ANGUS KING OF MAINE: A MODEL OF HOW POLITICIANS SHOULD BE!

Recently, Maine United States Senator Olympia Snowe decided not to run for reelection.

Reason?

Well, let's allow Senator Snowe to speak for herself as she did in a Washington Post Op-ed on March 1st:

... I have spoken on the floor of the Senate for years about the dysfunction and political polarization in the institution. Simply put, the Senate is not living up to what the Founding Fathers envisioned.

The Senate of today routinely jettisons regular order, ... ; serially legislates by political brinkmanship, ... ; and habitually eschews full debate and an open amendment process in favor of competing, up-or-down, take-it-or-leave-it proposals

Again, the reason?  Frustration with how organized Republicans and Democrats put political party interests above the the nation's interest.

Oh! that we had an Olympia Snowe in Ohio.

For the nation, the state and localities desperately need politicians who will stand apart from their political party agenda on crucial  and important issues and push to develop policies that are in line with what is good for us all.

But we do not.

The battle over Senate Bill 5 ("the collective bargaining bill" - State Issue #2 on the November 8, 2011 ballot) is a demonstrative of the intransigence that plagues "organized" Republicans and Democrats in our state.

When he realized that the Democrats and their union allies were going to be successful in overturning SB 5, Republican Governor John Kasich wanted to compromise.

Simply unbelievable!

And it was a pity too.

Because, as Stark County assistant prosecutor Michael Bickis (a Democrat, by the way) said in his analysis of SB 5 to the Stark County commissioners in July, 2011, there were some very helpful provisions in the bill for local government officials to use in getting their finances in order.

Kasich and his highly politicized minions in the Ohio General Assembly (which included Republican state Senator Kirk Schuring and state Representative Christina Hagan) did what Olympia Snowe described as happening in the United States Senate, to wit:  "take-it-or-leave-it" on Ohio Senate Bill 5!

Had the Republicans included the Democrats and organized labor in pre-Senate Bill 5 passage negotiations, chances are  that some of the Bickis-described "good parts of the bill" would now be Ohio law.

But no.  The Republicans had to engage in political machismo.

So Ohioans and Stark Countians will face a round of highly politicized confrontations beginning in January, 2013 on the detritus of SB 5 in a piece by piece by piece fashion.

It will be "up-or-down" vote after "up-or-down" vote after "up-or-down"vote and "take-it-or-leave-it" vote after "take-it-or-leave-it" vote after "take-it-or-leave-it" voter after "take-it-or-leave-it" vote!!!

You can bank on it.

And the votes will be followed a "repeal-that-bill" initiative after "repeal-that-bill" initiative after "repeal-that-bill."

You can bank on that too.

The only way for Ohio to get out of this morass of confrontation politics is for someone to take the lead of Maine's Angus King.

A former "independent" governor, he is running to replace Snowe.

According to a USA Today (Maine candidate:  don't assume party affiliation, June 19, 2012) article King says:  "He is running a campaign on a platform of changing Congress and resisting partisanship ... ."

So should everybody running for a national or state legislative post.

There is nothing wrong with "checked" partisanship.

But that is not what we have on both sides of the aisle in Ohio.

No doubt that Oelslager (he voted against Senate Bill 5), Schuring and Slesnick (a Canton Democrat) are better than most of their fellows in the Ohio General Assembly, but they all still could stand some distancing from their respective political parties.

Christina Hagan (Republican - the 50th)?

She is the personification of the worst kind of example of the "up-or-down," "take-it-or-leave" it mentality that dominates in the Ohio General Assembly.

Pure and simple.  She should not be elected to the House.

But she is exactly the kind of politician that a political party caucus will go all out for.

Why?

Because she will do whatever the caucus tells her to do!

MASSILLON'S MAYOR CATAZARO-PERRY'S "OWN WORST ENEMY?"

Indeed, it appears to the SCPR that none other than Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry is her "own worst enemy" in terms of getting Massillon headed in the right direction.

Nowhere is this more obvious than in the ongoing saga of the Catazaro-Perry administration's decision to layoff a combined total of 19 policemen (9) and firemen (10) effective May 20th.

