COUNCILMAN JOE COLE WILL NOT BE STARRING ON "I AM A SURVIVOR." MARY CIRELLI DOES A NUMBER ON HIM AND HIS COUNCIL PAL JIMMY BABCOCK?

 CORRECTION

David Kiven (business agent for the Pipefitters and Plumbers, Local 94) has sent the SCPR a email correcting The Report's recollection of how Councilman Morris voted on the proposal for Canton City Council to authorize the expenditure of $25,000 for city of Canton promotional materials for products made in China.

Morris joined Kirven's candidate for the 9th Ward (Joe Cole) in voting for the measure.  Only 5th Ward Councilman Kevin Fisher voted no in an 11 to 1 vote.

The SCPR regrets the error and thanks Kirven for bringing the mistake to The Report's attention.

ORIGINAL BLOG (Revised to account for the error)

Probably due to a SCPR political analysis blog showing that if Bill Smuckler, Jimmy Babcock, Mary Cirelli, and Joe Cole were to run for the three slots up for election in Canton's council-at-large race this coming May that Councilman Cole would be the "odd man out," he apparently decided to play a game of "political musical chairs" with Cirelli on Wednesday, February 6, 2013.

A SCPR source (confirmed by Mary Cirelli herself) says that Cirelli and Cole (along with his fellow councilman and pal Jimmy Babcock) were camped out in their cars in front of the the Stark County Board of Elections (BOE) as the 4:00 p.m. filing deadline for the 2013 elections neared.

Cole seemed intent on waiting for Cirelli to declare herself as to whether she was going to run to be Canton's next treasurer or seek to retain her seat as councilwoman-at-large.

And any one who knows Mary Cirelli has to know she would not be outdone.

Cole had taken out petitions for his current seat (council-at-large) and to run against incumbent Democratic 9th ward Councilman Frank Morris.

Finally, Cole enters the BOE and Cirelli follows.

But she does not see Cole when she gets into the building.

She assumes Cole has already filed.  But que sera, que sera, Cirelli tells the SCPR.

She plomps her petitions for council-at-large down on the counter and asks the nearby Jeanette Mullane (deputy director of the BOE) to check them out as to accuracy.

While Mullane is doing the checking, Cirelli excuses herself to go to the ladies room.

Meanwhile, Cole makes his appearance at the counter of the BOE.

Likely, Cole sees Mary's council-at-large petitions laying on the counter and ASSUMES thereby that she has opted to run for re-election as councilwoman-at-large.

So Cole files for the 9th ward against Morris apparently figuring that running in the 9th was his best chance to stay on council.

Out comes Mary Cirelli.  She asked Mullane if the petitions appeared to be in order. 

Mullane responds:  "Yes".

Whereupon Cirelli whips out her treasurer's petitions and said:  "Okay, then these must be alright, too."

And she files for treasurer.

Cole has to be utterly shocked.

What a hoot!, no?

But worse for Cole, getting out maneuvered by Cirelli probably means his days on council are numbered.

Had he gotten the filing process right by filing for council-at-large, he would be a shoe-in to be reelected.  With Cirelli out of the race, and two political newcomers vying against him for the third of three slots (assuming that his friend Babcock and former councilman Bill Smuckler will win the first two slots as the SCPR does), The Report believes that the lackluster Cole would clearly be in a position to place third.

But there is more to the story.

Probably Cole's biggest booster is Dave Kirven who is the business agent for Plumbers and Pipefitters, Local 94 located down on 13 Street, SW.

The Report's source tells yours truly that Kirven was told weeks ago that Cirelli was going to run for treasurer.

Kirven denies to The Report that he was told any such thing.

But now that the die is cast and his man is running against Morris, this is what he had to say:

Make no mistake Joe Cole is Local 94's guy in whatever race he would have decided to run in. Joe has been a good friend to Labor and in my opinion deserves our support (Local 94) and I will express my opinion to other Local Unions in the area. It's unfortunate that our local Dems put more energy into fighting each other than finding common ground.

This is just plain crazy.

One Stark County's main trade union guys campaigning against Morris who is himself a union glazier.

Democrat against Democrat.

Union member against union member.

And what's even stranger, is that Cole is superintendent/principal of a Canton-based charter school.

What is a prime characteristic of charter schools?

They do not hire union teachers!

Wow!  Kirven is big time advocate for "justice for local workers."  On July 1, 2010 he was the main organizer of a "justice for local workers" (LINK to a prior SCPR blog) rally.

While Kirven likes to say that the rally was not only for union workers but for all (union/nonunion) Stark County-based workers; make no mistake about it, the bottom line:   the rally was for union jobs.

As was the picketing effort in April of 2012 against the Outback Steakhouse and Bonefish Grill building projects adjacent to The Strip in North Canton (LINK to North Canton Patch article and video featuring Kirven).

Last year (May, 2012), Hall of Fame AFL-CIO president Dan Scuiry appeared before the Canton City Council to talk down a Healy administration plan to market city of Canton promotional materials made by non-union workers in China.  (LINK to prior SCPR blog)

Who was a major proponent of the plan which was ultimately passed by council?  You've got it:  Councilman Joe Cole.

But strangely enough so did Morris and everybody else on council.  It is hard to believe that Morris, being the strong union man he is, would vote for such a piece of legislation.

Apparently, everyone has his weak moments.

As the SCPR sees this race, Cole has very little chance to unseat Morris.

So not only does Kirven have a problem identifying with the councilman who best represents union interests (Morris); he picks a likely loser come November (Cole).

Hmm?

Morris is part of a group of Canton City council first termers (Morris, Fisher [5th], Mariol [7th] and Mack [8th] who the SCPR has termed as being "the young turks."

The young turks have banded together to defeat a number of Healy administration legislative initiatives and moreover have become aggressively proactive in a united effort to reverse Canton neighborhood deterioration.

The SCPR is well taken with their political courage and their positive plan to change Canton for the better.

