SCPR CALLS 29TH OHIO SENATE RACE FOR OELSLAGER - TOO BAD FOR STARK COUNTY?

Even though they have not gotten through their respective primaries (both running unopposed), the SCPR is ready to call the 29th Ohio Senate (the 29th encompasses all but extreme eastern Stark County) race for "musical chair" candidate Scott Oelslager.

Oelslager does not deserve to be re-elected to public office, but he will be.  He will handily defeat Democrat Richard D. Reinbold, Jr. in November.

How is it that the SCPR says that Republican Oelslager does not deserve to be re-elected?

First, he has achieved very little being a state legislator despite being in office for a quarter of a century.  The worst part is that for a good part of the 25 or so years Oelslager was part of a majority (i.e. the Republicans controlled the Ohio General Assembly)  and for a space of time a supermajority.

Second, though he likes to point out his connection to public education (his parents were educators), he has not been an - despite enjoying senior legislator status - effective force for the fixing of the inadequate funding of public education in Ohio.  He merely repeats the Republican legislative caucus talking points that they (the Republicans as majority) did put more absolute money into pre K -12, which is true.  More true is the reality that the funding and structure of Ohio public education remains broken a la the DeRolfe line of cases.

Third, Oelslager and Kirk Schuring, who currently holds the 29th (he is term limited out this election cycle and is running for the 51st - which Oelslager currently holds) have broken the trust of Stark Countians on the issue of term limits.

Both supported term limits when the Republicans were in a minority as a vehicle to majority status.  Now that they are in office, they play this game of switching back and forth between the 29th Senate and the 51st House as an "in effect" defeat of the will of the voters of Ohio.

Fourth, he does not brook criticism very well. Several years ago, when yours truly criticized his failure as a legislator he blew off yours truly in a face-to-face encounter and he persistently fails to answer the Report's emails on legislative questions.

The foregoing are some of the reasons why Oelslager should not be re-elected.

However, the Ohio Democratic Senate Caucus, in picking Dick Reinbold (a retired Stark County Common Pleas Court judge) came up with one the most colorless and uninspiring candidates the Caucus could possibly have found in all of Stark County.

If Reinbold is indicative of the Caucus's picks, then the Democrats have very little chance to make inroads on the 21 to 12 majority currently held by the Republicans.

The SCPR thinks Stark County could do better than Oelslager, but is clear that Dick Reinbold would not be better.  He has no legislative experience whatsoever and therefore would merely be a foot soldier for the likes of Capri Cafaro, the Democratic leader in the Senate.

If Oelslager does have anything to recommend himself, it is, that on occasion, he does cross the aisle and vote with the Democrats.  Moreover, a number of Democrats (e.g. Healy and Slesnick) have told The Report that he graciously extends a hand of bipartisanship in helping newly elected legislators "to learn the ropes" of being a legislator)

In the end, this race is a "no-brainer" for the SCPR and The Report hereby declares this race as a "lost cause" for the Democrats and candidate Richard D. Reinbold, Jr!

SCPR GETS COMMISSIONER ANSWERS TO CITIZEN REVIEW COMMITTEE CRAIG CONLEY'S LETTER. THE REPOSITORY IGNORES THE LETTER!

Back on March 10, 2010 Craig T. Conley (a local attorney who was the lead person in the Vote No Increased Taxes Committee) wrote a letter (see full text in accompanying video below) to the Stark County Commissioners asking certain questions of the commissioners.

Conley faxed a copy of the letter to The Repository and sent it by snail-mail to the SCPR.  Who took up the cause of his letter?  The Repository or the SCPR?

Of course, The Report.

At commissioners meeting last Wednesday, The Report asked commissioners to respond to the Conley letter.  The video below, contains the commissioners' responses (Bosley did not make one on camera, but only inquired as to whether or not Conley serves on the Citizen Review Committee).

Off camera, Bosley confirmed what appeared to be his on-camera contribution a la Ferguson:  "let the Citizen Review Committee deal with it."

Not only did The Repository not do anything with Conley's letter, even though The Report's question was asked during the meeting, The Rep failed to publish anything on the letter in its coverage of the meeting.