Ostensibly, it was designed to pull Massillon out of a $1.1 million or so deficit that Catazaro-Perry says political bogeyman Frank Cicchinelli (the former mayor) left her.

But there is disagreement as to whether or not the layoffs will do the trick in pulling Massillon even in its budgetary numbers.

In the short term, they certainly will not.

Perhaps, over the longer term.

But Massillon needs financial relief and it needs it now!

And there is some thought that the layoffs were a "roll of the political dice" calculated to scare Massillon City Council into approving Catazaro-Perry's insistence that Massillon needs to reduce the city income tax credit for those who work outside the city by 50% then 35% so that the city can get several hundred thousands of dollars into city coffers this year.

If such was the motivation of the mayor's closest strategists and advisers (e.g. her "kitchen-cabinet" of the likes of de facto mayor Johnnie A. Maier, Jr., [former Stark County Democratic Party chairman] and Shane Jackson [Stark Dems political director] and others), Mayor Kathy should be looking for advice elsewhere.

Reading Matt Rink's piece Layoffs complicates fire talks, June 17 (The Independent) CLOSELY, it seems to The Report that all the mayor succeeded in doing with the layoffs was to "dig her financial hole deeper" and complicate her life "by leaps and bounds" and she has to attribute the troubles to no one other than herself thus being her "own worst enemy."

From Rink's article:

Layoffs announced in April threw a wrench in contract talks between the city and its firefighters union, says union President Pat Perkowski.

And an excerpt on Safety-Service Director Maier's take on the talks:

If you had asked me this question a week ago, I would have told you ‘soon.’ But some things have changed a little bit. So, to be straightforward, the answer now is ‘I don’t know.’ I’m hopeful we can come to an agreement on a few things, but I’m guessing there will be some things we’ll have to go to the next level (mediation) on.

For the layoffs to provide the kind of budget savings her numbers cruncher (Budget Director Ken Koher) projects there will have to be a rework of the "minimum staffing" mandates that are in the current working agreement.

Getting to such an agreement has to be a road the fire fighters do not want to take.  For if they agree, then the need to hire back the 10 laid off firefighters evaporates, no?

The SCPR asked Massillon Fire Chief Tom Burgasser (last Thursday) whether or not he was hopeful that the 10 would be coming back.  Yes, he said, he is hopeful.  However, he added he could offer no concrete specifics to justify his hopefulness.

And this is just the firefighter negotiations.  The police union negotiations will not begin until the end of this month.

It appears that Massillon City Council for the most part wants to work with the mayor, but is not about to be politically manipulated and bullied into doing things just because "word has come down from on high."

If Catazaro-Perry wants to be successful mayor of Massillon, she should be learning by now that that her "kitchen-cabinet" is not going to get her there.

Establishing a mutually trustworthy relationship with Massillon City Council will be far more productive for her becoming NOT her "own worst enemy!"

(VIDEOS: GONZALEZ & SCHURING) SCOG 9-1-1 GOVERNANCE BOARD SETS PRIORITIES. IS GONZALEZ'S FRUSTRATION EXPERIENCING SOME RELIEF?

Last Thursday 9-1-1 Stark Council of Governments (SCOG) Governance Board Chairman Randy Gonzalez called the board ("GovBoard") together for the express purpose of determining what the board wished to recommend to the Stark County commissioners as to how to spend some $2.1 million that the commissioners are holding for the rehab of the countywide 9-1-1 system.

Back in 2007/2008 a commissioned study found the system to be broken and in dire need of fixing.

In December, 2008 former Stark County commissioner Todd Bosley came up with a plan to "impose" (which fellow commissioners Tom Harmon and Jane Vignos went along with) on Stark Countians a 0.5% sales tax as a way to fund the repair of the countywide 9-1-1.

Moreover additionally in the mix was a, "let's say - a less publicized," side plan to put monies into the Stark County general fund.

The SCPR's take is that "imposed" factor coalesced with the "general fund" factor to deal an overwhelming defeat for the tax in a referendum on the tax in November, 2009.

When the tax was "imposed," Gonzalez was elated that finally, finally, his 20 year effort to bring a "state-of-the-art" countywide 9-1-1 was a reality to Stark County.

