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.

(VIDEO) WILL CANTON COUNCIL BOW TO DEMANDS OF GROUP 175 ON WAY TO FUND ADDITION OF 25 CANTON POLICE OFFICERS?

It is appearing more and more that Canton Mayor William J. Healy, II's plan to reorganize the city parks and recreation operation (with a November ballot 4 mill levy being a key ingredient) might well fall victim to his ongoing battle with Bruce Nordman of Group 175.

Some local political observers think the levy will fail with no formal opposition.

So it stands to reason that if there is organized opposition in the form of a competing levy for beefing up Canton's police force, then its failure appears to be a certainty.

Witness this video from yesterday's Stark County commissioners' regular meeting and the appearance of Nordman during the Public Speaks portion of the meeting.



As stated above, a key to Healy's plan is to get Cantonians to agree via the ballot on November 5th to add 4 mills to their property tax bills to take funding of Canton's parks and recreation out of the city's general fund and replace it with the approximately $1 million generated by a dedicated levy.

Nordman, who lives in Vassar Park, told Stark County commissioners yesterday that he plans on asking Canton City Council President Allen Schulman to place on council's agenda for Monday an informal resolution committing council - contingent on the parks and recreation issue passing - promising some $1.3 million in general fund monies needed in order to upgrade Canton's police force to 175 strong which means that some 25 officers will need to be added to the force.

The thinking is that if the Canton general fund is relieved of financing parks and recreation, then it will have the money to meet Group 175's demand.

If the resolution is not placed before council or if council votes it down, Nordman says Group 175 plans to submit an legislative initiative to Canton voters by the filing deadline (August 7th) in the form of a "police specific" levy to pay for the Group 175 demanded upgrade in numbers of Canton police officers.

While Canton's parks and recreation department will continue to operate if the levy fails, it will not operate at a robust and adequately capitalized rate that the proposed 4 mill levy would provide for.  So in that sense, the SCPR believes the facilities, programs and operations are at risk in the tug-o-war between Group 175 and Healy.

Healy was so concerned about Group 175 opposition that he sent Parks and Recreation Director Derek Gordon to meet with Nordman et al in order to finesse the activist group into supporting the levy.

But the effort failed.

Witness the following video which the SCPR captured on June 17th.  The Report captured about 45 minutes of a total 1 hour 10 minute post-council-meeting "argumentive brawl" between Nordman and Healy.



So why is Nordman taking this matter to the Stark County commissioners?

• REASON #1 - He says to keep the commissioners informed about his effort to make Stark County and its "crown jewel city" (which also happens to be the county seat) a safe community which is attractive for business and families to locate in.
• Nordman first appeared before commissioners on March 6, 2013 (LINK to SCPR blog on his appearance) and presented a challenge to them to find a way to expedite the increased use of the available beds (501) at the Stark County jail.
• Group 175 sees the jail's bed utilization factor as one of a number to help lessen Stark County's and Canton's crime problem.
• One of the historical reasons that Mayor Healy has given for not doing better in alleviating crime in Canton was the reduction of county jail bed utilization to some 300 beds during the county's recent financial crisis.
• Nordman cited the passage of a countywide "law enforcement specific" levy that Stark Countians passed in November, 2011 but still not fully implemented in March, 2013,
• The commissioners' initial reaction was lukewarm at best but perforce of Nordman's insistence, they rallied to his cause and brought interim Sheriff George T. Maier into a commissioners' meeting to explain how and on what timetable he would get the jail up to 501 inmates.
• In fact, Maier found a way to add 50 beds immediately in response to Group 175's persistence.
• Maier has said that one reason he has not brought the jail up to its full 501 bed capability is because he cannot find qualified corrections officers.
• Group 175 stepped up to the plate and put together a "job fair," designed to draw in military veterans, which was held in late April of this year and which provided a number of potential new hires.  Maier then decided to strike out on his own in setting up additional such events in a "thanks, but no thanks" to Nordman's offer to help organize future hiring events.