They have been aided in their effort by Councilwoman Cirelli, Councilman Greg Hawk (Ward 1), both of whom are long time Healy foes, and here and there by Ward 3 Councilman Jim Griffin.

Cole, completing his second term, has decided to fall in line with the Healy administration and along with councilpersons Babcock (at-large), Dougherty (Ward 6), Smith (4th) and West (2nd).

The Report is told that "the young turks" will be campaigning together.

Cole, on the other hand has been a major disappointment.  Among his impressive credentials:  (from LinkedIn profile)

• -YSTARK and The Canton Repository’s “Twenty under 40,” (Inaugural Class)
• -Stark County Young Democrat of the Year, 2009

The SCPR once had high expectations for him.  But he has failed to deliver as an independent minded, energetic and visionary Canton legislator.  Rather he has decided to fall in with the mayor and base his political survival on being joined at the hip with Healy and his allies.

Come November 7th, the SCPR believes that Joe Cole will be ex-Councilman Joe Cole.

For he played the game of "filing for political office musical chairs" with Mary Cirelli and ended up without a chair.

Joe Cole outfoxed by veteran Canton/Stark County politician Mary Cirelli!

IRONIC? MARLBORO CHIEF OF POLICE RON DEVIES TAKES THE LEAD TO DEPOSE RICK PEREZ AS CANTON-STARK COUNTY CRIME LAB DIRECTOR?

UPDATE:  PEREZ RESIGNS CRIME-;LAB DIRECTOR POST

Press release issued by Mayor William J. Healy, II

Canton Mayor WIlliam J. Healy II asked for and accepted the resignation of Rick Perez, effective 6 p.m. Monday due to questions arising about the hiring process for the Canton-Stark County Crime Lab director position.

"This is about the process. I reviewed the situation and concluded that the hiring process was not handled appropriately," explained Healy, who plans to discuss reposting the position during

CORRECTION

The Report has learned that the meeting of SCOG set for tomorrow at 3:30 p.m is an executive committee meeting (not an executive session) and therefore is open to the public

Also, there is no 4:30 p.m. general SCOC membership meeting as they only take place on a quarterly basis.

The Report thanks SCOG member and Perry Township trustee Craig Chessler for the correct information

*************************************

On January 7, 2009 the now former Stark County chief deputy Rick Perez showed up at the Marlboro Township police chief's office to question Chief Ron Devies about allegations that he may have been involved in unlawful activity with respect to the township computer system.

Unbeknownst to Devies, Perez was wearing a wire.

When word got out within the Stark County policing community, there was outrage galore.

And, the SCPR believes, that revelation more than any other factor (including his brother Kim's difficulty in terms of public perception as Stark County auditor in what has been labeled Zeiglergate) is the reason that Perez is not the sitting Stark County sheriff today.

But for Devies, it was probably good that Perez had a wire on.  For when it was used at trial it showed him to be a guileless, "honest-to-the-bone-marrow" police officer.  (LINK to May 27, 2009 SCPR blog).

And by the way, Devies who was charged with a 4th degree felony supplemented by misdemeanor charges was in effect acquitted by Stark County Court judge V. Lee Sinclair in his dismissal of all charges at the end of the prosecutor's case-in-chief.

Folks, if there is such a thing as a slam dunk in the law, such a dismissal is it.

Now that word has gotten out that police and, apparently, political crony of Perez and Canton safety director Tom Ream (one would think with the blessing, if not the complicity, of Canton mayor William J. Healy, II) has orchestrated the rearrangement of the qualifications for being the Canton-Stark County Crime Lab director in order to make Perez's hiring possible.

Under the old criteria, Perez was unqualified.

Moreover, because the Ream/Healy rewrite of the crime director's job description, the job did not have to be advertised so that other (including qualified Cantonians/Stark Countians) could know of the intent to hire and to apply for it.

The Perez hiring occurred on Monday, February 5th.

The result?

As in the wire wearing Perez caper, Stark County police outrage.

How many outrages can Rick Perez absorb and remain a viable public figure?

Well, one of the most marked outrages in terms of reaction came from guess who?

You've got it.

Marlboro Chief of Police Ron Devies, that's who.

Here is the contents of a copy of an email sent to the SCPR by Devies (to Repository reporter Matt Rink):

First I want to commend you on your reporting covering this travesty that has occurred at our crime lab.

I knew Bob Budgake for many years professionally and I can sincerely say, the crime lab has not been the same since he has been gone.

Many of the staff there have told me how he is dearly missed. I teach  evidence collection in three different police academies and I always would brag how fortunate we were in Stark County to have the Canton-Stark Crime Lab. I won't be bragging anymore about this.

Yesterday I sent via certified mail, notice to the Crime Lab requesting they box up all cases my agency has submitted and to notify my office when they are ready for pick up.

My agency will no longer use the crime lab due to the unqualified leadership it possesses.

I may also point out, Mr. Ream told me personally a little over a year ago what good friends he was with Perez and Tim Swanson.

My agency wishes to have no association with the unethical practices that have taken place here.

I know Rick Perez very well and wish to have no association with him or anyone associated with him. He is definitely NOT qualified for this position.

If he thinks his experience in "investigation" brings anything to the table,I would say he has watched too many episodes of CSI.

The dedicated criminalists  who are qualified there, do not do investigate crimes. In most cases evidence is submitted to them and they analyse [sic] it to see if there is a link between the victim, suspect and crime scene.

I seriously would wager if you asked Rick Perez to  explain the Locard Transfer Principle he would try to tell you it was some kind of SARTA pass.  (emphasis added)

So does this action by Devies signal that he will be a leading force in seeking a reversal at the Stark Council of Governments (SCOG) board level?

It will be interesting to see whether or not he shows up at the board's regularly scheduled meeting at 3:30 p.m. at meeting room on the 8th floor of City Hall on Tuesday, February 12th.

Even if he doesn't, the SCPR has to believe there will be plenty of screaming and yelling at Ream during the executive committee of the board which begins begins at 3:30 p.m. and is open to the public.

