CONLEY IS BACK. FILES BRIEF WITH 5TH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS ON FORCHIONE MATTER. WILL PERSISTENCE MAKE HIS CLIENT & THE "RULE OF LAW" A WINNER?

Local attorney and civic activist Craig T. Conley may be Stark County's leading jurist in terms of his dogged, persistent pursuit of the rule of law.

Undoubtedly, his detractors would like to paint him as a lawyer who has gone amok in that he has so much ego that he cannot abide anyone getting the best of him.

Such might be the view of the anonymous person (presumably a peer lawyer of Conley's or, perhaps, a Stark County judge) who filed an ethics complaint against him on January 28, 2013 with Ohio's Disciplinary Counsel.  (LINK to prior SCPR blog).

Conley was exonerated of having committed any ethics violation on March 26, 2013. (LINK to prior SCPR blog on the topic)

To summarize the origin of things which resulted in the ethics complaint being filed:

Conley accused Stark County Court of Common Pleas judge Frank Forchione of grandstanding on part of his sentencing order of a Stark Countian who had pled guilty in his court in December, 2012 in multiple counts of Illegal Use of a Minor in a Nudity-Oriented Material or Performance (R.C. 21907.323(A)(1)](F2)).

Judge Forchione had, in the objectional part of his sentencing (to Conley) of one Scott Studer, ordered him to pay $5,000 for the benefit of the Sandy Hook Elementary School (Newtown, CT) shooting victims of December, 2012.

Conley of February 1, 2013 [LINK to prior SCPR blog) filed suit against Forchione (a Declaratory Judgment action on the interpretation of ORC 2949.11) demanding that "the rule of law" prevail and that Ohio's statutory scheme providing that criminal case fine money be paid to the county treasury in satisfaction of the aforesaid statute.

The reason that the SCPR cites to this particular link is because the referenced blog explores the question of whether or not Conley was motivated to take Forchione on in Studer because of a separate legal tussle between the two on the allegation by Conley that Fochione had demonstrated bias against him in a case in which he was a defendant (citation:  Estate of Cletus P. McCauley et al vs. Craig T. Conley, et al [Stark County, 2011 CV 02325] in 2011 in the Stark County Court of Common Pleas).

Needless to say, Conley denies that such was the case, but the SCPR thinks it is a fair question to ask and consider as one seeks to determine why Conley carries on (with a different client) and a new issue even after Forchione retrieved the $5,000 from Sandy Hook and had Stark County Clerk of Court Nancy Reinbold deposit the money into the Stark County general fund maintained by Stark County Treasurer Alex Zumbar as demanded by Conley.

The ink on the clerk of courts stamp on the voluntary dismissal (February 15, 2013) of the declaratory judgment action (filed on behalf of Thomas Marcelli) had not yet dried  yet when on February 28, 2013, a new legal proceeding was initiated against Judge Forchione.

Initially, Conley was not involved.

But by April 15th, Conley picked up on the new matter (pro bono - for the public good - as in Marcelli v. Forchione) in which Columbus resident Louis Demis (a former Stark Countian with ties to the Navarre area) alleged in an affidavit that Judge Forchione had, in ordering (and in following through in seeing that the order was effectuated [re:  Letter of Transmittal, January 3, 2013]) the $5,000 be paid to the Sandy Hook victims relief fund rather than to the Stark County treasury, committed the criminal offense of "theft in office."

Hearing was held on the affidavit in the Canton Municipal Court on April 23, 2013 before former Barberton Municipal Court judge Michael McNulty with Akron Law Department attorney Craig Morgan (an Akron chief assistant criminal prosecutor) appearing (unsympathetically to the affiant in the opinion of the SCPR) and Conley also appearing but who was actually advocating for the Demis position.  (LINK to prior SCPR blog with video on the entire hearing)

Well, to took Judge McNulty about one hour after concluding the hearing (at about 9:35 a.m. [the state having begun at 9:00 a.m.]) to file his decision of "no probable cause."  (LINK to prior SCPR blog detailing the decision)

Not long after the decision, Conley announced that he would be prosecuting an appeal for Louis Demis.  (LINK to prior SCPR blog)

The SCPR has obtained a copy of Conley's brief (about 15 pages long) filed in the appellate case which he filed on Friday.

