A PHANTOM CAMPAIGN FOR COUNTY COMMISSIONER?

An interesting campaign, no?

Jackson trustee Jamie Walters versus Lake Townhip home builder Dean Windham?

You talk about a "low profile" campaign for this abbreviated term as commissioner (2 years).

Has anyone seen a sign?

Yours truly hasn't.

Certainly there are signs somewhere throughout Stark County.  It just that the SCPR hasn't seen any.

Maybe the candidates are spending their effort doing mailers?

Neither is particularly well known.

Walters would have some I.D. in Jackson Township, where he is trustee.  But not likely very much.  He has only been trustee for four years and serves in the shadow of two other longer serving trustees and Fiscal Officer Randy Gonzalez.

But he does have a website.  Not much of one as far the the SCPR is concerned.  Here is a sample (excerpt):

The "Bosley" and the "Tips" subscripts are from headlines in area newspaper which Walters has integrated.

Why would a candidate want to focus on a "soon-to-be" former commissioner and on an issue which is a non-starter for the foreseeable future?

Sounds like a campaign going nowhere to The Report.

Walters was at the commissioners meeting on April 14th, but said nothing.

Windham, perhaps, has even less I.D. than Walters.  He is a Lake Township home builder whose main qualification (see  bio on The Rep's Election Central) it seems to the SCPR as having built hundreds of homes throughout Stark County.

He is also a CPA who has minimal government experience (apparently limited to Marlboro and Lake Township appointed positions).

Like the Walters' campaign, Windham's does not appear to have much life to it.  The SCPR has not been able to find a website.

From the beginning, the SCPR has said that Democrat Tom Bernabei has this one in the bag no matter which among Walters and Windham surfaces to run against him.

What this means is that it nearly a certainty that Stark's Dems will still control the commissioners' office after the November election.

The likely lineup:  Ferguson (Democrat), Bernabei (Democrat) and Creighton (Republican).

THE GOP 16TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT PRIMARY: IT IS ALL ABOUT "WINNING THE BATTLE" - "BUT LOSING THE WAR?"

Congressman John Boccieri must be smiling broadly to himself these days.

How's that?

The candidates for the GOP nomination to run against him are "racing to the right" so fast that by the time one of them (probably Matt Miller) wins that battle, he will have damaged himself so much with the political center of the electorate that John Boccieri will have an easier time than he could have expected (given two controversial votes - cap 'n trade, health care) and may come close to replicating his margin of victory over Republican J. Kirk Schuring (about 10%) over either Miller or Renacci.

Jim Renacci, if he loses to Matt Miller, has no one to blame except Jim Renacci.  He has tons more money than Miller and he has most of the established Republican leadership in the 16th behind him.

But in his zeal not to be out-righted by Miller and extreme right winger Paul Schiffer, he (if he survives to be the nominee) will lose some Republican votes, many independent votes and get almost no "disaffected with Boccieri" Democratic votes in the general election.

Miller, if nominated, will - ironically do better than Renacci.  At least Matt Miller is who he is.

Renacci, if nominated, will veer wildly towards the center in the run up to the general election.  But to the Republican right, he will appear (from their perspective) to going left.  Not a place one would want to appear to be going if one wants to keep his political base and add enough independents and disaffected Democrat to eke-out a victory.

If either Miller or Renacci wins in November, it will be by the slimmest of margins; perhaps, at the "re-count" level.

Winning battles and losing wars is what political idealogues do.  But Renacci is no political idealogue and that is why GOP leaders got behind him.  So his rush to the right defeats the notion that he can appeal to a political cross section of voters.

If Renacci wins, it will not be because of his flirtation with the Republican right.  Rather, it will be because Paul Schiffer (who has no chance whatsoever for the nomination) drains away enough votes from Matt Miller to let Renacci slip through.

In any event, this primary, which could have been a spellbinding square-off between the more moderately perceived Jim Renacci versus rightists Miller and Schiffer, has turned out to be very boring.