This is not to say that Gonzalez (also Jackson Township's fiscal officer, a employee of the Canton clerk of courts and chairman of the Stark County Democratic Party) was pleased with the way the funding was brought about.  Being the skilled politician he is, one has to think that he worried that the revenue would be short lived.

And, as already pointed out, it was!

However, the county did collect monies from the "imposed" tax of which the $2.1 million remains.

Since the "imposed" sales tax collection ended in mid-2010 (because of a built-in lag in collecting on/ending levies), the GovBoard through 9-1-1 Project Manager Joe Concatto has been working on five aspects of completing the "dispatch" side of fixing 9-1-1, to wit:

• a "CAD - Computer Aided Dispatch" (i.e. software) system,
• getting Stark County's first responders outfitted with "state-of-the-art" 800 mhz radios,
• up-to-date consoles,
• figuring out a way to pay for the annual upkeep on CAD to the tune of about $100,000, and
• reserving some of the sales tax revenues to use as leverage (the local match) to qualify for state and federal grants that might be available for the CAD, radio and console aspects of upgrading the Stark 9-1-1 dispatch side of the equation.

It was this latter factor (i.e. the $100,000 annual upkeep cost) that gave Stark County Commissioner Tom Bernabei "pause for thought" as to whether or not purchasing a CAD system was a wise thing to do.

Anyone who knows Bernabei is well aware that he is a painstaking, detailed type when it comes to analyzing the costs and other factors associated with implementing local government initiatives.

He is so highly regarded in the county (except, of course, for Mayor William J. Healy, II of Canton who fired him as Canton chief-of staff back in 2008), The Report does expect that Commissioners Creighton and Ferguson will follow his lead as the commissioners move towards a final decision as what to do with the $2.1 million.

The options are, as pointed out above, the CAD software and/or 800 mhz radios and/or new consoles or any combination thereof.

The Report believes Bernabei is genuinely undecided but is leaning towards the radios.

Undoubtedly, Gonzalez and Concatto are likely tuned in on Bernabei's wavering.

It has always been the impression of the SCPR that Gonzalez and Concatto favor (as the top priority) getting the CAD system.  CAD will probably cost between $1 million and $1.3 million.

Beyond that, their likely priorities are getting as many radios as they can and setting aside money for the local match factor.

The hope is that bringing dispatchers together in two central facilities (the Stark County Sheriff's Center and the Canton Communications Center [or alternative, the RED Center] will significantly reduce the need for upgraded consoles and therefore the console factor appears to be their last priority.

But the decision on priorities in not Gonzalez's/Concatto's decision to make.

It is that of the GovBoard which is made of various fire/police/emergency force units and, of course, various representatives of Stark County's political subdivisions (township, villages, and cities).

While the SCPR believes that the GovBoard discussion was thorough, open-ended and frank, there is little doubt that the members caught the Gonzalez/Concatto drift and and that their carefully crafted advocacy resulted in their priorities being endorsed by the board.

And for yours truly's part, the Gonzalez/Cancatto priority plan appears to be the correct one.

But it remains to be seen as to whether or not Tom Bernabei will be convinced.

The SCPR understands that the GovBoard will have representation at this coming Wednesday's regular commissioner meeting to pass onto the commissioners the GovBoard's recommendation that the CAD be put out for bid as a first priority.

Here is a videotape on the GovBoard's vote on the priority:



As was pointed out in the GovBoard meeting, merely bidding out the CAD does not necessarily mean that the CAD will actually be purchased.

A concern of Concatto is that movement take place on the $2.1 million soon as a convincer (e.g. putting CAD up for bid) to the Fund for our Economic Future (Cuyahoga County) that the 9-1-1 rehab is a "go," so as to secure payment of a $100,000 EfficientGov-Now grant won by the 9-1-1 GovBoard in June, 2010.

But it still remains for them to convince Bernabei.

Another aspect to the 9-1-1 rehab is on "the call receiving side" of the countywide system.

Stark County emergency call receiving is currently "state-of-the-art."

However, two key parts of the future funding of this side of Stark's 9-1-1 includes:

• a 28 cent per month, per cellphone user fee which is due to expire on December 31, 2012.  The fee produces about $1 million per year for Stark County 9-1-1 emergency call receiving.
•  a Stark County 1/10th of a mill property tax levy dedicated to 9-1-1 which is set to expire at the end of this year.  The tax produces about $500,000 per year.