Here are the issues as Conley sees them:

If Conley's client is to prevail and Conley's devotion to the "rule of law" is to be realized, then it will be owing to his persistence and doggedness.

For the SCPR daresays that about the only person living in Stark County who believes that the 5th District Court of Appeals will reverse Judge McNulty is Craig T. Conley.

Agree with him or not, like him or not; you have to admire his determinedness, perseverance and persistence.

While the SCPR would be surprised to see Judge McNulty overturned, there were probably a lot of Stark Countians that never thought that the $5,000 Studer fine would make it into the general fund of the Stark County treasury after it had already been paid for the benefit of the the Sandy Hook victims.

But guess where it sits on July 22, 2013?

Judge Forchione is likely being counseled by many that he has absolutely nothing to worry about from the Demis initiative.

And that may prove to be the case.

Nonetheless, the SCPR is guessing that he is not underestimating Craig T. Conley.

For he knows from first hand experience that Conley is absolutely committed to the "rule of law."  And make no mistake about it, motivated or not by outside events, Conley does see the current case as an extension of that basic principle of law.

Finally, he does put his money (i.e. pro bono time) where his mouth is!"

Yes, Craig T. Conley is back.

Could it be that his persistence will produce results once again?

VIDEO: STARK COUNTY GOV'T GETTING SPECIAL SCRUTINY AT STATE LEVEL BECAUSE OF ITS HISTORY GOING BACK SOME 5 YEARS?

It appears that the folks who run state of Ohio departments of government are wary of anything coming to them out of Stark County.

Since April 1, 2009 when the story broke that the-then Stark County treasurer Gary Zeigler was accusing his chief deputy Vince Frustaci stolen taxpayer money from the county treasury, there have been a number of Stark County originated events (including the Frustaci revelation) that have kept our county in the limelight of attention with the bureaucrats who run Ohio's capital city.

Frustaci subsequently pled guilty.

But for about two and one-half years following the revelation, activities which included:

• the involvement of the State of Ohio Auditor (auditing the Stark treasury and finding deficit management oversight which Zeigler steadfastly denied), and
• the Ohio Supreme Court (determining whether or not the-then Stark commissioners [Bosley, Ferguson and Meeks - all Democrats] had properly removed Zeigler from office)
• Note:  The Supreme Court found that they had not used proper constitutional safeguards and therefore returned Zeigler to office.  He did work out an agreement with the-then commissioners Bernabei, Creighton and Ferguson on October 19, 2011 to retire/resign

became part and parcel of Stark County making a negative name for itself in Columbus as an outgrowth of other screwy happenings that followed on the heels of the Frustaci matter.

The "other screwy happenings" have included:

• the election debacle in Lake Township (November, 2011 - SCPR prior blog LINK) as township trustees first appeared to have won a hard fought election to take the Uniontown Police Department township wide, only to have the Supreme Court overturn the election results because of deficient ballot language that originated with township legal counsel but was never corrected despite timely word from the Ohio secretary of state of the need for a correction,
• the selection in February, 2013 of a sheriff (former Massillon safety director George T. Maier) by the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee to replace "the unable to take office for health reasons" Mike McDonald (elected in November, 2012) with Maier having questionable - as a matter of law - qualifications under Ohio Revised Code Section 311.01.  
• Note:  Maier's right to serve is under review with the Ohio Supreme Court as this blog is written,
• the action of mayor-elect Kathy Catazaro-Perry requesting (in December, 2011) a State of Ohio Auditor audit of Massillon city finances (denied by Auditor Yost) only to be renewed by her as mayor in May, 2013 to prompt Massillon being put on either an Ohio monitored fiscal watch or fiscal emergency.

Spillover from Stark's negative name in Columbus was evident (at least to the SCPR) this past Monday night at Canton City Council meeting when Canton law director Joe Martuccio got up at Council's Committee of the Whole meeting which precedes the regular council meeting and explained why there was an item on council's agenda to amend Canton's ballot initiative to have city voters decide whether or not to tax themselves 4 mills in property tax to support the city parks and recreation function.

It appears to the SCPR that Stark County may be acquiring - at least from the secretary of state's office perspective and, perhaps, from the state auditor - a "watch them" and "give them special scrutiny" as a consequence of Stark County political and administrative history since April 1, 2009.

Nearly everybody and most entities want to make a name for themselves.

But not a negative image that may be taking hold in the Columbus bureaucracy on Stark County government.

