KIM PEREZ GEARING UP TO RUN FOR MAYOR OF CANTON?

 

 UPDATED AT 8:52 AM

Once upon a time Kim Perez was one of if not THE VERY BEST Democratic vote getters in Stark County.  He has been particularly effective in garnering city of Canton votes in his races for various offices over the years including his recent (2013) win as Canton treasurer.

His 2010 Stark County auditor race loss to Republican Alan Harold (under special circumstances, see explanation below) had to be devastating to him.

An astonishing thing about Perez is how many Stark County Republican politicos there are who cotton to him personality-wise.   The Report thinks that he successfully projects an "aw-shucks, who me?" persona that sucks even political sophisticates into believing that he is a politically uncalculating elected official who is more or less uninterested in hard-core Democratic politics.

In that regard he has an almost Gomer Pyle innocence quality to him.

But make no mistake about it, Perez is not a Gomer Pyle "Oh, Golly Gee" rube.

Perez, a cousin to Stark County Democratic chairman Randy Gonzalez, can and does work political sophistication one-step-up from his political peers.  Had he not got caught up in the web of Conley's Zeiglergate tag line because of his deep and lengthy political camaraderie with Zeigler, he would have beat back Alan Harold's challenge with ease.

He - the SCPR evaluates - buys into  Democratic Party political rhetoric and indeed becomes the Stark County spokesman for Democratic Party "talking points" from his "aw-shucks" demeanor at the "flip of a - political - switch."

His 2013 bounce-back might mean that he has pulled off a Bill Clintonesque (1992 presidential primary campaign) Comeback Kid caper and has earned the right to be viewed as Stark County's Comeback Kid.

And if the 2013 results are indicative of renewed political vigor and effectiveness, Mayor William J. Healy, II might be a Perez target in the Democratic primary for mayor that comes up in less than a year from the date of this blog.

Since being elected treasurer, it is the SCPR's take that Perez has ramped up his political activity (speaking out on policy issues [e.g. ending reduction in city income tax credit for Cantonians working out-of-town] and The Report believes the step up is indicative that Perez is not content being the head of Canton's smallest (in terms of number of employees) elected office.

When the SCPR brought the matter up in a May 13th discussion with Democratic mayor William J. Healy, II, he said "he didn't know what Perez was up to" but he did indicate that he found it significant that Perez was addressing policy matters and not focusing on the treasurer's primary job of collecting the city's income tax.

Most of the focus by the SCPR has been on whether or not long term councilman (with a break for 2012 through 2013) Bill Smuckler will be running.  And he may be.  But if he does, The Report thinks he may well find Perez in the field of candidates.

Smuckler has told The Report that he is only interested in a head-to-head with Healy.  So if Perez does get in, if Smuckler does not change his mind on participating in a multi-candidate field, then Smuckler will be out.

A Perez/Healy match up would likely be a heated match up and would cut right through Canton City Council in terms of which councilpersons align with the candidates.

The Report believes that Democrat Kevin Fisher (Ward 5) and Jimmy Babcock (Democrat, at-large), both of who worked for him when he was county auditor, would support a Perez run for mayor.   Thomas West, Chris Smith and David Dougherty would likely line up with Healy.  And the rest would be prone to be neutral in terms of taking a public position.

As kind of a side note, isn't it interesting that Healy tried to make Perez's brother Rick Stark County Council on Governments (SCOG) Crime Lab director though unqualified under long established job description criteria (calling for a scientist to be in charge) which qualification Healy tried to get excised in a proposed rewrite of the job description.

Actually, the appointment was made but immediatley backed off upon when "the s_ _ t hit the fan with the likes of Healy arch-political-enemy (Healy fired in early 2009 as Canton's service director) and now Stark County commissioner Tom Bernabei who is a member of the SCOG executive committee.

Rick was a former top deputy with former Stark County sheriff Tim Swanson, who at one time designated as being Swanson's choice to succeed him until the political fallout from the Marlboro police chief Ron Devies case took hold in the Stark County policing community) .

The question is whether or not in making the attempt Healy was anticipating a possible challenge from Kim Perez and in appointing brother Rick as Crime Lab boss trying to make it difficult for Kim to take him on?

Perez started out as a Canton city councilman in 1988 (Ward 1).  Next he was in place as Canton's auditor (1994 through 2004).  And from there he defeated Republican insider and Alliance resident Brant Luther to become Stark County auditor in 2004.

Republican Janet Creighton had defeated Democrat Bill Smuckler in the 2003 Canton mayoralty race.

The Republicans appointed Luther to succeed Creighton as auditor.