The ho-hum GOP primary has been advantage to Boccieri too.  He has been grabbing the headlines on the drama of which way he would vote on health care, while Renacci has been battling Miller/Schiffer on who is more right wing.

Most voters get bored to death with ideological battles.  Only the fringers get turned on by puritanical politics.

By putting the great political middle asleep with their ideological battles, the GOP candidates have hurt the Republican effort to win the political war with the Democrats immensely!

A BELLWEATHER RACE: IF ALAN HAROLD DEFEATS KIM PEREZ IN THE STARK COUNTY AUDITOR RACE, LOOK FOR WHOLESALE DEMOCRATIC LOSSES AT THE COUNTY LEVEL IN 2012?

Revised at 11:15 AM

Is the Stark County "organized" Democratic Party close to collapsing?

Hmm?

Collapsing?

A Party which has every non-judicial countywide office under its control, on the brink of collapse?

Not likely, but there are some "nervous nellies" surfacing these days among Stark Dems.  Nervous Nellies?  Nervous about what?

Nervous about the "imminent" unfolding of the legal consequences of the alleged theft of taxpayer money from the Stark County treasury!  Nervous about being the Party (via Commissioner Todd Bosley and former Commissioner Tom Harmon) that imposed a 0.50 sales/use tax on Stark Countians taking away the fundamental democratic right of citizens!!

First, the Zeigler matter.

More and more one hears a castigation of Party officials for not learning hard on Treasurer Gary Zeigler to resign.  These folks apparently feel that as long as Zeigler remains an a elected Democratic official, his presence will "rub-off" on the likes of Auditor Kim Perez and could cause their defeat in upcoming elections.

The SCPR does have indication that a least one key Democrat has been pressuring Zeigler to step down, but Zeigler is adamant that he has done nothing wrong and therefore is not about to quit.

A early test case of whether or not the controversy surrounding the Democrat-controlled treasurer's office will be the Republican Alan Harold versus Democrat Kim Perez auditor's contest coming up this November.  Perez, rightly or wrongly, seems to The Report to be publicly perceived as being a close political ally.

If Perez were to fall in November, then political analysts will be turning their attention to November, 2012.  Who could be next?  Zeigler, the treasurer?  Campbell, the recorder?  Ferrero, the prosecutor?  Swanson or Perez, the sheriff?  Murthy, the coroner?  Reinbold, the clerk of courts? Maybe even Engineer Bennett? (who seems most impervious, because of the requirement of special qualifications)

If Perez falls, will Stark's Republicans be emboldened to go all out to capture more countywide offices?

The SCPR has already chalked the Creighton/Meeks match up as going the Republicans' way.  But it will be a relatively close race.  In the work up to November, it will be interesting to see whether or not former Canton mayor Creighton tries to associate Meeks in any way, shape or form with the goings on in the treasurer's office.

Creighton has queried previously to the SCPR (a kind of thinking out loud type of question), whether or not county offcials should be looking to attempt to recover any deficiencies in county money (the loss, projected by some to be about $3 million, less any bond money recovered) from Treasurer Zeigler himself.

Perhaps, Creighton was thinking of Ohio Revised Code Section 321.04 Ohio's law on the subject since October 1, 1953 which was referred to the SCPR by Attorney Craig T. Conley), to wit:

321.04 Deputies. Each county treasurer may appoint one or more deputies, and he shall be liable and accountable for their proceedings and misconduct in office.  Effective Date: 10-01-1953

Will she be applying pressure on Meeks during the campaign to become a advocate of such an attempt?  If so, how does Meeks respond?

Remember, Zeigler maintains he has done nothing wrong, and, in fact, affirmatively did what the law requires of him in reporting the alleged theft to law enforcement authorities.  Notwithstanding Zeigler's position, the political reality among the Stark County electorate appears to be that Zeigler is in a "the buck stops here" modality and therefore should be held accountable.