Here is Law Director Joe Martuccio addressing the parks and recreation property tax levy amendment issue:

STARK COUNTY: THE QUALITY OF POLICE ADMINISTRATION?

Last weekend The Repository's Kelli Young and Matt Rink broke out with a series of articles which should raise to "inquiring minds" the question of the quality of police administration in Stark County.

To the SCPR, there is very little that is more scary than a person authorized to carry a gun driving through the neighborhoods of Stark County when the person may be a rogue cop.

After digesting the Young/Rink work, it strikes The Report that too many of those in charge of getting "the bad apples" off Stark's police forces are not doing an effective job.

Of course, there are exceptions to the rule and for these exceptional police leaders Stark Countians should be thankful.

But for those not getting the job done, public pressure should be brought to bear on the political leaders (i.e. those we elect) to ratchet up the quality of leadership needed to ensure that you or I are not going to be a victim of a cop gone bad.

And, to be sure, it is not just about police persons going bad.  There are other "appointed to their positions" public officials who should not be in their public jobs but are not effectively dealt with in terms of on going scrutiny in terms of their negative interactions with John and Jane Q. Public.

Hopefully, the days are gone in which Stark County/city/village and board of education elected officials have not put in place adequate safeguards to ensure that a public employee cannot walk off with taxpayer dollars.

But, of course, these folks do not carry guns.

Alarming to the Stark County public should be the fact that public official police supervisory types and their legal advisers have been largely unsuccessful in winning arbitration cases in those instances where supervisors have determined that particular police officers should not continue to be so employed.

From Taking away the badge:  Fired officers often return to duty:

The Repository’s analysis found that 34 law-enforcement officers (including a sheriff deputy) have been fired in Stark County since 2003. Nineteen of those officers appealed and more than half of them returned to their jobs — largely due to arbitrators. 

Of the 13 appeals that went to arbitration, 10 of the firings were reversed. About half of the reinstated officers also received back pay for the time they missed from the job.

Yours truly remembers years ago (early 1980s) hearing ad nauseam the complaints of a local school district board of education member about all the bad (in terms of effectiveness) teachers the district had on board.

And yet the district was not documenting the deficiencies to a legally sufficient degree to get rid of teachers who were not up to the job of educating our kids.

In the district you had teachers who yours truly witnessed saying such things as:

"Oh, but Mr. Olson if only your daughter had handed in her homework she would have gotten one grade higher."

The obvious question:  "Why didn't I know that she wasn't handing in her homework?"

Answer:  "Oh, but Mr. Olson if I had to notify each parent of a student that was not handing in homework of such I would have to work an hour or two more a week."

And there were the teachers who routinely called 13/14 year old students orangutans and the like.

Or the teacher who got upset with the classroom question: Why is "Pi" is 3.14?

Undoubtedly the readers of the SCPR have many, many similar stories which should at least bring up the question of whether or not the offending teacher belongs in the classroom.

But by and large such stories are dismissed as the teacher having a bad day or we don't have the personnel to adequately monitor what is going on in the classroom or like in the Stark County police dismissal stories, it is those unions and those arbitrators who keep ineffective or undesirable employees in place.

The SCPR is not buying the line that disses unions and arbitrators.

Rather The Report thinks it is more a case of the supervisors and their legal advisers not being up to the task of protecting the public from having on the public payroll employees who should not be there for a variety of reasons.

Particularly offensive in this regard is the quote in the Young/Rink series attributed to Jackson Township trustee James N. Walter with regard to the township's efforts in arbitration, to wit:

I think the arbitration system is seriously broke.  To shove this down the community’s throat is indefensible.  

Young attributes to Walters:

Walters believes employment decisions should be made by elected officials who are accountable to the public, not by an out-of-area arbitrator who answers to no one. 

Tell us all about it Mister Trustee Walters.

Walters as an "elected" Jackson trustee is a part of a board that the SCPR thinks has fumbled and bumbled the matter of David Zink being appointed as police chief in the first instance and has been decidedly ineffective in dealing with sexual harassment allegations that have been made against Zink.

The Zink situation is not an arbitration situation, is it?

The SCPR only hopes that Jacksonians will hold the Board of Trustees accountable.  It is interesting that Walters himself is not up for election this time around.

Walters and his disingenuous "hold us accountable" is akin to "the pot calling the kettle black."