The Republicans had held the auditor's office (and, at the time its many, many political patronage jobs) for years and years and years.  Creighton was auditor from 1991 through 2003.  Alliance Republican William Bowman. held the office from 1975 through 1991.  And the SCPR believes that Republican control of the office preceded Bowman.

So it was quite a big deal when Perez wrestled the office from the GOP's appointee Luther.

Just a note on Patricia Fallot (now Louisville's Republican mayor).

She is one of few Stark County politicians who has politically outmaneuvered Perez.  

But to be fair to Perez,  she used the Canton Repository's "let's give Perez special scrutiny" (as compared to, let's say, Janet Creighton) on whether or not he brings political cronies into office with him (i.e. when he defeated Luther), the SCPR thinks, as a skillful use of political leverage to retain her job has one of Auditor Perez's top employees, though a Republican.

Clearly, in the opinion of The Report,  she belonged in a category of originally gotten her job as an auditor employee primarily because of Republican political connections.

But then came 2009 and what local attorney and civic activist Craig T. Conley labeled as being Zeiglergate.

A very good resource for those readers who are not familiar with Zeiglergate, go to this LINK to get up to date on how it unfolded.  The linked article gives Perez and his political allies plenty of space to expound on their view that he was a victim of Zeiglergate as some believe Zeigler himself was.

An interesting point of the referenced link is Perez's historical vote getting power within Canton, to wit:

Traditionally, Canton has been Perez’s support base. During the 2006 election, Perez, a former city councilman and city auditor, swept Canton with huge margins. But this year [referencing Perez's losing 2010 election effort], Harold won 250 out of 364 precincts in Stark County, including 13 Canton precincts.

However, looking at the numbers in the treasurer's race, it is noteworthy that Perez was unable to garner 50% plus of the vote.

Healy did get a majority (53%) in 2011 in the general election when he defeated Republican A.R. "Chip" Conde as he did in the Democratic primary against Smuckler (55%).

To the SCPR, a successful Perez challenge to Healy would not do much for Cantonians.

The Report sees Perez being "six of one" and Healy as being "half-a-dozen of another" in terms of being consummate politicians and having among their allies highly politicized supporters.  The SCPR sees both as primarily politicians at heart in need of a taxpayer supported job.

Even so, should he run for mayor and should he win, he definitely will have validated that he has risen from the politically dead and deserving of being thought of as being Stark County's Comeback Kid!

IS NORTH CANTON THE "KENMORE" OF STARK COUNTY?

It seems as if ever since Daryl Revoldt left North Canton city government (president of city council) that North Canton has been falling apart.

The Report thinks that matters are deteriorating so much in North Canton that one has to start entertaining the notion that the city may not long endure.

Perhaps suffering the same fate as the once "city of Kenmore" (in the southwest corner of Akron) did in 1928 when it was forced to lose its identity as a municipality in its own right.

North Canton citizen activist Chuck Osborne tells the SCPR that the Akron Beacon Journal in recent days did a piece on Kenmore's absorption into Akron which he shared with North Canton's council members on Monday evening last.

It appears to The Report that North Canton is pretty much landlocked and has very little room to grow and perhaps Stark Countians will be looking at a graphic like this one in coming years.  North Canton's failure to approve an economic development collaborative agreement with Canton, Jackson Township and Plain Township earlier this year could prove to have been a major blunder in terms of North Canton retaining viability.

In this sense, it is a bit ironic if not hypocritical that Osborne is sounding the alarm bells inasmuch as he was a prime figure in joining with an adamant mayor David Held to defeat North Canton's doing a MEDA (Mutual Economic Development Agreement) with its immediate geographical neighbors.

To their credit, Councilpersons Jon Snyder and Marcia Keisling pushed the hardest to provide North Canton with an avenue to the future.

Also, to his credit, Snyder proposed earlier this year a back door revenue raising measure (a parks levy) that would keep North Canton out of a fiscal crisis over the near term.

A consequence of the MEDA failure (when coupled with a revenue crunch) could be a timeline like this one down the road, no?

Not that Revoldt is any savior figure.

In fact,  one thing that Revoldt was not able to achieve in his time in North Canton agreement is a working partnership with surrounding communities.

But he had a knack for leadership that seems sorely missing these days in (excuse me if I mention trees) in Stark County's major northern most city - The Dogwood City.

On or about March 10, 2011 Revoldt was summoned to Columbus by newly elected Republican governor John Kasich to serve in the then Ohio Department of Economic Development.

Fellow North Canton 4th Warder Jon Snyder (a Republican) took over for Revoldt.

