players.

But in the background, Stark County prosecutor (and former Stark County Democratic Party chairman [1996 - 2003) John Ferrero and executive vice chairman of the Stark Dems (former chairman 2003 - 2009) Johnnie A. Maier, Jr are the political forces fueling the huge and "take no prisoners" fight going on within the party.

And the Stark County Political Report is beginning to believe that the Dems internal bloodbath may result in two-time Republican sheriff candidate (2008 and 2012) Larry Dordea slipping in the "political" back door and becoming the first Republican sheriff in Stark County since the politically disastrous and turbulent reign (to the Stark GOP) of Robert Berens (the sheriff who is said to wear a bandolier [see picture below]) 1981 through 1984.

On election day this year, the Ohio Supreme Court did what The Report predicted it would do and validated Swanson's quo warranto lawsuit against Maier (filed February 12, 2013) in ousting Maier from the sheriff's office, saying that he was never the legal sheriff of Stark County because he did not meet the legal qualifications spelled by Ohio statutes in order for him to be entitled to remain in office as appointed by the Stark Dems by a 92 to 84 vote (over Lou Darrow, a current Stark County - rank "lieutenant" - deputy sheriff) on February 5th).

The high court's decision settled - "for the time being" - the Swanson/Maier fight began "in earnest" on the 5th.

But only for "the time being."

Swanson rushed back from his retirement home in Florida to re-assume command of the sheriff's office.

Immediately, he began "to clean house of all vestiges 'Maier'" and restore the longtime Swanson rule at 4500 Atlantic Boulevard.

But the SCPR did find one Maier reference that Swanson has not erased.

Really?

What is that?

On the page on the sheriff's website which lists Stark County sheriffs who have served since 1800, Maier's name remains.

Hmm?

The question is:  Will the Maier name still be there after Sheriff Swanson reads this blog?

After all Sheriff Tim, the Ohio Supreme Court has said that Maier was never the legal sheriff of Stark County!

The SCPR is willing to bet that because the page is buried deep in the bowels of the website, Maier's name remaining is a Swanson oversight.

Because Maier and his political allies (Chairman Randy "Gonz" Gonazlez and Maier, Jr) in command at Stark Democratic headquarters out on 12th Street in Canton have "laid down the gauntlet" in Gonzalez publicly saying that he is in full support of George T. Maier's declaration that he would seek a "second" Stark Dems appointment to the sheriff's office, there has been - what the SCPR believes to be a "political saber rattling" - in the form of Swanson suggesting to Canton's local daily newspaper that he is having Ferrero (his "political ally of the moment") look into whether or not George Maier committed a crime for (reportedly in Swanson's words) "deceiving residents and for falsely representing himself [to Stark Countians] as [being] a qualified candidate for the office."

It appears that George Maier's "guarantee" of being qualified is being taken to heart by Swanson.

Moreover, he will be using the foolhardy statement to fan the fires among Stark's organized Democrats to ensure that any new appointment goes to his sidekick Darrow.  

The SCPR is skeptical that Maier will - in the end - be in play for re-appointment.

But he likely will run in the May, 2014 Democratic primary.

Who doubts the likelihood that the primary will be a continuing "knock down, drag out" battle between the Fererro/Swanson versus Maier/Maier/Gonzalez forces?

As far as the SCPR is concerned, the Swanson allegation/suggestion/inquiry? has about as much chance of finding a lasting home in "the land of prosecutorial discretion" as does the proverbial chances of "a snowball in Hell."

For starters there is no way that Ferrero can (though he may have motivation) make a finding to prosecute George T. Maier because of his obvious "conflict-in-interest" status in that he back on February 5th issued an affidavit saying that Maier was in his opinion unqualified.

And the SCPR refuses to believe that a stand-in, "no-dog in this fight" prosecutor is going to give Swanson's allegation "the time of day."

The import of the Swanson "war of words" is that they amount to "a [political] battle cry" to the anit-Maier-forces among Stark Dems that seemingly threatens the Stark Dems with disintegration in the short run.

But not short enough to - perhaps - prevent the Republicans from taking electoral control next November of 4500 Atlantic Boulevard.

The SCPR believes that the main reason Stark County has a Republican county treasurer (Zumbar - actually appointed to office under the chairmanship of "Gonz" under stifling civic and political pressure) and auditor (Harold) is that Gary D. Zeigler's (Zumbar's predecessor) went to war with the Stark Dems when they put extreme pressure on him to resign from office early on when the Vince Frustaci "theft-in-office" scandal broke on April 1, 2009.