The SCPR notices that The Repository as a matter of course seems to give Repository readers the short-shrift on what actually transpires at the weekly commissioner meeting.  For instance, Kevin Ellis of Louisville who made a important plea to commissioners to do something about a long standing flooding problem in Louisville/Nimishillen Township was totally ignored by The Rep in its publication of contents of the meeting.

Now don't you suppose Louisville/Nimishillen Township residents would be interested in the Ellis presentation?

If they are, it appears that they will have to come to the SCPR to get their information.  Moreover, it is becoming apparent that Stark Countians who want more thorough coverage of coverage of the weekly meeting will have to get it from the SCPR.

Here is the video on the Ferguson an Meeks responses to the Conley letter.

TEN YEARS AND COUNTING: LOUISVILLE RESIDENT SAYS COUNTY HAS DONE NOTHING TO SOLVE FLOODING PROBLEMS

CORRECTION:  Kevin Ellis tells the SCPR the flooding issue discussion scheduled for tomorrow, Tuesday, April 6th at the Stark County commissioners "boardroom," (located in the Stark County Office Building) is to begin at 2:00 p.m.

Kevin Ellis of Louisville is one of Stark County's premier citizen activists.

He is so known for looking out for the interests of Louisville's citizens that Commissioner Todd Bosley tabbed him at last Wednesday's commissioners meeting as being the "deputy mayor of Louisville."

Undoubtedly, Pat Fallot, the newly elected Councilmember/Mayor of Louisville appreciates the efforts of Kevin to push Stark County into doing something about the chronic flooding problems being experienced in Louisville.

Ellis, was by the way, highly complimentary of the work being done by Mayor Fallot since taking office.  Commissioner Bosley seconded Ellis' laudation.

Recently, Louisville was hit by another flooding situation that necessitated emergency services.  Ellis at Wednesday's meeting pointed out that Commissioner Bosley went into action marshaling emergency forces to deal with the situation at hand.

But Ellis' real mission was to express concern about budget cuts (owing to current Stark County financial crisis) to the Stark County Soil and Water Conservation operation which he believes will further delay county action to solve a persistent flooding problem in the Constitution City.

He brought a copy of a petition to the current commissioners that had been submitted on July 27, 2000 to then Commissioners Gayle Jackson, John Dougherty and Jane Vignos, to wit:  "For Help in Solving Flooding Problems in Louisville, Ohio."

It's ten  years later and Ellis contends that nothing has been done to solve the Lousville flooding problem.

Ellis says he voted to retain the 0.50 sales/use tax imposed by commissioners in December, 2008.  It is a credit to Ellis that he did vote "yes" to retain the tax.    One would think that a frustrated citizen such as Kevin Ellis might not have supported retaining the tax.

How many of the affected in Louisville/Nimishillen Township were as generous as Ellis in the November, 2009 vote?  Not very many.  The retention went down  about 2 to 1.

The SCPR believes it is an outrage that the commissioners have sat on their collective duffs (multiple boards of commissioners) and have done nothing to solve the Louisville/Nimishillen flooding problem.

Commissioner Bosley has called a meeting to discuss the problem for Tuesday, April 6, 2010 at 2:00 p.m. at the Stark County commissioners' offices located on the second floor of the Stark County Office Building.

But don't look for anything remedial to be put into action.

What Louisville and Nimishillen Township can expect plenty of is "talk."

What's the expression?  "Talk is cheap."

Yes, it probably is the case that there is no money to do the fix now.

But don't the commissioners have a responsibility to the residents of Louisville/Nimishillen to go all out to do the impossible and find the money somewhere?

After all, the Board of Commissioners have let down Louisville/Nimishillen residents for way too long now.  To repeat, ten years, that's how long!

Is it believable that there has been no money for ten years?

Or is it that the commissioners as a matter of deed has assigned the Louisville/Nimishillen fix a low, low priority?

Here is a video showing Kevin Ellis before the commissioners and Commissioner Steve Meeks' response.

COMMISSIONER PETE FERGUSON SEEMS TO BE "GROWING INTO THE JOB?"

After the last Stark County commissioners meeting on Wednesday last (March 31), yours truly had a very enjoyable conversation with Commissioner Pete Ferguson.

More on that conversation later.

As readers of the SCPR know, The Report has been critical of Pete for "not being up to the job" as commissioner.