Next to Revoldt, Snyder has the most experience and depth of knowledge of anybody in North Canton, except maybe, his major nemesis (and Revoldt's); one, Chuck Osborne.

And Snyder seemed to be holding things together pretty well.

But after Revoldt's departure and series of unfortunate events have conspired against Snyder (some of his own making) to undermine his ability to lead council.

The SCPR heard yesterday that Revoldt has retired from his work in Columbus and is back in town.

So The Report contacted him and asked whether or not he would be interested in returning to North Canton government?

His answer?

Non-committal.

But he would not rule a return to North Canton government out.

One scenario has Jon Snyder resigning as Ward 4 councilman (and he tells the SCPR that he is considering same because he cannot afford to be without healthcare given his age) and Revoldt who lives in Ward 4 taking his place.

And, the SCPR thinks, another possibility connected to a Snyder resignation might attain out of the surprise Monday night announcement by Gail Kalpac that she is retiring.

One of what the Stark County Political Report thinks was the worst turn of events for the stability, citizen responsiveness and "for the citizens" productiveness was the election of Republican Tim Fox as Ward 3 councilman (November, 2011) and not long thereafter his selection by council as North Canton's law director (SCPR LINK, September 12, 2012).

The Report believes that a good number of problems that dog North Canton to this very day are traceable to Fox and his imperial ways which council has utterly failed to rein in.

Kalpac's retirement (to be effective on June 1, 2014), the SCPR thinks, was largely due - at this time - to the acerbic relationship between Fox and Kalpac.

The SCPR  has spoken to Kalpac and she says that she wants to devote time to caring for her aging parents to spend more time with her grandchildren.

Kalpac is a classy lady and would never point the finger at Fox and her relationship with him as others have done with the Stark County Political Report going back many months ago.

There have been a number of run-in between Fox, citizens and the media (including the SCPR) which The Report thinks is attributable to his "my way or the highway" bearing.

There have been multiple rumors that council was about the sack Fox, but for some reason he seems to have a hold on five councilpersons and Mayol David Held and thereby has been able to stave off those who seek his removal.ere

Back in February there was a big furor about Fox which the SCPR asked the council president Jon Snyer about.

a

Of course  Snyder is no longer council president..

But Monday's Kalpac resignation puts North Canton in quite a pickle if not in the box which is already populated with the MEDA failure and no revenue raising plan on the horizon.

Not only will Kalpac's departure make it next to impossible for council to function in an administrative support context, but Snyder tells the SCPR that there is nobody available to train a new employee.

So what to do?

Interestingly enough the answer may have come out of the mouth of one Chuck Osborne.

In a conversation with him today, The Report could scarcely believe the ears as he was suggesting that a clerk of council crisis may be averted by a Jon Snyder resignation to pave the way for his wife Kathy (now employed part-time with Canal Fulton government, and, formerly, a seasoned Stark County Board of Elections employee) to take on being clerk of council.

In yesterday's SCPR conversation with Snyder, The Report brought up the Osborne suggestion of what may be afoot.

Snyder said that in the past (before they married), his wife (then Kathy Lewis) considered going to work for North Canton.

However, with their marriage; her working in any capacity for the city of North Canton was a non-starter?

Snyder that he is going to bring up with his wife the question of whether or not she would be interested in replacing Kalpac should he resign from council.

And, if she were interested and North Canton Council was receptive, a Kathy Snyder employment would solve one huge problem for Jon Snyder.

Kathy Snyder as a North Canton employee would qualify to get "family plan" health care insurance coverage which of course would include who?

You've got it!

One Jon Snyder.

What a gas such a turn of events would be, no?

Jon Snyder was forced off North Canton's health care coverage by the politics of the situation notwithstanding a Tim Fox opinion that he could legally maintain his coverage because of defects in the Osborne generated referendum ordinance (passed overwhelming in November, 2012 by North Cantonians). 

The Osborne ordinance has been challenged in the Stark County Court of Common Pleas by Mayor Held with the blessing of council.

While the SCPR does see North Canton being boxed-in by a number of measures, do not look for an Akron/Kenmore outcome anytime soon.

But Osborne in right.

Council and the mayor need to fashion a plan now to avert what might happen in 2028 if nothing is done.

The SCPR thinks that if North Canton (formerly "New" Berlin) is to avoid being absorbed into Canton and thereby become a part of perhaps a name changed entity "New" Canton; North Canton is going to need a ramp up in quality of leadership.

A Snyder being replaced by a Revoldt and replacements for Councilpersons Werren and Griffith might be enough of a leadership boost for North Canton to avoid becoming Stark County's Kenmore.