Except the only reason that the arbitration kettle may be black in terms of not working is because those who have to make the case are proving in spades they do not have the skills needed to win a vast majority of arbitrations.

What if prosecutors had a track record of losing 77% (10 out 13) of their cases?

There would be a public outrage, no?

As far as the SCPR is concerned, it should take first-rate preparation and the accumulation/presentation of compelling evidence for a person subject to arbitration to lose his/her job.

For those who are losing arbitration cases at the aforementioned alarming rate, it is high time for them to take a look at themselves and doing a "gut check time" and honestly facing up to the question as to whether or not they are in over their heads and are not up to the task at hand.

The Stark County Political Report posits that as they would if prosecutors lost 77% of their cases, the Stark County public should demand of those Stark County elected officials who have put in place supervisors and legal advisers that are not getting the arbitration job done, that changes be made.

And there is one final thought.

There are police administrators that have an amazing track record of getting resignations from those police officers who do not measure up to the very high standards that they have in place for those who wear "blue."

The resignation route is a "win-win" for the officer in question and the public.

Maybe just maybe Stark County policing officials should be putting together some training sessions staffed by the successful police administrators so that the number of arbitrations get diminished.

But, where the resignation route does not work, it is imperative that those employed to manage the employer's side of arbitration get better at doing what they do.

And, if they do not, then some heads should roll.

If heads do not roll, then the appointing elected official authority should be held accountable come election time.

(VIDEO) UNDER "MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS" ON THE CANTON CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ALLEN SCHULMAN SHINES!

It would be a mistake to leave a Canton City Council meeting before the final bell.

The very last item on the meeting agenda before adjournment is "Miscellaneous Business."

The SCPR has learned over the years that some of the most riveting stuff occurs during this part of the Canton City Council agenda.

It is the opportunity for council members and members of the Healy administration to pipe in with just about anything that they want to get out into the public.

Council President Allen Schulman is a regular participant in "Miscellaneous Business" and is known to use this aspect of the meeting for going after various national, state and Stark County political personages on "issues of the day."

Monday night's meeting was Schulman at his finest insofar as the SCPR is concerned.

Earlier in the day, The Report published a blog (LINK) showing how disingenuous the Ohio General Assembly (OGA) can be and indeed is on the matter of K-12 public school funding.

The main point of the blog was working through the numbers from $45.4 million newspaper headlines in casino profits (per half) that the OGA has earmarked for local school districts and how by the time one gets to how much it means per student the amount gets whittled down to $20.

Compared to the cost of educating a student in Stark County's schools (ranging from a high of $11,631 in Massillon to $7,426 in Tuslaw), the $20 is "one big - though cruel -laugh" at the expense of public education.

But the legislators always focus on the $45.4 million like they really have done something for the financing of public education.

A particularly reprehensible part of the actions of the Republican super-majority (meaning governor veto proof) in passing the 2014-2015 biennium budget bill (including Stark County Republicans Scott Oelslager, Kirk Schuring and Christina Hagan was to make it more difficult for local school districts and other local government units to get new property tax issues passed.

Schulman picked up on the essential points of the blog plus other "screwings" of local government by our state government in his quintessential and unique style on Monday past.

He also got on the voting public for its apathy in just sitting by and dutifully accepting whatever the Legislature dishes out to the public's own detriment.

And he fired a shot across the bow to the local print media for largely ignoring what transpires at the Statehouse that damages the ability of local governments to responsibly and effectively serve their cities, villages, townships and local school districts.

For the SCPR's money, Canton City Council President Allen Schulman is a model of passion and political energy that other Stark County officials would do well to emulate.

Many, if not most Stark County elected officials, are like eating vanilla ice cream.

Few local officials have the spark and fire of Democrat Schulman.

Another Stark County political figure who has loads of "fire in the belly" is Republican Stark County commissioner Janet Creighton.

With a few other exceptions, in the view of the SCPR, Stark County officialdom is a pretty bland lot which explains in large part what local government is getting dumped on by the folks in the Washington and Columbus beltways.

Here is Schulman at his finest!

WARREN PRICE OUT AS CANTON'S SAFETY DIRECTOR?

UPDATED:  11:45 AM - 07/17/2013

A source tells the SCPR that Price has agreed to stay on as safety director through the end of 2013 at Healy's insistence.