Does Meeks say:  "Treasurer Zeigler has said he's done nothing wrong, in fact, everything right.  The alleged theft is an unfortunate incident.  I have no basis to challenge Zeigler's position and therefore there is nothing to be done."

Or does Meeks say:  "I understand what Treasurer Zeigler has to say about his non-culpability in the matter.  I respectfully disagree with him and in terms of "the buck stopping with him" as the head of the Stark treasury, I think the county should consult with legal counsel with a eye towards pursuing a civil recovery from Zeigler for any deficiency and let a judge or jury decide whether or not Zeigler, in his performance as treasurer, bears any legal liability."

Second, the imposed sales/use tax.

While the SCPR does not believe that the Stark Democrats will suffer wholesale losses 2010/2012 election cycle, it could happen.  Especially, if one adds into the political equation, the 0.50 county commissioner imposed sales/use tax increase as being a Democratic gig.

Yes, Republican Jane Vignos did support the imposed tax and she still stands by it as having been the right thing to do.  But isn't the public perception, in the main, that it was a Democrat (Bosley, Harmon) thing?

Will Republican Harold press Perez and will Republican Creighton needle Meeks into disavowing the Bosley and Harmon decision?

How about the survivor of the Republican primary for the two-year commissioner term?:  Windham or Jackson trustee James N. Walter.  Will the nominated candidate join Harold an Creighton and force Democrat Tom Bernabei to stand up or stand down on the Bosley/Harmon action?

And there is one more dimension to the sales/use tax aspect of this blog?  How will it impact on Bosley himself?  Commissioner Bosley is running against Republican state Representative Todd Snitchler in Ohio's 50th House District.

The SCPR has every reason to believe that Bosley will stand squarely behind his December, 2008 "impose the tax" vote as the right thing to have done.  Accordingly, this race - though covering only about one-third of the county - could be at least a partial measure of how much the Stark County electorate are disaffected with Stark County Democrat politicians.

Conclusion.

To repeat, the SCPR does not expect the Stark County "organized" Democratic Party to collapse between now and the 2012 election and lose all of its currently held non-judicial county posts.

But it could happen.

It all depends on how skilled the political players involved turn out to be defining/positioning each other.

November, 2010 could be the election year that local politicos long remember?

HEALY VERSUS SMUCKLER: MAY, 2011 - THE MAIN ISSUE IS SHAPING UP?

Is the main issue shaping up in the looming primary battle for the Democratic nomination for mayor of Canton come May, 2011?

The SCPR thinks so.

What will the main issue be?

Healy will likely say that it is economic development and that Councilman-at-large Bill Smuckler has been a hindrance in equipping Canton government with the proper structure/staffing to go all out in reversing the slippage in Canton's economic development effort in recent months.

Smuckler will probably seize on Healy's "Zero Tolerance" campaign theme against former mayor Janet Creighton and the obvious reality that crime still exists in Canton's neighborhoods in intolerable quantities.

On Monday night, Canton City Council voted 10 to 2, with only out-and-out Healy loyalist councilmembers Thomas West and Chris Smith voting with the Mayor, to reject Healy's plan to reconstitute Canton's economic development effort in rejecting the creation of a new cabinet-level position.

In the post-vote discussion, what did Smuckler talk about?  Taking money saved with the resignation of the City's communications director (Adam Herman) and putting it into Canton's high crime neighborhoods.

The SCPR believes that Smuckler has hit a Healy nerve which has the Mayor on the defensive already.  Healy is disclaiming a George Bush-esque "Mission Accomplished" stance.

Why the need for a disclaimer?

Because Healy has been going around Canton with Police Chief Dean McKimm and Safety Director Thomas Ream touting FBI statistics showing that Canton crime is down.

Any yet what are Canton residents doing in significant numbers these days?  They are showing up at City Council meetings and complaining about what?

You guessed it!  Yes, crime in the neighborhoods.

Yes, we are more than a year out from May, 2011, but it appears that "the heart and soul" of the looming Smuckler versus Healy mayoralty battle is already becoming apparent.

