DISCUSSION: AN ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITY FOR BOCCIERI & BROWN TO GET STIMULUS $$$ INTO UNIONTOWN, STARK COUNTY OHIO?

Ohio's junior U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown rushed back to Washington, D.C. last night from attending his mother's wake, to cast the deciding vote (the 60th) in gaining congressional approval of a bill providing for $787 billion in economic stimulus money including $5.5B to cleanup "nuclear waste sites."

Concerned Citizens of Lake Township president Chris Borello of Plain Township who has been spearheading efforts to force cleanup of the Uniontown Industrial Excess Landfill (IEL) jumped right on this news in a e-mail to the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report) and others.

The first question is: Why would "cleanup of nuclear waste" apply to the IEL?

The Report has no clear answer.

But there is a dispute about whether or not plutonium was dumped by the U.S. Army or its proxy at the IEL.

If The Report understands the IEL position on the plutonium issue, it is that CCLT does believe that plutonium was dumped at the Uniontown area. Other locals and Ohio and federal officials dispute whether or not this was the case.

The Report's position is this. Why not err on the side of caution? Isn't there enough of a question to justify pushing for some of the $5.5B to be applied to the IEL?

Shouldn't Boccieri and Brown be fighting to get some of this money into Stark County and Uniontown?

GRAPHIC EDITORIAL: STARK COUNTY'S "EXPEDITED" LAW ENFORCEMENT TEAM?

DISCUSSION: WHO'S BLUFFING, WHO'S NOT?

North Canton has just upped the ante on the Canton/Jackson Township Stark County internecine war that, in the end, will be highly damaging to Stark County's effort get its economic development cards in order.

The move by North Canton officials in filing a complaint (see North Canton files complaint on Canton Annexation bid - posted on line 2/13/2009 by The Rep) is a making good on a statement yesterday by a North Canton official to the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report) to wit: "We've got a legal card or two, We're not done yet."

This same official acknowledged that North Canton ia "behind the eight-ball" (The Report's phrase). Moreover, an ensuing discussion focused on the phenomenon that "its not over until its over." (a quote attributed to famous Yankee catcher Yogi Berra) So The Report expects this war to go on and on and on.

The Report's ending point is this.

While it may be a lot of fun to play poker where there is a jackpot winner, and in this game either the Canton/Jackson Township side or the North Canton side will be a winner in the narrow sense of the word; however, in the end - the broader economic interests and future of Stark Countians will be the loser.

A SCPR GRAPHIC EDITORIAL

DISCUSSION: DEVIES UNLOADS ON MARLBORO TRUSTEES WISE AND WOLF - PART I OF SCPR VIDEO INTERVIEW

Marlboro Township Police Chief Ron Devies has a few things to get off his chest about the treatment he says he has gotten at the hands of Trustees Wise and Wolf since they were sworn-in January, 2006 (having been elected in November, 2005).

The STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report) sat down and had a far reaching discussion with Chief Devies today and The Report will be posting a series of clips from the video over ensuing days.

Part 1 of the interview is posted below:

CANTON CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATE SERIES: VOL I - VIGNOS ON "ZERO TOLERANCE"

The STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report) has started talking with and assessing the views of candidates for Canton City Council.

This election may be one of the most important in Canton's storied history. As The Report sees it the city is as a crossroads. It seems to have highly deficient leadership these days.

The question becomes this. is there a field of candidates from which voters and draw to change the direction in which Canton is heading?

Between now and May, The Report will be focusing on the Council-at-Large race because there is a potential of 11 candidates for 3 spots - all Democrats.

So far no Republican has gone so far as to even take out a petition. Unless this changes between now and the filing deadline for the primary, whomever survives the Democratic primary will be the the at-large representatives on council.

One of the key issues in this campaign is how each of the candidates see one of Mayor William J. Healy's main campaign themes when in ran for mayor.

Here is candidate Cynthia Vignos view: (CLICK HERE TO SEE CANDIDATE VIGNOS WEBSITE)

What people have to recognize is that "zero tolerance" doesn't mean that crime doesn't take place - it simply means that it won't be tolerated. Personally, I believe that Mayor Healy meant these words to imply that he would do everything within his power to address crime in our city (this is just my interpretation, of course). He is restricted by the limits of his authority, the budget, etc. As we discussed, city council is only capable of so much as well. Obviously, the entire system is going to be more effective and efficient by everyone working together - rather than as adversaries.

Do you agree or disagree with Ms. Vignos?

DISCUSSION: NORTH CANTON'S PRESIDENT OF CITY COUNCIL ANSWERS CRITIC - WHO WILL SPEAK FOR JACKSON TWP? CANTON?

REGARDING SCPR POST: ARE STARK COUNTY'S CITY, VILLAGE & TOWNSHIP OFFICIALS OUT TO DESTROY STARK COUNTY'S ECONOMIC FUTURE?

Earlier today an "anonymous" commenter made the following POINT on North Canton's negotiations with Jackson Township regarding possible annexation and/or Joint Economic Development District (JEDD) or Community Economic Development Association (CEDA) zeroing in on Daryl Revoldt's role (as president of North Canton City Council, and probably because the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT expressed a positive take on Revoldt ), to wit:

Daryl Revoldt is the reason all of this is happening right now. It has been his past and present unwillingness to cooperate in good faith with North Canton's neighbors. He had a choice and he blew North Canton's chances once again.

To his credit, Council President Revoldt by name responded to the commenter's "point" with this COUNTERPOINT, to wit:

First, I did not particpate in the negotiations with jackson. The mayor, two
members of council and outside counsel participated.

However, I did insist that the city approach the agreement like a business
deal. Legal council reviewed the terms and we modeled the tax sharing
formula.

The contract required the city surrender annexation rights for 99 years, but
did not require Jackson perform with any CEDA or JEDD. In fact, I suggested
to our team that we sunset the agreement if no JEDD or CEDA action occur. 

With regard to the tax sharing formula, the agreement required the city make
Jackson "whole." on property tax and that we split any income tax revenue
50/50. We created 8 study areas. We modeled one with 122 properties. If the
city adhered to the propsed tax sharing formula, the city in the single study
area alone would have owed Jackson nearly $100,000.  The city's take: $0.

During the study process, the city was constantly pressured to enter the
agreement: Canton will get it, Canton will get it.

Common sense, not pressure or public relations had to drive a deal of 99
years.

We knew from our earlier analysis of the Plain CEDA proposal that Jackson is
filled with buildings that have high property taxes, but have relatively few
jobs, hence a very low income tax yield. We confirmed to out satisfaction
that the proposed formula wasn't good business. This simple fact should
caution Canton.

Our team concluded that the proposal was unworkable. Jackson telephonically
was quickly advised that the tax sharing proposal didn't work. It did not ask
to review our worksheets or offer a counter proposal.

The matter ended there.

Has Revoldt effectively answered his critic?

Why so?

Why not?