The 28 cent fee is a State of Ohio imposed fee as voted by the Legislature.  Accordingly, Chairman Gonzalez asked state Representative Kirk Schuring (Republican - Jackson - the 51st soon to be the 48th) to look into extending the fee beyond this year.

To track Schuring's progress, Gonzalez asked Schuring to be at Thursday's meeting and make a public presentation and take questions from the GovBoard's membership.

Schuring acquiesced and explained that he has heeded the GovBoard's call as evidenced in his amending House Bill 509.

The amendment provides for a complete review of Ohio's emergency services call receiving/dispatch system with recommendations of the review to be voted upon after November 15th of this year when the Ohio General Assembly returns to Columbus for a "lame duck" session.

Obviously representatives and state senators up for re-election this year would not want to be on record as having favored the tax increase.

While it is not known how much, if anything, the review will recommend in a continued fee, Schuring in this on camera with the SCPR appears confident that his efforts will be productive not only for the Stark County SCOG 9-1-1 GovBoard, but for 9-1-1 call/dispatch functions for all 88 Ohio counties.



As for Gonzalez's 20 years plus frustration, the SCPR asked whether or not he is optimistic that there is "light at the end of the tunnel" and, perhaps, his frustration is on its way to being ended?

Here is his video response to The Report:



The SCPR is skeptical that a complete fix of Stark County 9-1-1 will be realized.

However, it could happen.

The key?

Getting Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II on board.

The only way The Report sees that happening is Gonzalez brokering some kind of deal with Healy.

Healy being the cause of the stalemate is not good politics for him.

But will his ego allow him to do what is good for Stark County's citizens and sacrifice being the "man in charge?"

Hmm?

(VIDEOS) PLAIN TWP STARK CO. COMMISSIONER-HELD COMMUNITY MEETING OF MAY 14TH COULD RESULT IN 200 CANTON POST JOBS BEING SAVED? SEE PLAIN TWP CITIZEN JACKIE GEORGE STATE HER CASE. SEE COMMISSIONERS' REACTION.

 

From the SCPR's perspective, Plain Township resident Jackie George makes a compelling case that Stark County departments of government (i.e. the Stark treasury, auditor's office and the sanitary engineer's office and, perhaps, others) could save about 200 Canton postal jobs if they would mail such things as real property bills, dog license renewals, and water bills from the Canton Post Office mail processing center rather than from Akron.

On May 14th, the Stark County commissioners resumed their practice which began last year of making evening visits to Stark's townships, villages, and cities in order to make county government more accessible to citizens who cannot make the commissioners' meetings which are Mondays and Tuesdays (work sessions) at 10:00 a.m. and Wednesday (formal meeting) at 1:30 p.m.

First stop:  Plain Township.

At that meeting Ms. George, prompted by a media report of a reconfiguration of the Stark County sanitary engineer's office billing practices and procedures, asked why county offices were not using the Canton postal facilities to do their mailings inasmuch as by doing so Stark County government could possibly help retain 200 postal jobs in Canton.

It has been well publicized over the last year or so that the United States Postal Service (USPS) has been in the process of streamlining its mail processing nationwide because it is losing scads of money and that it is contemplated that as a consequence, perhaps, Canton will not continue to be a mail processing center over the long term.

Accordingly, local officials such as Canton Mayor William J., Healy, II, former Congressman John Boccieri and other public officials have waged a campaign to retain postal jobs in Canton.

Many Stark Countians including yours truly have felt that the well intentioned efforts of the politicos have been in vain.

But not so quick!

Citizen George, who says she is in the printing business herself and has 17 years experience and knowledge in working with post offices, is convinced that the Stark treasury, auditor's office, and the sanitary engineer's office, with the volume of presorted, commercial class mailings they make annually, could be a difference maker in making the Canton Post Office an attractive facility for the USPS to keep open and thereby save 200 jobs for Canton.

Currently, she says, and county officials do not disagree, the vendor who handles the Stark County mailings is depositing the mail in Akron which might have the effect of giving Akron an edge in the fight between the Canton and Akron facilities for survival.