However, The Report has learned that Healy is already sending out administration emissaries contacting possible possible replacement candidates.

As the mayor seems to be a highly whimsical person, who knows when Price will actually move on.

A reader has written yours truly to say that Price is not likely to run against Healy in 2015.  The reader says that Commissioner Tom Bernabei is being targeted to run.

It is hard for The Report to believe that Bernabei would entertain entreaties that he run for mayor of Canton.

ORIGINAL BLOG

It may be stunning news to some Cantonians/Stark Countians, but not to the Stark County Political Report.

The Report is getting indication from multiple sources that Mayor William J. Healy, II's "Jack of All Trades" - Warren Price plans on leaving the beleaguered mayor's administration within 90 days.

Price was not present at last night's council meeting.

And the SCPR is told that "the straw that broke the camel's back" is Healy's playing policeman at Trinity Place on July 2nd.

In a blog of July 8th (LINK), The Report opinionated that the incident was one more example in a string of incidents in his 5-1/2 years in office that the mayor is a "Mister Do-It-All," who, when it suits his political needs, does what he has to for what he perceives as being in his personal political interests.

In the July 8 SCPR blog, yours truly revealed a highly reliable source had shared that Price had been looking for new personal opportunities even before the Trinity Place incident.

While the likes of Ream, Price, Williams and others who serve (or have served) at the pleasure of the mayor may think they are in charge of the particular bailiwicks of their offices, the reality is that to think so is to engage in an illusion.

In time "the light comes on" and disaffection for the mayor sets in.

Consequently, a number of city officials have had their fill of Healy and his intermeddling and undermining and have moved on.

If Price carries through with his reported planned departure, his leaving will leave a gap that may prove to be the proverbial "nail in the coffin" which ends Healy as a viable Stark County politician.

Price's plan, the SCPR, is told is to go into the private practice of law reportedly either with Canton City Council President Allen Schulman (Schulman and Associates, a well known and highly regarded personal injury oriented law firm) or former Alliance city government ally Steve Okey.

Last evening yours truly asked Schulman whether or not Price was going to join Schulman and Associates.

His response?

Predictably:  "no comment."

Beyond Price's speculated leaving of the Healy administration, there is the prospect that Price may be a candidate to unseat the mayor in the Democratic primary that will be coming up in May, 2015 - less than two years away.

We do know that Price has a political side to him. That is, "interested" in running for office.  In 2007, the ran a very respectable race against Republican Toni Middleton (the-then incumbent mayor of The Carnation City), to wit:

Last night Bruce Nordman told The Report that he and his Group 175 are "all-in" in putting together an effort to have Price take on Healy.

Nordman and his Vassar Park centered allies are engaged in a protracted battle with Healy on their insistence that the monies are in city coffers to beef up the city's police force to 175 officers strong.

The SCPR has been impressed with Price and has written (LINK) that Canton would be far better off with a Warren Price-esque person as mayor.

From all yours truly can determine in the many conversations with local political figures about the state of political affairs in Canton city government, Price is viewed as a steady, stable, listening, receptive, get-the-job done type that may not have the political pizzaz of a Healy but who would likely be "what the doctor orders" in terms of bringing Canton out of his economic and social (i.e. the crime problem) despair.

The first of the "parting of the ways" was the firing of the then Canton service director/chief-of-staff but now Stark County commissioner Tom Bernabei (D - Canton) on January 26, 2009.  A little over a year after Healy took office on having defeated Republican Janet Crieghton (also a current sitting Stark County commissioner) in the November, 2007 elections.

At the time preceding the Bernabei firing, the SCPR was hearing story after story after story about how the mayor would do some bizarre things that prompted Bernabei to sit him down and lecture him as if Hizzhonor was a six year old needing correction and redirection.

Bernabei's firing was a stunner but it should not have been.

If nothing else, Healy has a ton of ego and over the longer term he does not brook tongue lashings from anybody.  So while it may have appeared to Bernabei that he could redeem the mayor from "the error of his ways," such is an illusion.  It may take awhile, but Healy will "do whatever it takes" to satisfy his ego needs.  Such is especially the case when he has the actual political power to do so.

Not all that long after Bernabei's firing, seeing the handwriting on the wall; Healy's first safety director Tom Nesbitt (whom Healy recruited from Nebraska where he held an important position with the Nebraska Highway Patrol) quit.