Zeigler (who has never been implicated in the theft) has always maintained that he did nothing wrong and therefore there was no reason for him to resign as Stark County treasurer.

It is likely that many countywide, officeholding Democrats agreed with Zeigler including, perhaps, Chairman Gonzalez.

Gonazlez was later to say that presiding over (even advocating for [ironically, {in light of the current Swanson/Maier fight} aided by Mike McDonald] Republican Zumbar's appointment was the hardest political thing he has ever done.

Rank and file Democrats were not taking to the prospect of Republican Zumbar's appointment.  McDonald (whose resignation - as sheriff-elect from the election in November, 2013 precipitated the current Dems fight) stepped up on October 31, 2011 and made an emotional plea to assembled Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee members to support Chairman Gonzalez.

It could be that the McDonald's rush to the rescue saved Gonzalez's "political bacon," at least for that day.

However painful it was for Chairman Gonzalez, looking back he had to be lamenting the political reality was that the  Zeigler perspective was not the public perception and also square up with the knowledge that Zeigler's doggedness has cost the Dems dearly and for the foreseeable future.

When the state of Ohio auditor came out with a report after the Frustaci revelation that Zeigler's "protect the taxpayer's money" administrative policies, procedures, practices and facility infrastructure were not what prudence would dictate, it should have been clear to Zeigler that his position - even if true - was not politically sustainable.

If the Democrats were going to have any chance going forward to maintain the longtime Democratic control of the Stark treasury, Zeigler was going to have to step aside and do it yesterday.

But Zeigler had worked tirelessly in the Stark Democratic Party vineyards having run in countless "unsuccessful" campaigns (by the SCPR's calculation about nine times) and consequently he was not about to lose the prize having been appointed himself by the Stark Dems in year 1999 as treasurer without a mammoth fight.

In 1999,  Mark Roach - son of former longtime Democratic Stark County treasurer Harold Roach) fell onto hard times and was forced to resigned.

Zeigler won election in 2000 surprisingly easily over current Republican Stark County commissioner Richard Regula (son of longtime 16th District congressman Ralph Regula).

He won again "in a walk" in 2004.

By 2008, he was running unopposed.

But a mere 15 months later, April 1, 2009, the political sky fell in.

And he was in the fight of his political life.

And fight he did!

Until October 19, 2011.

After many twists and turns it "finally" dawned on Zeigler that there was no way had he stayed on after the Ohio Supreme Court had ruled that he had been unconstitutionally removed fm office by the-then Stark County commissioners Todd Bosley, Steve Meeks and Pete Ferguson (all Democrats) that he was going to be re-elected in the general election of 2012 if he could get through a Democratic primary unchallenged.

Being the relatively young man he is, it appears to the SCPR that Republican Alex Zumbar, given a general perception that he may be Stark County's most non-political politician who is doing an excellent job as treasurer, will be Stark County treasurer for many, many years to come.

And the same thing may be the order of the day for Republican and Stark County auditor Alan Harold.

His predecessor, Democrat Kim Perez, was unfairly, in Perez's view, politically tainted and tarnished in having been a close political ally of Zeigler's (a main point of the Harold's 2010 general election campaign) over many years and a consequence, lost to Harold.

The lesson?

Those internal political party fights can have lasting and enduring consequences in electoral politics.

The question?

Are the Democrats on a "political suicide 'on the plank' march to political oblivion" in the Swanson/Ferrero versus Maier (George)/Maier (Johnnie)/Gonzalez apparent "fight to the finish?"

Consequently, could Stark Countians wake up to "Good morning, Stark County, it is January 1, 2014 and Republican Larry Dordea today takes the oath of office as Stark County's newly elected sheriff?"

Stay tuned!

MAIER PINS HOPE OF "EQUIVALENCY AS A 'PRINCIPLE OF LAW'" ON REMAINING STARK CO. SHERIFF?