But The Report's take on Ferguson is evolving.  While The Report believes that Ferguson was ill-equipped to run for commissioner (Pat DeOrio, a North Canton Councilman,  likely was better prepared by virtue of his experience in government and business), now that he is in office he seems to be coming along rather nicely.

On a personal basis, few Stark County officeholders surpass Ferguson in terms of affability and enthusiasm for the county job they have been elected to.   He ranks right up there with state Senator Kirk Schuring (Republican - the 29th), Canton law director Joe Martuccio and former county official and mayor of Canton Janet Creighton.

However, affability and enthusiasm are just two of many other qualities a public official must have to be effective.  And the SCPR does not critique an officeholder on personal like or dislike.  Only whether or not the official, in the opinion of yours truly, is getting the job done for Stark Countians in direct administrative sense and in keeping politics - as much as possible - out of the administration of county level and political subdivision government.

The Report has written a number of blogs saying that Ferguson has not been effective.  But, the SCPR, does not "once and for all" say that The Report's assessment is fixed. Quite to the contrary.

A primary mission of the SCPR is to prompt officials to be all that they can be.  Heavens knows that Stark County needs the county's leadership to step up to the challenging as never before.  There has never been a more difficult time for governance than now.

One problem for all too many Stark officials is that they are too political and seemingly never accept a "the buck stops here-esque" responsibility for running their offices.  Being consummately political/self-serving/eely ultimately gets these folks.  They like to blame the press and anything else they can dig up, but the reality is that these folks are their own worst enemies. 

Being a consummate politico, however, does not appear to be a Pete Ferguson malady.

And being relatively non-political provides Ferguson with the opportunity to grow in his job and completely turn around the thinking of the likes of the SCPR.


Now back to the Ferguson conversation.

Earlier this week the SCPR wrote a blog criticizing the commissioners for not seeing to it that Board of Commissioner minutes were not kept relatively up-to-date.  The Report e-mailed each commissioner with a request that the minutes be brought up-to-date and kept up-to-date.

Of the three commissioners, only Ferguson broached yours truly with an explanation.

First, he protested that he had taken The Repository commenter seriously, and had worked on getting the minutes updated and keeping them that way, and had communicated such to the commenter.

Second, he talked about the impact that the draw down of personnel in the commissioners office was having on such things as keeping minutes up-to-date.

Ferguson only a few months ago would not have given yours truly the time of day.

The Report was impressed with Ferguson's effort to get a VA facility located at the old Doctors Hospital in Perry.  Hopefully, he is ginning up a new economic development project that can serve as a springboard for Stark County economic resurgence.

One thing that Ferguson and the commissioners will have to be careful about is cutting county administration personnel too much as The Report told Ferguson.

It is impressive that the commissioners have taken the lead in cutting their own budget (equals less personnel) to "lead by example."

However, at the price of what?

Meeting minutes running two, two and one-half months short?

Not a good choice.

The commissioners, all three of whom have put many unseen hours into being commissioner, need to have the administrative support required to serve the information, communication and access needs of Stark County's citizens.

After all the commissioners office is the gateway for Stark Countians to enter in order to understand and impact the operations of county government.

And Commissioner Pete Ferguson is showing more and more that he is making progress in leading the way towards creating a better public perception in how county government can work for everyday Stark Countians!

STARK COUNTY TREASURER GARY ZEIGLER SUES "THE REPOSITORY" (VIA ITS PARENT COMPANY): THE SCPR'S TAKE ON THE "HEART OF THE COMPLAINT?' ("HEART" AS IN THE OPINION OF THE SCPR)

 UPDATED:  12:10 PM 04/03/2010


/

From:

...

"JLR" ...

...

To:

tramols@att.net

JLR has left a new comment on your post "STARK COUNTY TREASURER GARY ZEIGLER SUES "THE REPO...":


I'm surprised that Mr. Olson chose to focus only on the portion of the complaint that relates to readers' comments. According to the Canton Rep, Mr. Zeigler is also complaining about the content of the articles written on the subject. These have been more than fair to him in my opinion. He objects to anyone alleging he was derelict in his duties in allowing possibly large sums of money to be embezzled under his watch. He feels his responsibility was limited to reporting after the fact, not having safeguards in place to prevent the theft. The Rep even printed a submission explaining why technically that might be true. If the citizens don't buy it, that's not the editor's fault.