Moreover, she contends that under the current processing setup in terms of how expeditiously the mail is delivered,  it makes no difference whether the county mail is deposited in Akron, Cleveland, or Canton in terms of the time between a mailing and receipt by Stark County recipients.

According to her, the turnaround time is 24 hours so long as the mail is in place at any of the three post offices by 8:00 a.m.

Accordingly, under the current arrangement Stark County government appears - by depositing the mail in Akron - to be helping Akron, perhaps, to be ultimately chosen over Canton as a processing center to be kept open.

Here is how George expresses it.

In writing:

And by video at Wednesday's commissioner meeting:



After the meeting the SCPR asked the commissioners for their reaction.  Here is the video of the exchange.



Also, The Report went to the office of Stark County treasurer Alex Zumber (where George had just been with her written information addressed in this blog above) to inquire as to whether or not he was open to changing his mailing practices to help Canton possibly retain 200 postal jobs.

His answer?

Not for the current mailing which is due out in matter of days.

However, he is open to reviewing and perhaps changing the office's mailing practice for real property tax bills that will be mailed out after the first of the year, 2013 so as to help Canton and, of course, Stark County with its employment picture.  He does say that he will have to have guarantees that a switch to Canton will not lengthen the the time lapse between mailing and receipt of the mailed item.

He says he is under a statutory duty to see to it that real property bills get to a Stark County taxpayer (in terms of the mail process) not later than 20 days prior to the due date of the bill.

The Report has not been in touch with either Stark County Auditor Alan Harold nor Stark County Sanitary Engineer Jim Jones but they need to conduct a similar review and consider similar adjustments to help out the local economy.

The major point of this blog is that incidents such of this is proof positive that over time the community meeting series brings out persons like Jackie George who make input that has the potential to boost the well being of Stark County's citizens.

The Report applauds the commissioners for resuming the meetings that were started last year when the county needed to communicate with county residents about the need to get a 0.5% sales tax passed.  One of the things public officials need to fight is the general citizen impression is that about the only time one hears from an elected public official is when they are up for reelection, or when there is need for a tax increase.

Since the Plain meeting the commissioners have engaged Stark citizens in Washington Township, North Canton and Lawrence Township.

In North Canton and Lawrence Township they have encountered residents with particular concerns (North Canton:  flooding problem; Lawrence Township neighborhood roadway issues).

While the meetings do get testy from time-to-time, they go a long way towards solidifying the trust that Commissioners Bernabei and Creighton (both elected in November, 2010) have purposed to bring access, accountability, interactive community communication, openness, and transparency to the processes of county government in the public's mind.

Now that the tax issue is behind us, there is less suspicion of the commissioners' motives and such an environment makes for a better opportunity for them to bolster citizen trust in their management of county government.

Obviously, Ms George would not have appeared at the May 14th Plain Township meeting unless she thought she would be heard and responded to.

It is heart warming and inspiring to hear a citizen like her say this:

Bravo to the commissioners for presenting Ms. George with the opportunity to participate in processes of Stark County government by listening seriously and intently to her with their implied promise that they will support her request should their own investigation confirm the information she presented.

And bravo to Ms. George for being willing to bring her 17 years of experience to bear upon not giving up on jobs which have not yet left Canton and Stark County, and for exercising continuing industry in endeavoring to make a persuasive case to the decision makers (Zumbar, Harold and Jones) that Stark County government can help retain jobs for Stark Countians.

(VIDEOS: FERGUSON & KASICH) STARK'S COMMISSIONER PETE FERGUSON LEADS THE WAY FOR CONSOLIDATION & COLLABORATION. CANTON MAYOR HEALY CONTINUES TO RESIST.

As Stark County Commissioner Pete Ferguson nears the end of his term in office (he is not running for re-election), he is on the cusp of realizing a dream of his on one of his two primary goals that he has been working to achieve for a good part of the past three and one half years.

Ferguson's two primary focuses have been on:

• proposing, promoting, facilitating and lobbying for the consolidation/collaboration of common local government services (e.g. building departments, health departments and informational technology), and
• and convincing the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs to establish Veteran's home facilities in Stark County which would offer a range of services from independent living to assisted long-term medical care.