And, North Canton could use a change in the mayor's chair occupant too.

Otherwise that box North Canton is in may compress and squeeze the city out of existence!

(VIDEOS) CATAZARO-PERRY PREVAILS AFTER A COUNCIL HICCUP OR TWO. A SCOTT GRABER DISRUPTION, SO SAYS LAW DIRECTOR PERRY STERGIOS!

UPDATE: 4:52 PM

The SCPR has been included in the loop in a series of emails exchanged between Councilman Milan Chovan (Republican, at-large), a Massillonian by the name of Daniel Brown and Scott Graber  (and others) which readers may find revealing in terms of the impact that the income tax credit reduction might have should the .2% increase in the city's income tax pass on  November 4th.

Re: Lewis 57-2014 section 3
FROM Milan Chovan TO You + 20 More

From:  Milan Chovan
To:  Daniel Brown 
CC
Scott Graber
Martin Olson
del rio keller home
16 More...

You are correct, Dan.  Everyone will pay the additional .2%.  So for people working out of town the tax credit would be 90%,  not 100%.   They would pay .2% of a 2.0% tax in Massillon.   They'd pay 10% of the city tax.

On Tuesday, May 20, 2014, Daniel Brown <dnbrow ...> wrote:

    This is the same stunt they tried to pull last time except last time it was .3%. "An equal distribution of the tax burden."

    Scott Graber <wulffiesrg ... > wrote:

    For the 57-2014 income tax credit reduction to "go away" Section 3 would have to read:  Section 3:

    "This seventy-five percent credit shall automatically expire the effective date the City income tax is increased above the current 1.8% and shall revert to a tax credit of 100% on the full amount of income tax levied by this section."

    On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Scott Graber <wulffiesrg ...> wrote:

        Ed Lewis and Nancy Halter apparently do not understand the effect of the legislation they passed.. They are saying in the video posted on your blog,  that if the City electors pass a .2 percent Income tax increase that the "tax credit reduction' "goes away" IT DOES NOT: The people who work out of town will have the credit limited to 1.8 % which means that they will have the .2% IMPOSED in addition to whatever tax they ALREADY PAY in the OTHER CITY.. and so if they are paying 2.2% in another City, the .2 percent increase will be ADDED and they will be paying 2.4% total.

...This seventy-five percent credit shall automatically expire the effective date the City . income tax is increased above the current 1.8% and shall revert to a tax credit of 100% on the first 1.8% only, of income levied by this section.

        We already know Nancy Halter is a confused ...,  but Ed Lewis is supposedly "in command" of his faculties.

        Therefore, he simply does not understand the effect of 57-2014

VIDEOS

=============

 COUNCIL HICCUPS

MANSON & HALTER

VOTE

"NO"

ON

$25 STREET LIGHTING FEE 

=============

 CITIZEN SCOTT GRABER

PRESENTS PETITION

==============

COUNCILMAN CHOVAN

SUPPORTS

GRABER PETITION

=============

 COUNCILMAN ED LEWIS

ON 

RUNNING FOR MAYOR

ON

"NO VOTES"

ON

GRABER PETITION
=============

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER

ON

"NO" VOTE

ON

GRABER PETITION

=============

COUNCILMAN MANSON

ON

"NO" VOTE

&

CALLS

 GRABER

"A BOZO"

It was an interesting meeting last night at Massillon City Council.

The most significant thing to happen was the two "no' votes by Councilwoman Nancy Halter (Republican - Ward 2) and Paul Manson (Democrat - at-large) on one aspect of a financial recovery plan agreed to by council several weeks ago and which was recently approved by the Massillon Financial Planning and Supervisory Commission (MFPSC).

Everything else in the plan has sailed through.

On May 5th, council unanimously passed an ordinance reducing to 75% of the current city income tax rate (1.8%) which out-of-town working Massillons are permitted to take on their Massillon Income Tax return as a credit against the 1.8% tax rate.

And last night council voted to put an increase in the city income tax on the November 4, 2014 ballot by a unanimous 8 to 0 vote (Sarita Cunningham-Hedderly was absent).

To add to the mini-drama of Halter and Manson voting "no" on the street lighting matter (see their videotaped explanations below), Massillon gladfly Scott Graber took to the floor at council with a petition and demanded (SCPR's perspective, Graber disagrees) that council members sign it while council was in session if they believed that Massillonians had a right to vote on whether or not the income tax credit reduction was to go into effect.

TAX CREDIT REDUCTION REFERENDUM ISSUE

Council president Tony Townsend took control of the situation and and asked Graber to sit down (after telling him that he was not going to sign the petition).