The SCPR expects Stark County commissioner Tom Bernabei to be venting big time on Ream and thereby indirectly on Healy like in the old days.

When Healy was elected in November, 2007 one of his first appointments in his first term was Bernabei as his service director and chief-of-staff.

Well, Bernabei was far too exacting in the details of administration, pointed and in-your-face for Healy to abide.  Within a few months of being hired, Healy fired him.  As he did to another, in effect, with hiree (Tom Nesbitt of Nebraska) as his safety director.

While officially, Nesbitt resigned.  The truth of the matter is that Healy made it impossible for him to continue and serve with integrity.

Folks who got to know Nesbitt raved about his work as safety director at the time and still speak very highly of him.  But, again, he was more than Healy can abide.  Healy is well known for only being able to work with "_ ss kissers."

The SCPR has heard nobody rave about safety director Ream except Mayor Healy.  So what does than make Ream?

Another interested party in all the Crime-Lab-Gate hubbub is Rick's brother Kim who is running for Canton treasurer.

Could he be in for another electoral loss because of an association with an "in the news" Stark County political/governance event?

A sidenote:

• The Perez appointment took place on Monday, February 5th.   
• George T. Maier (brother of former Stark County Democratic Party chair Johnnie A. Maier, Jr.) was appointed Stark County sheriff to succeed sheriff-elect Mike McDonald (who was unable to assume office because of an unspecified illness) on Tuesday, February 6th.
• One of the leading proponents for Maier was none other than Gonzalez.
• Maier surprising barely won 92 votes to 84 (for Lt. Lou Darrow).

So?

Well, the question that the SCPR has:  was there some kind of quid pro quo (something for something) deal on the George T. Maier candidacy cut between and among Ream, Healy, the Maiers and Gonzalez to support Perez's selection as Stark County Crime Lab director in exchange for support of Maier sheriff candidacy?

Gonzalez does say that he knew nothing about the Perez hiring, that he is a "distant" cousin and that "he has had little contact with him."

Sorry Chairman Gonzalez, the SCPR has a really difficult time taking your statements at face value.

What the SCPR will be looking for is whether or not Gonzalez uses his clout within the inner workings of SCOG to undo the Perez appointment.

Are we to hear from Gonzalez as the SCPR in the past:  "clout?"  "I have none.

That's what The Report expects to hear from the chairman of the Stark County Democratic Party.

The Report's take on him is that he is up to his eyeballs on everything political in Stark County, and his projected powerlessness is feigned.

ARE GONZALEZ, MAIER, HEALY & REAM "SCREW YOU, STARK COUNTIANS!" DEMOCRATS?

VIDEO: Stark Dems Chairman Randy Gonzalez Says Democrats are for Good Government. 

The week of February 4 through 8, 2013 will go down in Stark County political/governmental infamy whereby the Stark County Democratic Party leadership of Gonzalez, Maier, Healy and Ream fully engaged a full scale "screw you, Stark County public" operation.

So thinks the Stark County Political Report.

As a "kool-aid drinking Democrat" (as one would expect a party chairman to be, as being in, [but as one would not expect] the same vein as Republican state Rep. Christina Hagan being a "kool-aid drinking Republican"); Stark County Democratic Party chairman Randy Gonzalez led (at least in the sheriff matter; perhaps not in the crime lab matter) the pack of political jackals that run the Stark County Democratic Party (de jure and de facto) in a political frenzy of shafting the Stark County public.

In the Gonzalez-Johnnie A. Maier, Jr.-led political stormtrooping appointment of  George T. Maier (brother of Johnnie) as Stark County sheriff (replacing the "too-ill-to-serve sheriff-elect Mike McDonald" [February 5th] and in Healy and Ream orchestrating the appointment of longtime Ream pal and former Stark County chief deputy sheriff Rick Perez  as director of the Canton-Stark County Crime Lab, Stark County Democratic Party leadership demonstrated they could care "rat's a__" about the interests of the Stark County public as necessarily being in their political interests.

It both cases there is a hue and cry that neither Maier nor Perez are qualified for the positions to which they have been appointed.

In the case of Healy/Ream/Perez, Chairman Gonzalez denies any involvement in helping his cousin in helping get him the job.

But who believes that?

The party leadership attitude as as far as the SCPR is concerned?

"Just suck it up Cantonians!"

"Just suck it up Stark Countians!!"

 "We are going to what we are going to do.  The public be damned!!!"

If, as he says, Gonzalez had nothing to do with Perez getting the crime-lab job which he is unqualified for; then the party chairman will have ample opportunity as an executive committee member and member of the Stark County Councils of Government (SCOG) including being chairman of the 9-1-1 rehab governance committee to step in and correct what the SCPR believes is manifestly not in the interest of the Stark County administration of criminal justice sytem.

While Safety Director Ream is correct that Canton does have the power to appoint the crime lab director, the Stark County commissioners and the villages, cities and townships (Gonzalez is a Jackson Township fiscal officer) of Stark County fund the crime lab through SCOG.

We shall see if Gonzalez joins those who want to use the financial leverage factor to undo the Perez appointment.

But do not hold your breath on this one.

It was a anathema of gigantic proportions when Gonzalez on October 31, 2011 had Alliance and Stark County Republican Alex Zumbar jammed down his throat and that of the Stark County Central Committee as successor to Democratic appointed (1999 - under the then party chairman and now Stark County prosecutor John Ferrero) Gary Zeigler as treasurer of Stark County.

Gonzalez tried to put a good face on it (witness the following video):



But you can bet your bottom dollar, that the Dems leadership has to be seething to get back to what's good for the party and the interests of certain individual "preferred persons" who the leaders want to benefit with their political power.

Gary Zeigler had run for public office numerous times and lost but thereby had earned his political stripes as an out-and-out Democratic loyalist.