• REASON #2 - (A SCPR conjecture).  Nordman knows the negative personal history between Commissioner Janet Creighton (whom Healy defeated for reelection as mayor of Canton in November, 2007) and Commissioner Tom Bernabei (whom Healy fired as his service director/chief of staff on January 26, 2009).
• Creighton and Bernabei may be the most highly respected public officials in all of Stark County.
• Being the savvy guy he is, he knows that he will get a sympathetic ear from the commissioners in his overall drive to make Stark County and Canton a safer community.
• Undoubtedly, Healy bristles at Nordman's taking what appears to be a Canton situation to the county commissioners.
• And if the political "bad blood" helps Nordman and Group 175 push the mayor into hiring 25 new police officers, he has to be thinking "good for Canton and good for Stark County."

The question now becomes:  Will Nordman's game plan work?

The SCPR is skeptical.

It is likely to be a close call as to whether or not Canton City Council will agree to pass an informal resolution if Schulman engineers having it put before council.  And The Report believes even getting the matter before council is problematical.

Presumably we will know by the end of council's meeting of July 15th whether or not the demanded resolution is in the offing.

This matter of adding 25 police officers has now come down to being a matter of who has the stronger political will and strength (vis-a-vis council) between Healy and Nordman and his Group 175.

The Report believes that the mayor has the heft (Babcock, Cole, Dougherty, Griffin, Smith and West) with council to get to a 6 to 6 tie.  Such a scenario would leave it in tie-breaker Schulman's hands.

Which way will Schulman go, if it comes down to his exercising his tie-breaker role?

It is anybody's guess. 

If the resolution track does not work, then the only alternative is via an "initiative petition" as spelled out by Ohio Revised Code Section 731.28 (LINK).

The SCPR wonders whether or not there is enough time (to meet the August 7 deadline) for Group 175 to collect nearly 2,000 valid voter signatures, present the petitions to the Canton auditor (presumably on or about July 16) which after 10 days of the submission is to transmit them to the Stark County Board of Elections which has up to 10 days to certify the required number of valid signatures (10% of Cantonians voting in the Kasich/Strickland race of 2010).

The Report believes that failing the informal council resolution route, a successful effort to get a "for police only" levy on the ballot would be the death knell for the parks and recreation levy.

Canton officials have tried to talk Group 175 into waiting until the Spring, 2014 to push for a police levy.

But to no avail.

Healy and Nordman are very determined individuals and it appears that their differences may doom the parks and recreation levy.

Add to the Healy/Nordman (Group 175) rift:

• the fact that the Ohio Legislature has taken away the 12.5% rollback on property taxes, and 
• has disqualified future homestead exemptions for those with $30,000 and over in income from qualifying for the exemption.

It is hard to see how a parks and recreation levy passes even if for some reason the Group 175 folks cannot meet the petition filing deadline.

Remember, some folks think that the levy will not pass even with no formal opposition.

Monday's council meeting could be full of drama.

Of course, there is nothing unusual about that, no?

STATE REP. CHRISTINA HAGAN HELPED TO ALL BUT TORPEDO LAKE'S CHANCES OF PASSING ITS 7.95 MILL IN NOVEMBER?

At the last moment the Republican caucus of the Ohio House slipped in a provision to the state budget bill language which likely will make it next to impossible for the Lake Local School District to pass its 7.95 mill ballot initiative this coming November 5th.

Lake is the only Stark County school district with an issue on this fall's ballot.

As member of the caucus is Christina Hagan of Marlboro Township who represents the 50th Ohio House District which includes the Lake schools.

She voted for the bill.

This legislation did two things which had to give Lake school officials "that sinking feeling" in terms of whether or not its operations levy will pass.

First, it eliminated a 12.5% rollback in property taxes for all new tax levies (including schools).

Secondly, it took away a 10% homestead exemption for Ohio's senior citizens who have annual income of $30,000 or higher.

The Lake schools had an uphill fight to pass its levy without the barriers put in place by the Legislature in the tax action move that included no opportunity for those affected to make input.

Witness Lake's recent history on school revenue issues:

Going forward, it is not only Lake but all school districts and other local government entities (cities, villages and townships) who will have a tougher road to travel in getting voters to approve property tax levies.

The 12.5% rollback was a deal that the state of Ohio struck with Ohio's voters when the tax was implemented in 1972.

On April 25, 2013 Lake officials placed a levy on the ballot likely on a note of optimism.

On June 30th and Governor Kasich's action of approving the budget bill (with a few line item vetos) with the "adverse to local government property tax issues" provisions in place, any hope that may have beat in the hearts of Lake officials certainly evaporated into "that sinking feeling."

Will they be sending Representative Hagan a thank you for her help in bringing on that unease?