Economic development on the one hand versus safety in the neighborhoods on the other!

REPOSITORY FAILS TO BRING SUNSHINE TO STARK BOARD OF ELECTIONS - STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT GETS THE JOB DONE!

The SCPR could mimic the ownership of The Repository (GateHouse Media, Inc.) and give an award to itself (i.e. GateHouse awards The Rep for such an such), but The Report recognizes instead, the Stark County Board of Elections (BO#) for "letting the sunshine in."

About a month ago or so The SCPR showed up at a BOE in hand to videotape the regular monthly meeting of Board.  However, board president William Cline shut the SCPR camera down saying that the Stark Board had no guidance from the Ohio secretary of state office.

Another interesting side to the episode was that The Repository (which claims - once a year during "Sunshine Week" that it is at the vanguard of fighting for public access to government) reporter present at the meeting uttered not a word on behalf of "freedom of the press" and public to make a record of a public meeting.

The same reporter filed a report of the BOE's April 5th meeting describing the following, to wit:

"DISCUSSION  Introduced a draft version of guidelines and rules for public audio and video taping of meetings."

Notice not a word connecting the BOE's action to the SCPR's effort to record the meeting.  No question to the board members as to whether or not there was a connection.  Hmm?  Is The Rep really devoted to "journalistic/government sunshine?  Apparently, not.

Oh well, to carry on.

The SCPR did take up President Cline's challenge to check with the Ohio secretary of state office (SOS).  Answer:  It was not the role of the SOS to deal with such matters.

So at the next meeting, the SCPR showed up with camera in hand and videotaped the meeting. 

Now the guidelines. 

Recognition by the BOE of the public's right to access in terms of recording the event is a step in the right direction.

Rather than gloat, the SCPR chooses to thank the Stark BOE with an SCPR Sunhine Award.  It's up to the beholder to determine whether it is sincere or sarcastic.

Moreover,  there is additional work to be done by the BOE.  It needs to implement the SCPR request that it scan in candidate petitions an campaign finance documents as they are filed and make them immediately available to the general Stark County public in an electronic, over the Internet, format.

So far the BOE has been "in your face" with the SCPR on this issue.  If the board members think it is The Report that they are showing a thing or two to, they have it all wrong.  It is the Stark County public they are affecting.  Those many hard working Stark Countians who do not have the time to drive to Canton to get desired records as yours truly has the ability to do.

In the e-mail that yours truly sent to Director Jeanette Mullane for a copy of the "proposed" rules also asked about the status of the scanning request.  But no answer.  The last answer of any kind that The Report has gotten from the BOE, is something to the effect:  We will do with your request what we want to do and whenever we want to do it, if ever!"

Isn't that nice. 

As to the proposed rules themselves, they are highly insulting.  The emphasis seems to be on restrictive language highlighting that "no disruption" of board proceedings will be tolerated.  As if they anticipate that attendees would be predisposed to interrupt/disrupt.

The SCPR takes the language to be a signal from the leadership of the BOE that they view the mere presence of the public at BOE meetings to be intrusive, let alone the audacity of the public to think they can record the event. 

It is attutudes like the SCPR encounters from the BOE leadership that make The Report want to send the message to other Stark County departments of government that the SCPR will continue to oppose any sales/use tax reunewals/increases as long as your truly encounters perceived hostility to requests for making the public records of the BOE more accessible to all Stark Countians.

Rick Campbell (the recorder), Kim Perez (the auditor), the courts (through it CJIS operation) and other Stark County and political subdivision units of government have does a good job of increasing public access to their records.

The Report encourages these folks, the Stark County commissioners and all other Stark County officials to put pressure on the BOE to become more citizen-access-to-public-records friendly.

The issue of scanning is also one for the Citizen Review Committee (CRC)  to look into as a efficiency measure beneficial to the BOE and to everyday citizens.   The CRC needs use its influence to nudge the BOE into implementing the SCPR - on the behalf of the public - requested scanning project.