Recently, he learned that Stark County has been awarded an Ohio Department of Development (DD) grant of $75,000 out of the department's Local Government Innovation Fund (LGIF) which is designed to assist Ohio's political subdivisions with collaboration projects.  The winning Stark County grant is to be used to fund a Stark County Building Department Shared Services Feasibility Study.

Ferguson says there were a number of Stark County entrants for a grant including one advanced by the Stark County Council of Governments (SCOG) for its 9-1-1 countywide rehabilitation project and that he is thrilled with having had his building departments consolidation/collaboration proposal as being the one chosen.

Key figures cited by Ferguson in putting together the successful effort include Stark County Regional Planning Director Robert Nau and his staff as well as North Canton Mayor David Held, North Canton City Engineer Jim Benekos, and former state Representative David Johnson

Moreover, he singles out Stark Countian Daryl Revoldt for putting him in contact with Deputy Chief - Office of Redevelopment at Ohio Department of Development - Thea Walsh.  Commissioner Ferguson said that Walsh took an immediate interest in his project and worked with him to put together a plan that LGIF found merit in.

Revoldt is a Kasich administration appointee currently working in the Department of Development.  Formerly he has served as mayor and city council president of North Canton, chief of staff for now retired Congressman Ralph Regula, and as director of Region 9 (Akron office) of the Department of Development during the the Taft administration.

To get an idea of inter-local-government collaborations that Governor Kasich hopes to achieve with LGIF statewide, here is a YouTube video produced by DD as a concrete example which features a City of Green project and which also highlights Stark County Educational Service Center (SCESC) Superintendent Larry Morgan (yours truly's spouse is president of the the center's governing board).



Morgan is recognized statewide as the architect of Ohio's very best collaborative health insurance program which saves participating school districts many, many taxpayer dollars.

Local retail drug stores have fought COG's mandatory mail order prescription drug which saves taxpayers about $1 million a year.

Governor Kasich has taken a lot of flack from local government officials (in Stark County most notably Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II) for his 50% cut (to date) through fiscal year 2013 of Ohio's Local Government Fund and the threat that he will eliminate the funding completely in the state biennium 2014 - 2015 budget.

The SCPR believes that Kasich's cuts through his budget proposal was draconian and ill-advised and is an effort to force tax increases onto local taxpayers while appropriating formerly allocated state local government funds to Ohio's general revenue fund for broad state purposes.

This move is a breach of a promise made by past Ohio government officials to allocate local government funding in exchange for local officials supporting state income tax issues.

The governor says he is not bound by what prior governors have promised.

Isn't that interesting?

He has initiated some measures to lessen the impact of the funding cuts.

One such initiative was State Issue 2 (Senate Bill 5) which had a number of provisions which would have cut the cost of local governments.  Of course, as we all know, the issue was overwhelmingly rejected by Ohioans on November 8, 2011.

Another of those measures is encompassed in the LGIF and its prod on local government officials to become much more efficient in their operations.  This is the administration's "carrot."

But it is also administering a "stick" with its drastic local government funding cuts.

Anyone familiar with local turfism knows that each locality wants it own fire department, police department, its own school district et cetera, et cetera and only moves to consolidate and/or collaborate when deficit finances compels action.

It is interesting that Healy refuses to cooperate with Ferguson and his consolidation/collaboration work in his effort to make local government more efficient, less expensive and more citizen-user friendly. 

The SCPR's take on Healy has always been that he refuses to work with anyone on anything unless at the end of the day he or one of his proxies is in charge.

Here is a LINK to a prior blog (December 22, 2011) in which the SCPR writes about Commissioner Ferguson's interest in winning a LGIF and Healy's ire about his work for Stark County government efficiencies.

The question is fast becoming:  Will he be able to afford continuing to hang onto his [actually Canton's] turf?

Canton is under the gun with its finances.  Healy says that Canton will have a $4 million to $4.5 million deficit in 2013 because of the Local Government Fund cuts.  His solution is to get Cantonians to agree to a tax increase.

But what if the citizens of Canton refuse him?

All of a sudden, the Local Government Fund cuts "stick" comes into play in Canton, Ohio, no?

Won't he have to rethink his "protecting Canton's turf" stance?