UPDATED AT 09:30 AM

SUMMARY OF MAIER'S LEGAL ARGUMENTS

The doctrine of equivalents is a legal rule in most of the world's patent systems that allows a court to hold a party liable for patent infringement even though the infringing device or process does not fall within the literal scope of a patent claim, but nevertheless is equivalent to the claimed invention. (Source:  Wikipedia)

It appears to the SCPR that George Maier's legal counsel (paid for by Stark County taxpayers contracted at $20,000) is using "the legal doctrine of equivalents" to keep George as Stark County sheriff. (LINK to brief filed May 6th)

Counsel does not specifically articulate equivalency as his argument but it is - in the judgment of The Report - the essence of his advocacy.

Put another way would be to say that Maier does not meet requirements of Ohio Revised Code Section (ORC) 311.01(B)(8) and (B)(9) [LINK to statute] as a matter of law (de jure) but does as a matter of fact (de facto).

Put still another way (a very unlawyer-esque one) would be to say that counsel is throwing a lot of stuff at the seven justices of the Ohio Supreme Court and hoping against hope that enough of it sticks to result in Maier remaining as sheriff of Stark County.

BACKGROUND OF HOW THE QUESTION OF WHO IS TO BE STARK COUNTY SHERIFF GOT TO THE OHIO SUPREME COURT

As readers of the SCPR know, Democrat Mike McDonald (now deceased) won an election in November, 2012 over Republican Larry Dordea to become sheriff-elect in a relatively close election in which Stark Countians were nearly divided 52%/47% as to whom should be the county sheriff.

It was known before the election that McDonald was suffering from esophageal cancer and there was ample speculation that he would not be able to serve if elected.

One SCPR source points to a speech that McDonald made to the Massillon Fraternal Order of Police during the campaign in which McDonald himself made comments which fueled the conjecture.

Some of those who were skeptical about the survival of McDonald to actually be able to serve as sheriff drifted into political cynicism and started murmuring that McDonald's health condition was being hidden by the Stark County's Democratic Party's leadership.

Really.  Why?

So that if an unfortunate and regrettable scenario in which an elected but unable to serve situation should materialize, then the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee would be commanded as a matter of Ohio law (ORC 305.02) to name his replacement.

Well, as we now know, the situation did materialize.

The Stark County Democratic Party leadership has emphatically denied that any of them had any knowledge whatsoever that McDonald's ability to serve was in question in the run up to November 6, 2013.

To the SCPR, the denials fall in the category of:  who believes that?

Whether or not any of the Stark County Democratic Party leaders knew, there is no question that the materialization (i.e. McDonald's letter of resignation on January 3, 2013) deprived the mass of Stark County voters in the election of their say as to who would be Stark County's next sheriff.

On February 5, 2013 some 177 voting Stark County Democratic Central Committee members gathered at the Mayfield Senior Center and voted 92 (George T. Maier), 84 (Lou Darrow) and 1 (Larry Dordea) in naming Maier sheriff.

Key Stark County Party Democratic leaders (official and unofficial) played major roles in the selection process.

The SCPR evaluates that they were five in number, to wit:

• Randy Gonzalez, Stark County Democratic Party chairman; a Maier supporter,
• Tim Swanson, retired Stark County sheriff; a Darrow supporter,
• John Ferrero, Stark County prosecutor and former Stark County Democratic Party chairman; a Darrow supporter,
• William J. Healy, II, mayor of Canton, a Stark County Democratic Party precinct committee person; a Maier supporter, and
• Johnnie A. Maier, Jr., Massillon clerk of courts, a former Stark County Democratic Party chairman, currently a Stark Dems executive vice president; obviously, a brother George supporter

It is interesting to the SCPR of how in our democratic-republic:

• 171,129 Stark County voters (which, of course, included Democrats, Republicans and political independents)

got reduced to:

• 177 Democratic precinct committee persons

got further reduced to:

• 4 Stark County Democratic Party leaders as centralizing figures of political influence

penultimately reduced to:

• 7 Ohio Supreme Court justices none of whom are from Stark County and who sit in Columbus, Ohio

and, perhaps, ultimately to the persons:

• 3 in number (reference:  from 171,129 Stark Countians) Gonzalez, Johnnie A. Maier, Jr, and William J. Healy, II, 
• Note: Gonzalez as Jackson Township fiscal officer, Maier as Massillon clerk of courts and Healy as mayor of Canton collectively do not represent even one-half of the entire population of Stark County; approximately 378,000)

who (if the Supreme Court goes Maier's way) will have, in essence, selected Stark County's next sheriff.

But that is where we are folks!

America's democratic-republic at its finest, no?