There seems to be a pattern of using the legal process to intimidate critics that is more disturbing and dangerous than anything the Repository has done. The Devies' case, the filing of a disciplinary complaint by John Ferrero against Mr. Olson and now this. If the findings of the investigation are to be reported soon, this may be a way to deter anyone from suggesting Mr. Zeigler resign. I think the emphasis should be on the politicians' attempt to control information.

UPDATED  7:20 AM 04/03/2010

From:

...

"mary"...

...

To:

tramols@att.net

mary has left a new comment on your post "STARK COUNTY TREASURER GARY ZEIGLER SUES "THE REPO...":

Many of us, especially ones who are often, the victim of harassment, vindictiveness, racism, slander and even more, while not politicians, or office holders, have asked, just about begged Jeff to get a grip on his comment section, to no avail.

I never could understand why, he would want what was at one time, a 'comfortable' place to go and express your opinion on a political stance, a candidate, the State of the Nation, or whatever, to become what it is today. A place for people to go and dump on someone they dislike.

Have more people started commenting under his leadership? Oh yea. They could now, come on, make personal attacks on the comment and the commenter.

Mike Hanke had no problem keeping people in check. He along with Jim Hillibish, ran a pretty tight ship, which I complained about back then. I couldn't really see the need for some of their rules, until he left, and I saw, and was sort of a victim of the maliciousness that became, and remains until this day, the norm once on comments. Mr. Gauger allowed commentors to get out of control. Once it had gone so far, it was hard to lasso it back in. A little lecture here and there about us acting like pre-schoolers, just wasn't enough. People who were kicked off by Hanke, for very legitimate reasons, were knowingly allowed back on, and were even more malicious and vindictive than they were when they were booted off. They knew they could get away with murder now, and they did all but commit it. The only thing they're going to kill though is his newspaper.

Jeff's a likable guy, and I think that's part of the problem. He wants to be liked, or at least think he is. People weren't crazy about Mike, but at least the paper wasn't getting sued because of the comment section under his management. 

ORIGINAL POST


Revised at 3:18 P.M. 04/02/2010

The SCPR commentary is as a journalist and not as an attorney.

On reading the complaint filed by Stark County Treasurer Gary Zeigler versus The Repository (in the name of parent company GateHouse Media, Inc.), the SCPR's take on the lawsuit is that the core of the complaint is that The Rep fails to screen the commenters' comments so as to excise totally unsupported assertions.

It appears to The Report from the numerous editorials he has written since he came to The Repository from Rockford, IL assigned by GateHouse, that Executive Editor Jeff Gauger has been in charge of supervising whether or not a given comment on a Repository story gets published.

Just this week Gauger wrote a column in which he talks about a 2010 Stark County candidate's use of the comments section as a campaign communication medium without identifying himself.  The Stark County Political Report believes that Gauger should identify the candidate.  But Gauger says he sees no purpose in doing so.

Really?  No purpose?

Think that the "anonymous" candidate's opponent or even the voting public (and early voting does begin on Tuesday next) might not want to know so that a response in campaign literature can be fashioned and so that voters can make a determination as to whether or not the conduct of the offending candidate can be factored in by voters?

Back to the Zeigler complaint (excerpts of which appear in this blog).

Looking at the first paragraph of Zeigler's complaint - it seems to the SCPR -  (the SCPR has not talked with Zeigler or his legal counsel), that the core of the complaint is focused on The Repository's failure to control comments that appear to "go over the line" of responsible free speech into - in the opinion of The Report - unproductive, perhaps even counterproductive speech in terms of what is a healthy public dialogue on issue,s and citizen opinion of the public performance and conduct of officeholders.

In what the SCPR takes in a confirmatory sort of way, a source (a county officeholder, but not Zeigler) says that a number of area elected officials (including, obviously, Zeigler), who are often the subject of commenters' comments, are very unhappy about the quality of The Repository's monitoring of and screening out what the officeholders think are "over the line" comments.

Undoubtedly, The Repository has heard officeholders' complaints direct, but The Rep appears to The Report to have chosen - after hearing such - not to tighten things up. 

So now it will be for the courts to decide.