Kasich's breaking of the faith (in past promises) might be morally reprehensible, but the evaporation of local government funding is reality!

The SCPR is impressed with Ferguson's persistence.  While he will be leaving office on December 31st of this year and likely will not be in office to see the realization of his consolidation/collaboration goal, Stark Countians will likely benefit from his work.

And who knows.  Maybe in time the city of Canton might be part of a consolidated Stark County Building Department along with Alliance, Louisville, Massillon and North Canton?

Here is a video of Commissioner Ferguson describing the grant process and what he hopes will come of the study it finances.

DO YOU REALLY WANT TO HEAR LOCAL GOV'T OFFICIALS WHINING TO & THROUGH THE MEDIA ABOUT LOCAL GOV'T FUNDING WOES?

Updated:  11:00 a.m.

Ever since Republican Governor John Kasich announced through Ohio House Bill 153 (the 2012-2013 biennium state budget) that he was cutting back on local government funding, we have been hearing the whining coming out of Stark's various local governments about the hard times, even devastation that the cuts are going to reek on operations.

But the SCPR just has to wonder.

Really?

Why would the The Report muse as to whether nor not media reports of dire consequences are accurate?

One telling reason is that there is very little if any flap by city, village and township officials directed in name, rank and serial number fashion directly upon or in the face of the Republicans (Hagan, Oelslager and Schuring -  "The Three") who make of three-fourths of the Stark County delegation to  the Ohio Statehouse.

Yours truly gets around quite a bit in Stark County local government venues.

But The Report has not experienced nor heard of one incident of local government officials calling any of The Three in for a face-to-face and frank discussion of the consequences of their votes on the ability of an unit of government to financially operate.

If anything, when these officials do show up at town hall, the local officials are most likely to "kiss-up" and fawn; they do not take them to task. 

And The Report is not criticizing civility, but what one sees at all too may local government meetings when the staties or feds show up, is more like a love-in rather than merely being civil and respectful.

If the whining to the media is, in fact, merited, then The Three and their colleagues are to blame because the Republicans control the Ohio General Assembly "lock, stock and barrel."

In addition to voting for the original budget (Oelslager sort of [he voted early on for it, then against it but for reasons other than local government funding issues] and then again in a recent mid-budget revision, they have helped to eliminate the Ohio Estate Tax local government revenues beginning with 2013 and have failed to wholly hold local governments harmless on the loss of  tangible personal property tax revenues which has been phased out as a part of a Republican inspired mid-2000s tax reform initiative.

So there is no doubt that Stark County Statehouse Republicans Hagan, Oelslager and Schuring have been part and parcel of the statewide Republican effort that is changing the funding model of local government.

More and more, local taxpayers are going to have to determine how much in the way of local government services they want and, of course, to pay the bill pretty much all on their own.

An example.

The Stark County Crime Lab.

From all accounts Stark County "could" get by without having a local crime lab which is currently funded by Ohio's Local Government Fund monies.  It costs about $1 million a year.

After mid-year 2013, there is some thinking that Governor Kasich and his fellows in the Ohio Legislature will cut the Local Government Fund in its entirety and that there would be "no money" for the Stark Crime Lab (SCCL).

So does this mean that law enforcement officials would have no means to get crime scene evidence evaluated?

No.

There is the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation (BCI) located in Richfield, Ohio probably about 35 miles from Stark County.

Obviously, it is much more convenient to work with the Canton-based Stark County Crime Lab.  Moreover, there are reports that SCCL processes evidence far quicker that BCI does.

But the fact of the matter Stark County law enforcement could survive with BCI.

So doesn't it stand to reason that if Stark County wants physical proximity and faster service that Stark County taxpayers should pay for it.  

And maybe they have.

What was the November, 2011 ballot initiative Issue 29 (the county proposed 0.5% sales tax) about?

Answer:  funding county law enforcement and the administration of justice, no?

It passed, didn't it?

So haven't Stark Countians prioritized and provided the money for the continued existence of the SCCL notwithstanding the loss of Local Government Fund monies?

Of course, what local government official wouldn't want the Columbus cash cow to keep producing money-milk?

Has flow from Columbus insulated them from the need to lead and justify to their local taxpayers the essential nature of this or that program or policy or practice?