The SCPR doesn't like taking the position that there should be no tax renewal or increase (which affects all "general fund" county departments of government) when the main object of the SCPR's displeasure is pretty much focused on the BOE.  But such appears to The Report to be the only viable leverage left inasmuch s The Report cannot even get the matter on a BOE meeting agenda for discussion.

Unlike other departments of Stark County government, the board members of the BOE are unelected by the general public and therefore are not directly accountable to the public.  The members are "political appointees" and seem to the SCPR to have a "public be damned attitude" about them.

Such is not acceptable and it is in the interest of all of Stark County government to weigh-in on behalf of the public on this issue!

ONE TIME "POLITICAL FOES" ABOUT TO TURN INTO "POLITICAL FRIENDS?"

Long before Todd Bosley ever thought about running against Republican incumbent Todd Snitchler for the Ohio House 50th District seat, Jeffrey Ury had taken out petitions.

Then came January, 2010 and a visit by Ohio Speaker of the House Armond Budish to the Bosley home with a plea to Bosley that he consider running against Snitchler.

Why?

Because the Ohio House Democratic Caucus under the leadership of 'Liz' Brown (daughter of U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown) had done some polling and learned that Bosley was showing head and shoulders above Ury and others as a candidate with the most potential to put Snitchler on the political sidelines. 

Consequently, it was just a matter of time that Ury would step aside.  Though Ury denied to the SCPR that he would do so, he failed to file his petitions and thereby left the field clear for Bosley to focus on Snitchler.

Apparently, Ury's move is now paying political dividends for the Lake Township resident. 

The SCPR understands that Ury was very unhappy to have to step aside.  So much so, The Report is getting indications that he may be making demands of Candidate Bosley and the Ohio House Democratic Caucus (OHDC) to soothe his ruffled "political" feathers.

What might he be demanding?

First, a key role in the Bosley campaign.  Say, like campaign manager?  And, apparently, matters were coming to a quick conclusion on naming Ury the head of his former putative opponent's campaign.  But someone from Columbus must have said:  "Hold on a minute!"

Why?

Because as far as the SCPR knows, Ury is a political novice and hardly, in the opinion of The Report, and, most likely, to the political pros who staff the Democratic Caucus, not up to managing a critically important political campaign which could determine who controls the Ohio House of Representatives.

After some reflections, the "deep thinkers" at the OHDC got a grip on themselves and Bosley and backed off appointing Ury Bosley's campaign manager.

Second, The Report has learned that Ury was casting about for a new opportunity after being swept aside by Bosley. The SCPR has reason to believe that Ury had applied for Stark County commissioner Steve Meeks old job as the "eyes and ears" of Governor Strickland in Region 9 as a regional economic development director.  Moreover, the SCPR has been told he was asking the likes of Bosley to support him in his quest.

The Report was surprised to hear the political insider talk about this Ury initiative.  Ury appears to The Report to be politically naive about how these jobs are handed out and also does not seem to understand that he does not have the political longevity and connections to be remotely considered for such a job.

Proof of The Report's premise:  guess who got the job?  Congressman Boccieri staffer Chris Cupples, that's who.  Maybe someday, Ury will get to that level within the Stark County/Ohio Democratic Party, but he's a long way from there now.

So what is left for Jeffrey "I pulled petitions for the 50th, but didn't file them" Ury? 

How about:  "a regional campaign directorship" - including Bosley's race -  for candidates (there are 99 candidates) running as Democrats across Ohio?

It is a significant position, but it appears to be something much less than Ury was expecting.

Next question.  Is all this talk just happenstance (unrelated) in terms of context of Ury having stepped aside or was Ury pursuing these opportunities as "what he had coming" for stepping aside from the 50th and thereby providing Bosley a clear path to go head-to-head against Republican Snitchler?