Nesbitt, like Bernabei, was viewed by locals as a highly competent director whom Healy could ill-afford to lose if his administration was to have any chance whatsoever to dig itself out of the economic and "crime rate out-of-control" doldrums.

He, like Bernabei, was a strong leader which this headstrong mayor could not abide.

The SCPR is prone to believe that Warren Price is at the end of the day pretty much his own person in the mold of Bernabei and Nesbitt.

Hence the talk he is leaving.

Reportedly, he wanted to leave within two weeks of the the Trinity Place story breaking.  But the mayor is said to have begged him to stay on for longer and hence the 90 days.

Since his hiring on January 27, 2009, he seems to have been much more patient with the mayor than either Bernabei or Nesbitt.

And he has filled multiple needs (annexation director, chief of staff [March, 2010] and - his last stop - safety director [mere days ago]).

While his salary has climbed from $70,000 to over $100,000 in his multiple roles as service director and chief-of-staff (his initial hire), annexation director and finally as safety director (Healy having thrown Ream "under the bus" in the Canton-Stark County Crime Lab flap (LINK), it appears to the SCPR that the 30% increase over less that five years service is justified.

With Price's conjectured departure, the political parade of William J. Healy, II is definitely being rained upon.

And the rainmaker - with his incident, after incident, after incident on ad infinitum - is?

Hizzonor William J. Healy, II.

Healy for the sake of his personal political survival probably ought to be spending the next 90 days trying to get Warren Price to change his mind, no?

STARK COUNTY SCHOOL OFFICIALS SHOULD BE "JUMPING FOR JOY." WHY - THEY LIKELY ARE NOT!

UPDATED AT 12:19 PM

FORTY-FIVE MILLION DOLLARS FOR OHIO'S PUBLIC SCHOOLS!  (LINK to Columbus Dispatch article of July 12th)

WOW!, WOW!! AND WOW!!! A THIRD TIME, NO?

Not really.

Of the $45.4 million, the SCPR calculates that Stark's 17 schools districts will get a little over $1.2 million

No doubt that the $45.4 million sounds impressive.

And even dropping down to the county level $1.23 million is nothing to sneeze at.

It is when one gets to the school district level that it becomes apparent that the casino profits which are distributed twice a year are pretty much a dud.

It is at the local level that educators (i.e. superintendents and board of education members) cringe.

What sticks in the mind of the local taxpayer?

Of course, $45.4 million.

So why school officials are you asking for "new" monies?

This past May, five Stark County school districts asked for "new" money notwithstanding already receiving casino money AND, mind you, lottery profits.

So why levies for "new" money?

Answer - the casino monies and lottery profits are not what the politicians passing laws in Columbus including Stark County's:

• Scott Oelslager (R-Plain, 29th Ohio Senate District) who is chairman of the Senate Finance Committee,
• Kirk Schuring (R-Jackson, 48th Ohio House District),
• Christina Hagan (R-Marlboro, 50th Ohio House District) and
• Stephen Slesnick (D-Canton, 49th Ohio House District).

Oh, they love to talk about the $45.4 million.  Maybe even the $1.23 million you do not see them (this would be Christina Hagan for East Canton) high-five school officials over $18,000.

For East Canton schools with about 900 or so students the $45.4 million gets reduced to about $18,000 per half year or $36,000 for a full year of sharing in casino profits.

To give perspective to what $36,000 a year might mean in terms of meeting the annual school budget in the Osnaburg (East Canton) School district, let's take a look at what the district spends each year educating a student.

Scan down through the cost per student list for 2010/2011:

(Note:  2011/2012 - 2012/2013 figures are not yet available, but does anyone think costs have gone down?)

In East Canton it costs $9,568 (remember 2010/2011 numbers) to educate a single student.

So with the additional estimated $36,000 per year from casino profits East Canton can educate 3.75 students.

Remember that East Canton has to spread the $36,000 over let's say 900 students.

How far does $36,000 spread out?

How about $40 compared to at least $9,568 to education.

To be fair, let's look at Stark County's largest school district:  Canton.

Canton is likely to get about $400,000 a year from casino profits.

Okay.

Canton has about 10,000 students.  Divide 400,000 by 10,000 and what do you get.

Bingo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

$40 a student.

But Canton is worse off than East Canton.