BACK TO THE MAIER ARGUMENTS

In order to remain what the SCPR sees as essentially being the choice of three key Stark County Democratic Party leaders (Gonzalez, Healy and Johnnie A. Maier, Jr), George T. Maier needs to be praying to the Almighty that enough of the stuff being thrown at the Ohio Supreme Court by his legal counsel sticks.

Well, exactly what is that "stuff?"

How about:

• serving two days (January 12 and 13, 2013) as a Harrison County (about an hour's drive from Massillon) deputy sheriff appointee at the hand of law enforcement friend
• while he was Massillon's safety/service director
• constituted "full-time" law enforcement employment (as required by ORC 311.01(B)(8)(a) or (b) within three/four years going back from February 6, 2013,
• serving as a political appointee by the Strickland administration as assistant director of the Ohio Department of Public Safety (ODPS - also director for a few days at the end of the administration)
• (probably at the behest of brother Johnnie, Jr - who had/has close relationship with the former governor as being the first Stark County Democratic Party chairman who endorsed Strickland in the 2006 Democratic Primary),
• Note:  being a ODPS official is NOT listed in ORC 311.01 as qualifying as full-time law enforcement employment,
• attaining ORC 311.01 required law enforcement supervisory experience by bootstrapping himself into supervision in having served as a political appointee in the ODPS which, as pointed out above, is not listed in 311.01 as being a qualifying office,
• meeting the two year post-secondary (high school) educational requirement of the statute by virtue of an estimate by Stark State College officials that his prior law enforcement work experience as a state highway patrolman and municipal policeman would be the "equivalent" of 67 credit hours (60 hours being the standard for two years of post-secondary) at Stark State,
• Note:  Maier's brief does not mention
• that Stark State at a maximum grants 30 hours of equivalency hours as Stark State hours

At the beginning of Swanson's Quo Warranto action, Maier sought to have the suit dismissed on the basis of Swanson not being a qualified person to bring the proceeding.

Maier lost that argument but doing what any lawyer would do, Maier's attorney tries once again as part of his throwing in any and everything including the kitchen sink tries again on the standing issue in his brief.

Then he gets into the politics of the situation.

Isn't that interesting?

Kind of like "the pot calling the kettle black," no?

George, Johnnie and William were not being political?

In reality, the political factor is irrelevant.  But it can serve as diversionary "stuff."

As the SCPR sees it, Maier's counsel was merely attempting to muddy the water and thereby get the court off focusing on the literal requirements of ORC Sections 311.01(B)(8) & (9).

And, to boot, what logic!

Ohio law provides that politicians (i.e. central committee members) select a sheriff when a vacancy occurs and therefore the Ohio Supreme Court should not entertain a Quo Warranto because politics played into selection process?

And, there is the "the party" determined that Maier (and Darrow and Dordea) are qualified.

Whew!

Who would dispute a political party determining the qualifications of candidates for sheriff?

SCPR sarcasm, of course.

How did the Stark Dems qualify the candidates by the criteria of ORC 311.01?

Chairman Gonzalez asked two "select" attorneys (one in the hire of Gonzalez on a Writ of Prohibition filed by candidate Darrow against the chairman) present at the February 5  meeting what they thought as to the qualifications of the candidates.

As if orchestrated by the chairman, the answer, of course:  "qualified."

To him, their opinions were binding.

How convenient.

Other attorneys present at the meeting differed (one of who happens to be the Stark County prosecutor), but, of course, they were ignored by party officials.

To the SCPR, "the party qualification" talk by Maier's attorney was just more of the "stuff" being thrown at the court.

Another diversion from the real role of the court.

The evidence submitted by the Maier camp is replete with George Maier's impressive array of his law enforcement experience going all the way back to when he served as a Hartville police officer and a Tuscarawas Township police officer.

And this, again, is "stuff."

Nobody that the SCPR knows argues that George T. Maier is not de facto thoroughly trained and experienced in law enforcement.

But the generalized training and experience are not the issues addressed by ORC 311. Someone like Swanson needed to bring forth the qualification factor to be adjudicated.

The statute has some very specific requirements that anyone including Maier must meet in order to qualify under the law of Ohio to be sheriff.

Is the rule of law to prevail or is the opinion of political men and women to prevail?

That is the question.