AN INTERESTING REVELATION IN CHICAGO ABOUT RICHARD REINBOLD NOT BEING THE TOP CHOICE OF THE OHIO DEMOCRATIC SENATE CAUCUS FOR THE 29TH

The SCPR is writing from Chicago today.

The Report, until today, has not revealed that periodically yours truly writes the Stark County Political Report while traveling across the country.

Why make the "traveling while still writing" point today?

Because there was the strangest confluence of events that clearly makes underscores that "it is a small, small world we live in," at least - sometimes.

As The Report got settled in to take a bus ride from the hotel in Chicago to McCormick Place (the convention center in the Windy City), a fellow-rider started talking with another Stark Countian in the Stark County traveling group about Stark County politics.  The fellow-rider was from a nearby northeast Ohio county.

Obviously, the conversation caught the attention of the SCPR.

Yours truly sort of interrupted to ask the fellow-rider about whether or not he knew certain Stark County politicos or politically connected persons.

Answer?  Indeed!

Just to name a few: Congressman John Boccieri, William J. Healy, II (Mayor of Canton),  David Held (Mayor of North Canton) and former Stark County Democratic Party chairman Johnnie A. Maier, Jr.  And it became clear to The Report that Fellow-rider (his anonymous name for purposes of this blog) had/has extensive Columbus political connections, too.

It was Fellow-rider's Columbus connection which was the basis of the conversation becoming very interesting.

The Report made an observation to Fellow-rider about the significance of Ohio House Speaker Armond Budish having made a trip to Stark County to talk Stark County Commissioner Todd Bosley into making a run against incumbent Republican Todd Snitchler (Ohio House - 50th).  Fellow-rider retorted:  "But you know, Bosley was  not Budish's first choice."

"Really?" The Report retorted.

Fellow-rider than went on to explain that Stark County Auditor Kim Perez was Budish's first choice.

Well, this assertion swung the SCPR into action, to wit:  making a serious of phone calls:

First to Bosley and then to Perez.  For yours truly knew that Perez is about as Canton-based (living outside the 50th) as one can get.

Bosley protested that Perez could not have been a candidate preferred over him.  For he had seen the names on the list of possible contenders to vie for the Snitchler-held seat and Perez's was nowhere to be seen.  Bosley speculated that the Perez as "top choice" was the Ohio Senate - 29th race.

Well, Bosley suggestion made sense to the SCPR inasmuch as The Report was astounded to learn of the Ohio Senate Caucus' interest in former Stark Common Pleas judge Richard Reinbold as a candidate.

As far as The Report is concerned, a Reinbold selection is about as close as one can get to running nobody as one could get (which happened last time when "musical chair" candidate and incumbent Scott Oelslager ran for his final term in Ohio's 51st Ohio House District).

Why is The Report so negative on Reinbold?  Because he has no political pizzaz, no legislative experience and no real experience in running for "competitive" political office.

The Report believes that Oelslager has been largely unproductive over much of his 25 years in the Ohio General Assembly.  Moreover,  the Democrats, under former chairmen Maier and Ferrero, have pretty much given him an "undeserved" pass in terms of meaningful opposition and is concerned.  Apparently, the Oelslager charm on the Democrats will continue under current chairman Randy Gonzalez - as a Reinbold choice seems to indicate.

Back to the Chicago story.

Next up on the "to call" list:   Kim Perez himself.

Perez, indeed, confirmed that the he had been approached by the Ohio Senate Democratic Caucus to run against Oelslager.

Aha!  The Report was vindicated in believing that the Ohio Senate Caucus had to know - one would think - that there were better choices - in terms of electability - than Reinbold

But Perez declined Caucus entreaty out-of-hand because he is in the midst of revamping and reconfiguring computer operations within the Stark County auditor's office.  However, he did not rule out a run against Oelslager in 2014.

The moral of this story?  No matter where The Report finds himself, readers can be assured that the SCPR is working to bring them the latest on the inside story of Stark County politics.

From Chicago, this is the SCPR signing off.

Have a good day!

And thanks for reading the Stark County Political Report!