It costs at least $11,308 (nearly $2,000 more) to educate a student Canton than in East Canton so the $40 does not buy as much in Canton as it does in the Osnaburg Local School District.

with the additional estimated $400,000 per year from casino profits East Canton can educate about 35 of nearly 10,000 students.

So are you still wowing about the $45.5 million in casino provides allocated to K-12 Ohio education?

And we haven't even touch on the lottery profits.

Suffice it to say, in the opinion of the SCPR Ohio's schools get absolutely nothing out of the lottery profits (2012 was a record year for profits LINK), because - though denied by state legislators and the Kasich administration) the folks in the Statehouse play a "shell game" with Ohio taxpayers.

As required by the Ohio Constitution, each and every single profit dollar from the Ohio collection of lottery games DO GO TO EDUCATION.

But the dirty little secret of the $62 billion Ohio biennium budget is that general fund money equivalent to the lottery profits are redirected to "other than education" appropriations.

Folks that's how honest the likes of Oelslager, Schuring, Hagan and Slesnick and their colleagues are with you.

And educators "shudder" every time they see a headline about lottery profits going to the schools.

If their disingenuousness were not enough as to the "shell game" they play with us, the legislators (including ours, except for Slesnick [because as a Democrat he voted against the 2014/15 biennium budget bill]) Oelslager, Schuring and Hagan supported:

• taking away the 10% tax rollback on real property taxes, 
• taking away the 2.5% tax rollback on real property (owner occupied) taxes,
• taking away the Homestead Exemption for those making $30,000 or more.

In doing so they made it significantly more difficult for the school districts across Ohio to pass new levies.

Only Stark's Lake Local School District is asking for "new" monies in a levy issue on November's ballot.

In view of Lake's state representative (Christina Hagan) having made it harder for the district to pass its levy, the very least she could do is to wish the district good luck.

So in the firm belief that Representative Hagan will approve, the SCPR has put together this graphic for Lake Local School District users to take solace in.

(VIDEO) ALL SYSTEMS GO FOR A "CONSOLIDATED" 9-1-1 STARK SYSTEM?

UPDATE:  11:45 AM

ENTIRE VIDEO  OF 07/11/2013 SCOG 9-1-1 GOVERNANCE BOARD MEETING

VIDEOS

FORMER STARK COUNTY COMMISSIONER

JANE VIGNOS

MAKES MOTION 

TO RECOMMEND TO 

STARK COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

THE PURCHASE OF A 

CAD SYSTEM & 800 MHZ RADIOS

RANDY GONZALEZ

UPDATES

STARK'S EMERGENCY FORCES

ON

9-1-1 REHAB

JOE CONCATTO

UPDATES

STARK'S EMERGENCY FORCES

ON

9-1-1 REHAB

ENTIRE 07/11/2013
SCOG 9-1-1 GOVERNANCE BOARD MEETING

It was a touch ironic yesterday that former Stark County Commissioner Jane Vignos made the motion requested by Stark County Council of Governments (SCOG) 9-1-1 Governance Board Chairman Randy Gonzalez that SCOG recommend to the Stark County commissioners:

• that they spend some $2.35 million (according to County Administrator Brant Luther) being held by them to purchase a Computer Assisted Dispatch (CAD) system, for
• a "consolidated," not yet a "regionalized" (see Burgasser correction in Vignos motion video posted below),
• and to apply the rest of the money towards buying state-of-the-art 800 mhz radios for Stark emergency forces who do not presently have them.

Vignos motion - "somewhat ironic?"

Yes.

Republican Vignos was one of three Stark Commissioners (Democrats Todd Bosley and Tom Harmon being the other two) who "imposed" as 0.5% county sales tax which was highlighted as being to fix what was term then (December, 2008) as being a broken Stark County emergency call receiving and dispatching operation.

But the tax did not last long.

Local attorney and civic activist Craig T. Conley soon figured out that the imposed tax was not entirely for a 9-1-1 fix.  Half of the revenues were for the county general fund.  However, that fact was glossed over by the-then commissioners and other county officials who wanted to see the tax remain on the books.

Because of the tax being "imposed" and due to the secretive treatment of the general fund aspect of the collections, voters responded to a Conley put together effort to repeal the tax in November, 2009 with an overwhelming vote to squash the tax.