When Mark Roach (who more or less became treasurer by political heritage inasmuch as his father Harold had been a highly respected treasurer) was forced from office because he had failed to keep his state of Ohio mandated educational requirements up-to-date, Zeigler was the perfect candidate for appointment to succeed Roach.

Ferrero, Maier and the-then leaders of the Stark County organized Democratic Party were likely having a one big high fiving, back slapping time when the Democratic Party dependable Zeigler defeated the iconically-surnamed Richard Regula (son of the largely revered and long serving Republican congressman Ralph Regula) in the 2000 elections.

Who would have thunk it?

Stark's organized Republicans were reeling.

In 2004 the GOP ran a political non-entity and lost by 37 percentage  points.  And in 2008, they ran nobody.  And then April 1, 2009 came.

April 1, 2009.

Yes, this is the day that the political chickens had come home to roost.

In an unfolding drama which plagued Stark County for over 2-1/2 years, the political appointment of Gary Zeigler as treasurer was an object lesson to Stark Countians that political parties cannot be trusted to appoint persons to office who are up to effectively managing the office.

At least that is the perception that Stark County voting public appears to have walked away with when news broke on April 1, 2009 that Zeigler was accusing his chief deputy treasurer Vince Frustaci from having walked off with upwards of $3 million in Stark County taxpayers' funds.  Frustaci later pled guilty to having stolen $2.45 million and is now in federal prison.

While Zeigler was not implicated in the theft, the state of Ohio auditor's office issued a report blaming Zeigler for not having effective policies, procedures and practices in place to have prevented the Frustaci theft.

As fallout, Zeigler agreed to resign his office (October 19, 2011) and Stark County auditor Kim Perez (brother of Rick Perez) lost his election to Republican Alan Harold in November, 2010.

Why Kim Perez?

Many believe because that voters perceived that he did not do enough when warning signs appeared that all was not right with the county treasury to intervene and catch the Frustaci theft much earlier in the game.

Moreover, it is thought that he is part of the Stark County Democratic Party "good ole boys network" who, like Zeigler, was brought along as a dependable party loyalist by the likes of Ferrero and Johnnie A. Maier, Jr as a person they could count on to do the bidding of the party leadership.

So we have come full circle.

The names Maier and Perez were in the lead of today's blog and here they surface again.

Kim Perez appears to have been floundering around since his election defeat to find something, anything to get back into a comfortable perch in some facet of Stark County government.

So where did he turn?

What better place than to find a resting replace in the political arms of politics first and public interest second Canton mayor William J. Healy, II?

On September 9, 2011, the SCPR wrote:

But donning the Healy mindset, one thing possibly to be taken from Mayor Healy putting himself in a position of letting it leak out that he had "met informally" with Perez concerning Perez's interest of getting appointed to succeed former sanitation supervision Byron Carson at about $64,000 per annum, is that Healy is feeling awfully confident that he is a "shoe-in" to be re-elected mayor come this November.

Well, for some reason or another that plan did not work out.

But he's back?

Perez has filed to run in the Democratic Primary ironically "believe it or not" as Canton treasurer.

And who is his main support?

You've got it!  Canton mayor William J. Healy, II.

So is it any wonder that brother Rick Perez would seek political refugee status with Mayor Healy and his loyal political foot soldier and Canton safety director Thomas Ream?

 Even if Ream has to massage the qualifications for office.

Rick Perez was Tim Swanson's 2nd choice (after former Perry police chief Tim Escola fell on hard times [see SCPR blog LINK] to succeed him.

But when what local civic activist and local attorney Craig Conley has termed as being "Zeiglergate" broke and the negative publicity on brother Kim broke, then Swanson had an abrupt change of heart (after having announced to Rick Perez's Leadership Stark class that he would be Stark County's next sheriff).  He settled on McDonald.

Isn't it just plain weird that the qualification for office question comes up in a big way in both the George T. Maier and Rick Perez accession to officeholding?

And in certain cases, qualification is immaterial?

What is the message for Stark Countians out of the George T. Maier and Rick Perez situations?

Well, it seems that the likes of Gonzalez, Johnnie A. Maier, Jr, William J. Healy, II and Tom Ream will do whatever it takes to accommodate their political whims and the interests of their loyalists even if means screwing the Stark County public!

CHIEF CIVIL DIVISION PROSECUTOR ROSS RHODES SAID THAT MARCELLI LAWSUIT TO RECOVER $5,000 TO COUNTY GENERAL FUND IS"... A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME." REALLY?????

UPDATE:  10:00 AM

INQUIRY OF CLERK OF COURTS
NANCY REINBOLD

HER RESPONSE

********************************************

 BLOG TOPICS

Is Ross Rhodes eating his words today?

Conley:  correctly identifies his online detractor?

The Repository's "double standard!"

Judge Forchione's temperament? 

Conley has a motive? LINK 

 
****************************************

ADDED MATERIAL

Email from SCPR to Stark County clerk of courts Nancy Reinbold

>>> Martin Olson <tramols@att.net> 2/8/2013 9:12 AM >>>
Clerk Reinbold,

What do you plan to do with the $5,000 returned by the agent for the Sandy Hook Support Fund in response to Judge Forchione's request?

Do you have any indication [that Judge Forchione] is going to (or, perhaps, already has) amended his original order to empower/direct you as clerk to place the money in the Stark County general fund.

MartinOlson/SCPR

Response from Clerk Reinbold:

It will be held on deposit on the Studer case until an order is signed and filed by Judge Forchione directing distribution.

Nancy S. Reinbold
Stark County Clerk of Courts
110 Central Plaza North Ste 160
Canton, OH 44702
(330) 451-7622nsreinbo@co.stark.oh.us

ORIGINAL BLOG

First,  Stark County chief civil prosecutor Ross Rhodes said the judge had absolute immunity when there was speculation in the media that civic activist and local attorney Craig T. Conley would be filing a lawsuit on behalf of Thomas Marcelli seeking to compel Stark County Court of Common Pleas judge Frank Forchione to see to it that a $5,000 fine he ordered convicted criminal defendant Scott D. Studer to pay for the Sandy Hook shooting victims was repaid to the Stark County treasury and into the county general fund.