We should all hope - on this aspect of the case - for a decision that upholds First Amendment and Ohio's concomitant constitutional right to the fullest extent possible in the context of requiring publishers to exercise good faith control over which third party comments do or do not get published.

A SURPRISE! LEN COOPER, CHAIRMAN OF THE STARK COUNTY COMMISSIONER APPOINTED "DOG POUND ADVISORY GROUP" IS A CANDIDATE TO REPLACE EVERT GIBSON AS STARK COUNTY DOG WARDEN?

UPDATE ON 04/05/2010 AT 10:45 AM

The SCPR just received an e-mail from Len Cooper saying that his name will NOT be among those submitted Wednesday, April 7, 2010 by Dog Pound Advisory Board member Steve Swank.

Swank had promised to release to the SCPR the names on the list of five to be submitted to commissioners but the Board (via Board chairman Cooper) backed off releasing the names because of privacy issue concerns


UPDATE AT 5:30 PM

 REVISED AT NOON

The SCPR has learned from Stark County Dog Pound Advisory Group member Steve Swank that Board chairman Len Cooper is among a group of 5 to 8 who applied for the position to be recommended by the advisers to the commissioners for consideration.

The Report is told by Marsha Cdimdeville of the Stark County commissioners' office that Cooper submitted his application on February 26, 2010, but withdrew it on March 1st which probably accounts for the SCPR not coming across the application when The Report reviewed the applications (127 in number) a day or so before the Advisory Board held its March monthly meeting at which the applications were reviewed by the Board.

The Board recommened list was to have been submitted to commissioners last Wednesday but because of logistical problems the submission has been deferred to this Wednesday's commissioners meeting.

Swank tells The Report that Cooper has been on the Board for about four months.  Moreover, Swann says that Cooper's resume in very impressive insofar as his qualifications to be warden are concerned.

The SCPR has tried to contact Cooper to discuss with The Report this surprising (to the SCPR, anyway) turn of events.

The SCPR has been promised an up-to-date list of candidates for the Stark County dog warden position later today.

As soon as the list becomes available, the SCPR will publish same.

IS THIS ANOTHER FALSE ALARM OR IS IT "NO FOOLIN" THIS TIME IN TERMS OF GETTING RESULTS FROM THE FBI INVESTIGATION OF THE ALLEGED THEFT IN THE STARK COUNTY TREASURER'S OFFICE

The SCPR is once again being told that results could come any minute in the FBI's investigation to an alleged theft of taxpayer money out of the Stark County treasurer's office.

Today is the first anniversary (obviously not a day to celebrate as far as Stark County government is concerned) of allegations made by Stark County treasurer Gary D. Zeigler - to local media - that his chief deputy Vince Frustaci had stolen county money from the treasurer's office.  Zeigler also announced that he had fired Frustaci on the basis of the allegations.

County officials have wanted the investigation of the matter to have been completed long before now.  it appears that the next two weeks may well be the time frame within which Stark Countians will learn the results of the FBI investigation.

Two sources are reporting the imminence of an announcement by law enforcement officials on the outcome of the investigation.

One source used the figure $3,000,000 as the amount missing.

If true, such a loss further complicates the county's desperate financial picture.

Most knowledgeable Stark County political observers (including the SCPR) believe that there is no chance that the county can convince Stark voters to pass a new sales/use tax issue and base their analysis on the fact that the county imposed 0.50% tax increase in December, 2008 only to have it rescinded by voters in November, 2009 by an overwhelming majority and the economic reality of local, state and national economies being in the dumper.

Add missing money, and the political complications grow, perhaps, to the point that not even a renewal will pass when it comes up which most certainly will be in November of this year

Once the investigation results are announced, the SCPR believes that there will be a renewed outburst from the Stark County public of indignation at the loss in terms of wondering how it could possibly have happened under Zeigler's watch.  Moreover, the public may want to punish the entire county government operations over the failure from within the Stark treasury to have adequate safeguards in place to have prevented the alleged loss.

The Report is told that there are some within Stark County government who are putting pressure on Treasurer Zeigler to step down.  The Report has previously stated that, in the opinion of yours truly, Zeigler should resign.

For him to do so might make it easier for other county officials to convince voters to approve at least a renewal of the existing 0.25 sales/tax add-on which is due to expire on June 30, 2011.