In addition to the Maier brief, the Buckeye Sheriffs' Association (BSSA) a non-profit, law enforcement interest lobbying organization) weighed in with the SCPR deems to be "an almost laughable" - friend of the court - brief.  (LINK)

Laughable?

So the SCPR thinks.

How so?

Well, the BSSA took the position that its lobbying the Ohio General Assembly to enact ORC 311.01 and that therefore the Ohio Supreme Court should look to it as to the determiner of legislative intent and more particularly whether or not the OBSA thought George Maier to be qualified.

Legislative intent?

One goes to the Legislature for legislative history, no?

Not to the Buckeye State Sheriffs' Association, right?

In its brief, the BSSA references the Maier brief (though it had not yet been filed with the court) which indicates that the BSSA was working hand-in-glove with Maier and his legal team.

Talk about injecting politics into the matter?

One might ask who is Maier's political contact within the BSSA, no?

Just some more of the "stuff" being thrown around?

To the SCPR, it's pretty clear that though George T. Maier appears to be de facto qualified to be Stark County sheriff; yours truly doubts that he is  de jure qualifed.

And his deficiency de jure is underscored by the content of the Maier brief.

While he was at it [i.e. throwing what the SCPR thinks is largely irrelevant "stuff" in to his argument, why didn't Maier legal eagle go out and get affidavits from deputies serving under Maier as to how well they think of him?

For the SCPR hears that the rank-and-file at the department think well of George.

Maier also had an offer by the Group 175 folks of Canton's Vassar Park Neighborhood (who are impressed with his effort to get deputies up to strength so as to be able to open up all 501 beds at the Stark County jail) to circulate petitions to gather signatures of Stark Countians who want the Ohio Supreme Court to rule in his favor?

Why not give them the go ahead and throw that "stuff" in to the mix before the court?

Stuff is stuff, isn't it?

WILL THE RULE OF LAW PREVAIL?

What will be interesting to see is whether or not Stark County's chief law enforcer will be held to the de jure standards of the law.

Of course, we will not know such until the Ohio Supreme Court hands down its decision.

The SCPR is not saying that if Maier is successful in having the Quo Warranto denied that such in and of itself indicates he has not de jure qualified.

To know that, one will have to analyze the court's reasoning.

Then and only then will we know whether or not the court found enough in the evidence presented and the arguments made to ensure that the rule of law prevailed.

For now, The Report sees very little in the Maier/BSSA briefs that get anywhere near making the case that George T. Maier literally meets the requirements of ORC 311.01(B)(8) and (9).

Even so, Maier may win with what the SCPR sees at throwing "stuff" and hoping enough of it sticks with the court to give him a victory.

The Report in past blogs has trotted out Craig T. Conley's saying:

The Supreme Court does not have to be right, it just has to be the Supreme Court.

Therein lies the major hope of George T. Maier's quest to remain Stark County sheriff.

QUO WARRANTO: SWANSON V. MAIER - "SWANSON'S SOLID BRIEF!" SHOULD GEORGE MAIER BE PLANNING A NEW CAREER - AT LEAST FOR THE TIME BEING?

REVISED & UPDATED

In the opinion of the SCPR, it is looking awfully good that Timothy Swanson is going to be returning as Stark County sheriff.

At least until the Stark County commissioners appoint a replacement which should occur in pretty rapid order.

But first, a word of caution.

"The Supreme Court doesn't have to be right, it just has to be The Supreme Court."

If the Ohio Supreme Court follows the law as neatly laid out by Greg Beck (legal counsel for Tim), George T. Maier (the appointee of the Stark County Democratic Party on February 5, 2013) will prove to be a short time sheriff.

Of course, there i the matter of Maier's lawyers filing their brief in 20 days.

And the SCPR is excited to see what they (Roetzel & Andress) possibly could do to counter Beck's outstanding legal work filed on Monday, April 15th (LINK).

Undoubtedly, they will cobble something together.  And "cobble together" may be the appropriate expression.  For as far as yours truly can see, they do not have much to work with from the evidence submitted and in light of the Swanson brief.

It was interesting in viewing the depositions of Swanson, Maier and Harrison County Sheriff Ronald Myers, to read as Maier's attorneys quizzed Swanson about who was "really" paying for his challenge of Maier's right to stay put at 4500 Atlantic Boulevard.

Interesting?  Why?

Because Stark County taxpayers are set to pay the bill for Maier up to $20,000.