Secondly, in what the SCPR took as an implied intimidation to Conley proceeding with the lawsuit was Rhodes' statement to the effect that if Conley lost the case, he might be looking at paying costs of the action out of his (Conley's) own pocket.

The suit in declaratory judgment (LINK to SCPR blog providing more details of underlying facts of case) was filed on February 1st in the Stark County Court of Common Pleas.  And wouldn't you know it, guess who gets assigned the case by the court's lottery system of assigning cases?

Of course, who else, in a case of super-irony:  Judge Forchione.

Thirdly, after the suit was filed Rhodes said "[i]t was a complete waste of time."

Obviously, if the case continues on, the judge will be recusing himself as will the entire panel of Stark County judges.

Conley tells the SCPR that his/his client's intention was for the $5,000 to come out of the judge's pocket.  Moreover, he says for the judge to deprive the victims of the money already paid to the Sandy Hook Support Fund was disgraceful.

So when news broke last night (LINK) that the agent for the Sandy Hook Support Fund had returned the $5,000 at Judge Forchione's request, one would think that Conley would pack up the lawsuit as being moot and he and his client go away.

For any of us thinking that is not to know Craig T. Conley.

Conley is a guy who pretty much says what he means and means what he says.

His client's (under the counsel of Conley) primary reason for filing the suit in the first place was because of his all consuming passion to "the rule of law" in American jurisprudence.

And Conley is doing all of this pro bono (without charge - for the public good).

He has advanced $300 in filing fees to file the case which he may or may not recover as part of the resolution of the case.


And in filing the case, Conley has incurred the ire of at least a couple of Stark County attorneys (one of whom Conley says has a matter pending before Forchione and the other of which has received some four appointments to cases over the last year or so at the hand of Judge Forchione) and members of the general public.

To boot, Conley believes that Stark County Democratic Party chairman Randy Gonzalez chimed in on the comments section of The Repository in support of Judge Forchione under the screenname "warmsunshine."

The Report has asked Gonzalez whether or not Conley's suspicion was well founded.

Gonzalez answered with an emphatic NO!

Conley says that his suspicion is grounded in his belief that information shared in the comment was information that it is likely is uniquely ready at hand to Gonzalez.  Moreover, he points out that as an official in the Canton Municipal clerk of courts office, he thinks Gonzalez would have developed a government interaction relationship with Forchione as a consequence being a prosecutor in the Canton law department.

Conley indicates to The Report that he has put his mouth where his suspicion is as a testament to his certainty of the identity of the anonymous commenter.  He compiled a packet of information on the Judge's order and sent it to Gonzalez without comment.

Finally, Conley tells the SCPR that as far as he can determine, warmsunshine has not commented on the Forchione fine situation or any other Repository story since he transmitted the packet to Gonzalez.

Could be a mere co-incidence, no?

But Conely does not think so.

The Report repeats, that notwithstanding Conley's suspicion, Gonzalez has denied to the SCPR that Conley's speculation is true.

The main point of the foregoing discursive is to share with SCPR readers that folks like Conley are brought under enormous pressure by friends of those he holds to public account to back off.

And for a guy like Ross Rhodes to suggest that Conley's work "... is a complete waste of time" is outrageous for a person who is obligated to cherish the rule of law.

Lawyers 101 in law school is very clear in instruction that the way lawyers determine what the rules of law are, when disagreed upon, is through litigation.

Rhodes undoubtedly knows such to be the case and for him to suggest that Marcelli through Conley accessing the courts is "a waste" is the equivalent of placing himself in a three-in-one role of being jury, judge and executioner.  Pretty arrogant, no?

Nonetheless, Conley having an underlying motivation for participating in the filing the lawsuit merits examination.  This the SCPR has done.  Here is a LINK to that blog.

Beyond Rhodes, there is the conduct of The Repository editorial board in its processing letters to the editors on the Forchione fine issue.

Conley alleges (and has provided substantiation to the satisfaction of The Report) that two attorney letter to editor writers have connections with Judge Forchione.

One, Conley says, has gotten case appointments from the judge.  The other has a case pending before Forchione.

For Gayle Beck (the chief) and her fellow editorial editors to allow those who have a connection to get "letters to the editors" published without the editors having vetted the writers on whether or not they may have a motivation to write the letters they write is astounding.  Had she checked them out and detected Conley's allegations, one would think that she would certainly had inserted an editorial board disclaimer.

For some "letter to the editor" writers, Repository instituted vetting hurdles they have to overcome seem beyond reasonable.  For others, it appears the bar is very low, if not non-existent.

In a one-newspaper-town and in a county which has one-countywide-newspaper; double standarding is unacceptable. 

To The Report, the leadership at The Repository have irresponsibly (from an editorial standpoint) handled their monopoly of Stark County sited media.

The SCPR does not begrudge those with ulterior motives getting their letters published, but the editor, if they are doing proper editorial board journalism, should ensure that letters include disclaimers detailing connections between the writer and the subjects so that readers can make an informed judgment as to how much credibility those writers should be accorded.

So shame on The Repository editorial board for not doing its due diligence!

As it turns out, the Stark County's general fund is ultimately going to get the $5,000 courtesy of Conley and his client Marcelli at no cost to the taxpayers.

A waste, Prosecutor Rhodes?

Judge Forchione's given reason for retrieving the $5,000 is so that the Marcelli/Conley litigation will fade away for mootness thereby saving Stark's taxpayers the expense of protracted litigation.

For Conley, this is not good enough.

He is insisting that the judge correct his order so as to be in compliance with ORC 2949.11 and thereby, at least impliedly, admit that he did not have the legal authority to do what he did in ordering Studer to monetarily assist the victims of Sandy Hook.

In a letter to Prosecutor John Ferrero, Conley lays you his requirements to resolve the declaratory judgment action:

Conley has filed an amended complaint so as to include developments whereby Forchione asked for and received (via the clerk of courts office) the Sandy Hook money back.