Nevertheless, subsequent boards of county commissioners including the current one of Commissioners Tom Bernabei (Democrat), Janet Creighton (Republican) and Richard Regula (Republican) have set aside and protected the 9-1-1 fix share of the revenue generated by the imposed tax for 9-1-1 purposes.

The set aside and protection has been necessary because  county government went through a crisis of confidence from December, 2008 through November, 2011 generated by the imposed tax and the revelation that former Stark County chief deputy treasurer Vince Frustaci had stolen upwards of $3 million in Stark County taxpayer funds over several years but undetected by county officials until April 1, 2009.

During the crisis, pressure was put on commissioners to appropriate the $2.3 million to overall Stark County government operations.

It seems to the SCPR that the multiple boards of commissioners have understood that it would not set well with county taxpayers to give in to the pressure.

Back in 2011 it appeared that a countywide, centralized "regional" dispatch system was a "go" for Stark County when out-of-the-blue Canton mayor William J. Healy, II and his then-safety director Thomas Ream became a problem.

Along with the Stark County sheriff's office, the Canton Communications Center are to be the bulwarks (as backups to one another) of any countywide, centralized emergency call receiving and dispatch operation.

The SCPR's analysis is that Healy realized his Canton Communications Center was a key component of whether or not centralized 9-1-1 was going to be a reality and further realizing that Canton would not be in charge of a "regionalized," centralized system, all of a sudden became uncooperative.

All of that is all changed because now it is obvious even to the mayor of Canton that Canton's CAD system is out-of-date and the city can ill-afford to spend the million or so to update its system.

Beyond CAD, there is the issue of having a universal countywide radio system in which all county emergency forces have 800 mhz radios and that a capital fund be built up to upgrade the current radios (which will not be supported by vendor Motorola past 2017) and be part of the wave of the future in which nearly all if not all emergency force radio communications will be done through a state of Ohio system called MARCS (Multi-Agency Radio Communications System).

So he is all too happy now to join in with the county (though headed up by arch-political-enemies Creighton and Bernabei) and in a sense dip into the county's $2.35 million and thereby solving the need for Canton to find that much money plus to keep Canton's communication's center up-to-date.

SCOG's Gonzalez being the politico he is, to wit:

• Stark County Democratic Party chairman, 
• Jackson Township fiscal officer, and 
• an employee of fellow Democrat Phil Giavasis in the Canton Municipal Court clerk of courts office [CJIS], 

though humiliated by Healy on 9-1-1 (in the opinion of the SCPR), is willing to let bygones be bygones and is apparently overjoyed at the prospect of getting a "scaled down" system which he and others at yesterday's  session  were distinguishing as being a "consolidation" (Massillon Fire Chief Tom Burgasser was most emphatic on this point) and not a regionalization of a rehabbed county system.

Here is Gonzalez (who has worked for over 20 years for a "fixed" Stark County 9-1-1) yesterday updating a number of Stark's police, fire and emergency workers at the Stark County sheriff's training room on the status of Stark 9-1-1 dispatch upgrade.

During the session, Gonzalez said that he believes "it is now or never" for Stark County to get on the track towards regionalization of 9-1-1 dispatch.

Also weighing in yesterday was 9-1-1 Project Manager Joe Concatto who outlined:

• the CAD bids and emphasized that the county would only proceeding IF that the effort at rehabbing 9-1-1 ultimately results in a "regionalized," 
• the transition from a "consolidated" - at the start - to a "regionalized,"
• in a vague sense the costs of consolidation (e.g. historical average of 236,000 divided among 44 dispatchers [from Canton Communications Center, the sheriff's center and the RED center],

So it appears that the Stark County commissioners are willing to spend the $2.3 million for something less than ideal.

Eight dispatch centers will not be a part of a Stark County CAD at least at the start of operations.

Gonzalez, 9-1-1 Project Manager Joe Concatto and others expressed the "hope" that one day - down the road - the eight non-participants will see the light and join in with the "consolidated" system and thereby make the Stark County consolidated operation a true "regionalized" system.

The stark reality that the Stark commissioners now face is whether or not to take the tax dollars paid by "all" Stark County taxpayers and apply it for the benefit of about 75% of Stark's local government units.

The SCPR believes that they will.

It appears that they will buy into Gonzalez's "it is now or never" rationale.

For those SCPR readers who want to see the entire video (53 minutes long) of yesterday's SCOG 9-1-1 Governance Board meeting, here goes.