At today's Stark County commissioners meeting, commissioners are likely to approve the initial billing for Maier's attorney fees in the amount of $9,175.55

One local attorney suggests to the SCPR that if Maier loses:  the decision is likely to be that the Stark Dems' appointment will be ruled void ab initio:  a latin expression (ab initio:  "from the beginning") meaning in effect that he never was sheriff.

According to that attorney, it is likely, in the event of such a ruling, that Maier will have to foot the bill for defending his right to be in office.

Hmm?

From a political analysis standpoint, the SCPR believes that should Maier be turned out of office by the high court, you can bet your bottom dollar he will be running for sheriff come 2014.

And in the meantime, he likely would be returning to Massillon to be Massillon's public safety/service director, once again.  Interesting enough, his replacement (he quit February 7th to take on being sheriff) is the "interim" safety/service director.

Hmm?

Is brother Johnnie hedging his bets and using his influence with the Catazaro-Perry administration (his candidate for mayor in 2011 who successfully took down Johnnie's "down through the years rival:" and long time Massillon mayor Francis H. Cicchinelli, Jr.) to keep the safety/service directorship open in the sense of the mayor having named an interim appointee - just in case?

Moreover, there is another interesting tidbit.

There is speculation that Catazaro-Perry herself is looking to leave Massillon.  Things are not going well for Mayor Kathy and there is conjecture that she is negotiating with folks in Washington to become an employee of the United States Department of Transportation.

Hmm?

So what does that have to do with George T. Maier?

Well, the same folks who are speculating on the D.C. thing are thinking that he gets turned out as sheriff, Maier becomes mayor of Massillon.

But such is not doable under the succession scheme that Massillon is under.

If Catazaro-Perry were to step-down, the SCPR is told (by Massillonian Scott Graber, who cited the appropriate authorities referred to below) that council president Tony Townsend would become mayor until the next election cycle which depending on the timing of a resignation could be in the 2014 election cycle.

How about a scenario in which Tony Townsend becomes the Maier faction stand-in for election should Catazaro-Perry resign.

Wouldn't that be a sight to behold?

This revised/updated blog is a correction of yesterday's version of this blog in which yours truly erroneously applied Ohio Revised Code Section (ORC) 705.81 as being applicable.

However, Massillon City Council has adopted Rules of Council Rule 14 (being a ORC 731/733 city) which reads:

Rule 14.     In case of the death, resignation, or removal of the Mayor, the President of the legislative authority of the City shall become the Mayor, and shall hold the office for the unexpired term.  Thereupon the President Pro Tempore of such legislative authority shall become President thereof for the unexpired term, and shall have the same rights, duties, and powers as his predecessor.  The vacancy thus created in the legislative authority shall be filled for the unexpired term as provided in Ohio R. C. 731.43, and such legislative authority shall elect another President Pro Tempore to hold such office for the unexpired term.

In any event, the SCPR does not believe George Maier would have any interest whatsoever in being mayor if somehow it were possible in let's say an election scenario (to fill the unfilled term) should the conjecture about a Catazaro-Perry resignation materialize.

Why not?

Because:

• he has now had the taste of being sheriff,
• he reportedly is well liked by the deputies and has their full confidence, 
• he has been making reforms (interesting enough, pretty much those promised by Hartville Police Chief Larry Dordea had he defeated Mike McDonald in November, 2012), and
• he has "being a policeman" in his blood.  Remember, with the Maier family police work deeply embedded in their sinews/bones going back to the family patriarch.

The SCPR believes Catzaro-Perry's speculated departure in just that (speculated) and that it is likely that Catazaro-Perry family and business circumstances are such that leaving Massillon simply does not make sense for her.

And, of course, there still is the possibility that Maier's attorneys will "pull a rabbit out of the hat" and he wins and remains Stark County sheriff.

A number of Stark Countians with law enforcement/legal community connections are impressed with Maier's de facto qualifications to be sheriff (and the SCPR agrees, except maybe for his temperament) even if the Ohio Supreme Court may well say he lacks the de jure (as a matter of law) qualifications of Ohio Revised Code Sections 311.01(8) and (9).

Moreover, they (the supportive law enforcement/law enforcement types) like how he has handled his two and one-half months in office.

So one should never forget, and as his supporters may be wishing:

"The Supreme Court doesn't have to be right, it just has to be The Supreme Court!"