Conley says that it is his intent to, by legal redress, compel Judge Forchione to restructure the order so as to put Stark County Clerk of Courts Nancy Reinbold in a plausible legal position to deposit the $5,000 with the Stark County treasury on it way into the county general fund.

While he thinks such will not totally cure the problems with the order, he said that he and his client will not stand in the way of the matter coming to an end if the order is restructured.

At the end of this blog, the SCPR has placed a copy of those paragraphs of the amended complaint wherein Conley endeavors to give life beyond the mere fact that Judge Forchione recovered the money from the folks of Newtown, Connecticut.

For Prosecutor Ross Rhodes, he should issue a press release to effect that he misspoke when to termed the complaint as being "a waste of time," which by definition is not accurate witness the recall of the $5,000 by Judge Forchione owing to the Marcelli/Conley complaint being filed.

For The Repository Editorial Board, they should start applying the same vetting standard to all letters to the editor that appears in the pages of The Rep.

For Judge Forchione, he should reconstruct his order to be in full compliance with the provisions of ORC 2949.11 in such as fashion that Clerk Reinbold is on solid footing in terms of forwarding the $5,000 to the Stark treasury or deposit in the Stark County general fund.

Moreover, it would be helpful for Judge Forchione (who is held in high esteem by many Stark Countians) to admit point-blank that he overstepped his legal bounds.

But will his general disposition, his demeanor, his temperament allow him allow to do so?

Let's all hope that the Forlchione assessment of one highly placed Stark County elected official to the SCRP is on the mark (i.e. that Judge Forchione is a classy guy) and that Conley's is off-the-mark.

For therein lies a quick solution to what Craig Conley is now calling Forchionegate a la his 2009 - 2011 labeling  of Stark County treasury problems as being Zeiglergate.

Forchione's handling of this matter should go a long way towards answering the question of whether or not he gets re-elected when the next comes on the ballot.

Here is the core of the amended complaint:

(VIDEOS: LUTHER & COMMISSIONER BERNABEI) BRANT LUTHER BECOMING THE THE GUARDIAN OF THE STARK COUNTY COMMISSIONERS?

 

 VIDEO

Commissioners Hire Luther as Chief Adminstrator

VIDEO

Brant Luther Answers the Questions of the Press

VIDEO

Commissioner Tom Bernabei

"A Commissioner's Perspective on the Hiring Process"

Presently, Brant Luther is director of the Stark County Family Court guardian-ad-litem program.

On February 25th he will become guardian of the Stark County commissioners in a fashion.  As the selectee of the commissioners for the position of chief administrator being vacated in 22 days (March 1st) by Mike Hanke, he will be the eyes, ears and protector of commissioners' interests.

And the pay increase won't hurt either.

He will get a pay increase from his current $55,000 annually to $85,000 (after 90 days probation).  A whopping 55.5%!

A SCPR congratulations to Luther.

Yours truly has known him about 10 years.  He and middle daughter Heidi graduated from The University of Akron School of Law in the same year.

Here is a video on the commissioners passing a resolution hiring Luther, their comments at the time and of course the entire Luther press conference.



After the meeting the SCPR sat down with Stark County commissioner and president of the Board of Commissioners Tom Bernabei and asked him to go into more detail as to why they hired Luther over the five other finalists.

In a post-meeting press conference (recorded in video and presented below) Luther:

• describes his responsibilities as director of the Stark County Family Court's guardian ad litem program [which is his current employment],
• gives reasons why his prior work in county government put him in a strong position to attract the commissioners' interest in hiring him,
• spoke to the county's budgeting process and his anticipation of the inherent difficulties and how he will coordinate the commissioners' thinking of what the appropriate funding level (from county general funds) is year to year,
• addressed the fact that he is an attorney in the private practice of law and that he will maintain it but limit it to transactional type activity,
• projected on his adjusting to being chief county administrator and looked forward how a Brant Luther administration would unfold,
• indicated that he would be a player in the commissioners plans to hire a county human resources director, and
• spoke to his past relationships with the commissioners and in particular the political aspect of those relationships as well as what degree of participation he will have in Stark County politics going forward

To go one step further and get a more in depth look at the perspective of the commissioners as they went through the hiring process, the SCPR sat down with Commissioner Tom Bernabei who shared his perception of the commissioners' approach and evaluative factors of the candidates with an emphasis on Luther.



Michael Hanke has been an invaluable asset to the commissioners.

Hanke and his protege Rick Flory have been thorough in their analysis of county finances and have proved tough interactors with county officials whose offices receive county general fund monies.

The SCPR believe that two offices in particular have been troublesome to Hanke/Flory and derivatively to the commissioners.

Which offices?

Those of Stark County prosecutor John Ferrero and Stark County recorder Rick Campbell.

For instance, commissioners asked them to come in with budget numbers for at significantly less than 2010 numbers and allowing for 2% in pay increases and factoring in a 27th pay.

Well, you guess it.

Ferrero and Campbell want to go back to 2010 levels (over 2010 levels in Campbell's case) and hiring 12 and 7 new employees respectively and figuring pay increases at 3%.

This is the sort of thing that Luther will have to deal with as chief administrator.  Undoubtedly, he will have to learn to jawbone with toughness (if he doesn't have the skill already).  For the SCPR has a pretty good idea what Mike Hanke has had to deal with from a few county offices over the five years he has been chief administrator.

A SCPR "best wishes" to new Stark County commissioners' chief administrator Brant Luther.

BREAKING NEWS: STUDER IMPOSED FINE ORDERED BY JUDGE FRANK FORCHIONE IS BEING RETURNED FOR DEPOSIT IN THE STARK COUNTY TREASURY!

UPDATE:  02/07/2013 AT NOON

Stark County civic activist and local attorney Craig T. Conley should be very pleased.

But he isn't.