The SCPR is disposed to think more and more that all the whining to the media is somewhat disingenuous as evidenced by the "kissing up" that continues to take place in the relationship of local government officials vis-a-vis The Three who have endorsed (by their votes) the changing of the funding model for local government finances.

Isn't it time to stop the whining and start to lead?

Or, perhaps, put their Columbus representative on the spot in the public spotlight?

(VIDEOS: RENACCI, HELD, MARTIN, SNYDER) - RENACCI - YOUR CONGESSMAN TO FIX STARK COUNTY'S FLOODING PROBLEM WITH FEDERAL TAX DOLLARS?

There was a heavy touch of political irony taking place in North Canton last evening.

On the one hand, you had 16th District Congressman Jim Renacci (R - Wadsworth) decrying the growth of the national debt and vowing to fight to put the brakes on federal spending so as to protect, he says, the wealth of future generations of Americans.



On the other hand, you had North Cantonians present last night and last Wednesday (at the Stark County commissioners community meeting) beseeching public officials (the commissioners, North Canton Mayor David Held, North Canton City Council et cetera) to seek federal funding now to help fix Stark County's flooding problem.

One such person is Marty Martin of North Canton.  Last night he got in the ear of Congressman Renacci as he was trying to make his way out of the meeting.  Martin wanted to know of Renacci:  Why can't the federal government fix the infrastructure problems of America rather than doing nation building in Afghanistan.



While Mayor David Held seemingly was content with lauding Renacci for merely showing up to North Canton to have an eyeball look at the the problem, the reality is that he expects the congressman to deliver federal money to Stark.



As does North Canton Council president Jon Snyder.



The focus of officials dealing with Stark flooding is on Zimber Ditch which courses down the middle of Stark, but is by no means the only flooding problem in the county so says Gary Connor who is Stark's chief hydraulics engineer working out of the Stark County engineer's office.

But just to fix Zimber Ditch will take millions upon millions of dollars and many years of continuous repair projects.

Some estimates have the total bill ranging from 60 to 80 million being spent over a 10 year period of time.

Where is the money to come from?

Certainly not Stark County, remember just months ago the county faced financial ruin.  The sheriff had laid off 41 deputies and all departments of Stark County government were cut severely.

And, had a November, 2011 0.5% sales tax issue not passed, Stark County would be facing even more drastic cuts for years 2013, 2014 and on and on and on.

As it is, there is no money for finding millions upon millions upon millions to use in fixing Stark's flooding problem.

So where is the money to come from?

Answer:  the United States treasury at the expense of other American taxpayers, that's where.

Like it or not Stark Countians either directly to federal elected officials (e.g. Renacci) or through local elected officials (through Renacci) are asking Congress  for "a transfer of wealth" from the nation to Stark County.

That, folks, is a form of lobbying!

We typically think of the likes of the following as lobbying groups:

However, anytime anyone asks of the government: a grant, a tax break or for an exclusive government enforced right; the activity is lobbying, pure and simple.

It is not a question of the justness of the cause.  It is a question of the persuasive power of those doing the asking.

Congressman Renacci says he is for protecting future generations which means cutting the federal deficit and federal spending, but can he deliver for the future when he is being pressed by the "here and now?"

Is he a man of his word?

If he is,  Stark County will get precious little, if anything, in terms of federal funding in order to fix its long neglected ditch maintenance.

But the congressman will come and look.   And he will write letters like he did to the Army Corp of Engineers.  After all, it is an election year.  He is running (because of redistricting and the loss of two Ohio congressional seats) against another incumbent:  Betty Sutton, Democrat of Copley, Summit County, Ohio.

Maybe Mayor Held's first expression last night will prove to be prophetic in his saying that its more than North Canton could have expected that the congressman came to visit council and take a look at the ditch.

While the effect of citizen and public official requests for federal funding is lobbying for the rest of America and future generations to pay to fix Stark's problem, the local political pressure factor is not the equivalent of an AARP.

But lobbying it is.

So the generalized Renacci described problems of deficit and spending really does have a reality and a share in local communities clamoring for federal dollars.

Here is a video of Congressman Renacci's entire talk at North Canton City Council last night.