Last week he filed a lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgement  that a fine of Mark Studer that Judge Frank Forchione ordered him to pay for the benefit of the Sandy Hook shooting victims (which turned out to be the Sandy Hook Support Fund) was not allowable under Ohio law.

The Report has learned from a highly credible source that Judge Forchione has asked that the Sandy Hook Support Fund return the $5,000 for deposit in the Stark County treasury.

The Report has further learned that the check has been received in Stark County and is in the possession of Stark County Clerk of Courts Nancy Reinbold for transmittal to the Stark County treasury.

So why isn't Conley happy?

Answer:  because he has been told Matt Rink of The Repository (not communicated to The Report by Rink, but by Conley) that the reason Forchione asked for a return of the money is so that he can avoid Conley's lawsuit and thereby save Stark County money.

Conley told The Report that is disgraceful for Forchione to have asked for the return of the money from the people in need in the affected Sandy Hook community.

He further says that for the lawsuit to go away, Judge Forchione will have to change his order to eliminate the payment of the fine money for the benefit of the Sandy Hook victims.

Then, Conley says, the change in the order will in and of itself render his client's declaratory judgment action moot.

A SCPR "tip-of-the-hat" to Conley for pursuing the matter.

Before yours truly learned of Judge Forchione's reason for asking for the money back, he was up for being a recipient of a SCPR "tip-of-the-hat" award.

But The Report agrees with Conley that the reason given (i.e. to avoid the expense of a lawsuit) is not an acceptable reason.

He should simply admit that he did not comply with ORC 2949.11 in making the order in the first place and refashion it so as to be in compliance with the law of Ohio.

Here is background material from a prior SCPR blog:

In a move that undoubtedly caught Stark County Prosecutor John Ferrero by surprise, Stark County civic activist and attorney Craig T. Conley filed suit on behalf of Bethlehem Township resident Thomas Marcelli seeking interpretation of Ohio Revised Code Section 2949.11 (LINK) and that the statute is constitutional.

ORC 2949.11 has been at the fore of communications between Conley and Ferrero's office over the past week or so.

Conley demanded on behalf of client Thomas Marcelli that Ferrero file suit to recover to the Stark County treasury the sum of $5,000 which Stark County Court of Common Pleas Judge Frank Forchione ordered Scott D. Studer (on having pled guilty to multiple counts Illegal Use of a Minor in a Nudity-Oriented Material or Performance [R.C. 21907.323(A)(1)](F2)) to pay as a fine.  However, not to be paid to the Stark treasury; but rather to the Sandy Hook Support Fund.

Readers will recall as reported in local media that Studer (a former Jackson High School freshman basketball coach) had videotaped numerous student athletes (since 2005) taking showers.

(ABOUT 1 HOUR OF VIDEO BROKEN DOWN BY TOPIC) AS EXPECTED, GEORGE MAIER PREVAILS IN CONTEST FOR SHERIFF APPOINTMENT - FOR NOW?

UPDATED:  11:00 AM

VIDEOS

DEMORA
The Final Vote Tally

GONZALEZ

"Woe is Me"

Deals with Interruptions

GONZALEZ

Tribute to Mike McDonald

DEMORA

Checks Gonzalez on Giving Pro-Maier Speech

DAVID KIRVEN
Motion to Table Meeting
(until all the candidates are qualified)

 ED DAVILA
Motion to Vote on Candidates on Forchione List

CENTRAL COMMITTEEPERSON
Actual Voting

 CHECK BACK FOR UPDATES & NEW VIDEOS

Not too bad.

That's how the SCPR sums up the quality of the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee (SCDPCC) to pick a successor to Mike McDonald who on January 3, 2013 had to step down from being sheriff-elect due to unspecified health reasons.

Chairman Randy Gonzalez did an effective job of keeping the meeting moving despite frequent interruptions of callouts from the audience with points of order by one member in particular.

He did engage in a bit of a pity party for himself.  It is always interesting to see hardened political figures do a "woe is me" routine.



All-in-all the SCPR thinks the chairman conducted a fair meeting except the leadership of the Stark County Democratic Party was weighing-in heavily for Maier which certainly must have had an intimidating effect on the some of those voting.

Of course, far be that from the minds of these leaders.

Voting committee members had to sign their ballots.  So the party leaders know how each and every precinct committee person voted.

Knowing positioned politicians like yours truly does, there in no doubt in The Report's thinking that mental notes were made as to who voted which way.

Given the closeness of the vote, the SCPR believes that a secret ballot vote, which was brought up by Kirven only to have Gonzalez brush him aside may well have resulted in Darrow being selected over Maier.

Gonzalez did an entirely appropriate thing when he took a few minutes to acknowledge Mike McDonald.

Unfortunately, the chairman made as one of McDonald's good qualities the fact that he stepped forward in the October 31, 2011 SCDPCC meeting to replace Gary Zeigler as treasurer to support Gonzalez.

Wait a minute.  Who was this to be about?  McDonald or the chairman?

The SCPR will concede that Gonzalez has done some good things (especially his work on rehabbing 9-1-1) for Canton, Jackson Township and indeed all of Stark County in his public career.

But hasn't he been well paid for it?  Hasn't there been other multiple benefits to his personal interests? 

It is becoming more and more apparent to The Report that the chairman is be fast becoming his own best cheerleader.



The problem will come, if it comes at all, with the questionable (at least in the opinion of many of the participants) qualifications of victor George T. Maier and manner in which Gonzalez in his capacity as party chair and thereby head of the central committee determined the candidates to be qualified.

And guess what the meat of the meeting opened with?

Dave Kirven, who is business agent of Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 94, getting up and making a motion (quickly seconded) to table the matter of selecting a sheriff appointee "until such time that all the candidates are qualified."

Take at look at the motion and the ensuing discussion.



Well, the motion failed.  But reflect on the insistence of Gonzalez that the candidates were properly qualified. 

It was weak indeed that he cited attorneys Michael Thompson (selected by Gonzalez to represent him and the central committee in litigation filed Monday by appointment candidate Lou Darrow) and Steve Okey as authorities that the candidates are qualified.

And get this.

Thompson had the effrontery to accuse Ferrero of having bias as if he (Thompson) as legal counsel for the chairman was the personification of objectivity.

A classic case of "the pot calling the kettle black," no?

Ed Davila took command of the microphone to make a motion for a vote on candidates as qualified by Stark Court of Common Pleas judge Frank Forchione.

Fair enough?

Not really.

Forchione only dealt with the ministerial matters of the requirements of ORC 311.01, to wit:

1. be a U.S. citizen, 
2. be a resident of Stark County for one year,
3. be a qualified voter,
4. have a high school degree or its equivalent,
5. have no conviction record of a felony or first degree misdemeanor,
6. be finger printed under the direction Judge Forchione who is to have the finger prints compared to local, state and federal databases and  (a process that takes about 7 to 10 days according to Forchione) who turns submits the results to the Stark BOE,
7. residences going back 6 years, and places of employment going back 6 years,
8. have evidence of a basic peace officer certificate of training [by an approved issuing authority as specified in the statute],

He did not assess on:

• have been employed within the past four years as:a state highway patrolman,
• a full-time police officer, OR
• have been employed for the past three years as a full-time law enforcement officer, OR
• having two years of post-secondary education at an accredited Ohio institution

The tack of the pro-George Maier forces was to ignore "the elephant in the room,'

Ed Davila's motion appears to have been designed to avoid "the inconvenient truth" that there were unvetted standards of qualification that had been addressed by nobody except by attorneys who, while entitled to their opinions, are no better situated to make the assessment that "the proverbial man in the street,"

See the debate for yourself.



For the most part on any given matter, attorney opinions are all over the ballpark.  Only court decisions will do in terms of being authoritative.  So it was a particularly painful process for anyone familiar with the law to watch.

The SCPR believes that properly applied (ORC 311.02 and 302.05 in pari materia), Ohio statutory law was not followed in qualifying any of the candidates.

Although The Report in an overall sense believes the meeting was fairly conducted (see qualification of assessment above), it is rather obvious that Gonzalez as chairman was pushing his "more than equal" voice in his apparent alliance with Johnnie A. Maier, Jr to guide George T. Maier's appointment through, even if by a narrow margin and even if doing so left him open to "possible" post-selection challenge.

Isn't this a political version of "getting one's foot in the door" or "possession of the office is 9/10ths of the law?

You have to understand that in dealing with the likes of Gonzalez and Maier (Johnnie), one is dealing with folks who practice politics every day of the lives and fully understand that they are thereby a mismatch for everyday citizens.

If Lou Darrow stays with his writ of prohibition lawsuit (LINK) on the matter or possibly takes a new or additional approach to challenge the vote, it could be that ultimately Maier will have to relinquish his SCDPCC victory should the Ohio Supreme Court find that proper procedures were not employed to determine his and other candidates' qualifications or that he is not qualified.

It is hard for the SCPR to see Darrow maintaining or initiating new litigation in the face of having to work (as one of the top administrators in the sheriff's department) for Maier.

Yesterday's meeting reeked of resentment by Gonzalez and Thompson at Darrow's lawsuit now pending in the Ohio Supreme Court.

Thompson to the central committee members;  "He sued you!" (paraphrase)

Gonzalez about Ferrero:  "How can he make that argument when he signed an affidavit supporting the [Darrow] lawsuit." (paraphrase)

Gonzalez brought up the mess that Stark County went through with the troubles in the Stark County treasury during the period April 1, 2009 through October 31, 2011 and his hope that by appointing a sheriff at the meeting Stark could avoid a repeat.

John Ferrero did too.

Strangely enough and the SCPR agree with one another.

Because of the questionable procedures employed by Stark officials in coordination with the Ohio secretary of state's office on the qualification issue, The Report thinks that the SCDPCC put itself at greater risk in proceeding.

We shall see.

Gonzalez kept his cool in the face of frequent outbursts from committee members (though concentrated to relatively few) and in the light of audio problems in the speakers being heard.

Bill Demora, a consultant to the Ohio Democratic Party who bills himself as being knowledgeable on parliamentary procedures, seemed to the SCPR to be a stabilizing factor in not letting things get out of hand.

He was particularly impressive in stepping in and stopping Gonzalez as it appeared that he was about to begin an endorsement speech in favor of Maier.



To his credit, Gonzalez heeded the Demora admonition.  To his discredit, it was bad judgement to make the attempt unless he was going to allow the supporters of other candidates to take to the lectern to making their supporting statements.

It did not appear that such was his intention.

Demora also intervened and stopped one of two other persons interested in being appointed sheriff from taking the floor inasmuch as that person was not a central committee member.

Gonzalez was just okay.  At least better than his performance in Massillon (January 29th) when Massillon precinct committee persons selected a city treasurer and city council president.

It is good that he demonstrated that he could learn from the tough Massillon experience.

Demora was effective and perhaps the saving grace for an orderly meeting.

At the end of the day, the SCPR's take is that the Gonzalez/Maier political juggernaut was going to win over the largely unsophisticated pro-Darrow forces and that it was amazing that the vote turned out as it did.

If, it turns out, that the Maier choice turns out:

• to have been a poor choice in terms of his performance in office, or
• to have been a poor choice in terms of being sucessfully challenged in the court and thereby puts Stark County into a policing state of crisis,

the SCPR thinks it will be only fair for the blame to be on the shoulders of Chairman Randy Gonzalez for his "rush to judgment" in the face of contested qualification issues.

It is The Report's assessment that "Gonzalez committed to the cause" was the tipping point that the Maier camp needed to make George Stark County's sheriff in the face of no secret ballot.

You can be sure that if the Maier appointment sticks and he turns out to be an effective sheriff, Gonzalez will be quick to take the credit notwithstanding him being the modest, serving the public interest guy that he says he is.

 Here is a video of the actual voting that took place last night.