During the meeting Graber started soliciting signatures from citizens seated in the audience.

On seeing Graber doing so, Law Director Perry Stergios (through Councilwoman Nancy Halter) got the attention of President Townsend and requested that he be permitted to address council and the president on the matter.

Once Townsend learned of Graber's activity, he put a stop to it.

But Graber was not done.

In the second Public Speaks, Graber was front and center again on the petition.

All of Graber's actions are to be seen in the following video.

Of the members of council and the administration, only Councilman Milan Chovan agreed to sign Graber's petition.

Here Councilpersons Halter, Lewis and Manson explain why they would not sign the petition with Manson calling Graber a Bozo.  Also, Councilman Milan Chovan as to why he signed the petition.



 ON THE STREET LIGHTING FEE ISSUE



Councilwoman  Nancy Halter (Republican, Ward 2) on why she voted "no" on the issue.

Councilman Paul Manson (Democrat, at-large) on why he voted "no" on the issue.

Lewis reacts to the no votes, after a little tete-a-tete with the SCPR about speculation that he is preparing to run for mayor in November, 2015.

In Massillon these days, there is never a dull moment!

VOLUME 5 (SERIES) GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN STARK COUNTY?

The Stark County Political Report began a new series focusing on gender (equal pay for equal work) four Mondays ago with Volume 1 with an examination of "the commissioners office," "the Stark County treasury" and "the recorder's office."

Three weeks ago  in Volume 2 the perusal was of the county auditor's and prosecutor's office.

Two weeks ago (Volume 3 in this ongoing series) the look was at the clerk of courts office and the Stark County sheriff department.

And last week (Volume 4) the SCPR examined the Stark County Engineer's office and the Stark County coroner's office.

So far The Report has been less than impressed (in an overall sense) of how Stark County's elected officials are doing on the matter of gender equity.

And that experience squares up with the state and federal governments.

A primary document to be familiar with for anyone who cares whether or not American women are treated equally in the job market is in the Equal Pay Act of 1963.  However, the fight for fairness for more than half the American population continues inasmuch as the fact of the matter is that the 1963 act has not resulted in pay equity for women.

Still, in 2014, on average, women are paid 79 cents for every dollar that men are paid in the American workplace.

Of course, the law is one thing.

The underlying facts of the rampant discrimination and hardship that American women from the early 1600s on have had to endure and thereby necessitating the 1963 law is something that we all should familiarize ourselves with.

The SCPR just completed reading Gail Collins' America's Women and recommends that readers of this blog series take time to read.

For anyone who thinks that our great nation has overcome this blight, needs to think again.

In 2009, population demographics showed that women outnumbered men 158.6 million to 151.4 million.  And there is no reason that the tilt to a distinct majority women is not growing.

One danger in citing national statistics is that you, I and our neighbors might think that here in "good ole Stark County" there is very little if any gender employment discrimination going on.

Already, the SCPR believes that this blog's series is showing that the fact of the matter is that there are pockets of real and substantial differences in how men are paid depending on what department of Stark County government one is looking at.

Of course, the only place that information is readily available to assess is in government.  There is no right to obtain data from the "private sector" as to what the pay scales are between males/females as there is in the public sector. Accordingly, we have no choice but to rely on national statistical studies to get a feel for what is going on locally among privately owned entities.  And there is no reason to believe that the Stark County private sector varies significantly from the national scene.

As far as Stark County is concerned, today's picture (i.e. the Court of Common Pleas, Family Court and the Public Defender's departments of Stark County government) shows complete turnaround from Volumes 1, 2, 3 and 4 in terms of women getting equal treatment in terms of pay and position.

THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

Though the Stark County Court of Common Pleas has two female judges (Democrat Tayrn Heath and Republican Kristin Farmer), both are relatively newcomers to the bench and therefore do not deserve much if any of the credit for gender parity if not better (for women) in Stark's general jurisdiction court.

The SCPR thinks that retired judges - "all men" - Charles Brown (a Republican), V. Lee Sinclair (a Republican) and Richard Reinbold (a Democrat) deserve the lion's share of credit for ensuring that women have achieved if not surpassed gender equity in the Court of Common Pleas.

STARK COUNTY FAMILY COURT

The picture is much the same in Stark County's Family Court.

Here though the SCPR credits long time judges Michael Howard and Jim James (both Republicans) and, again - "two men" - for seeing to it that Stark County's women get a fair shot, in terms of pay and position, at taxpayer supported jobs.

THE PUBLIC DEFENDER

Stark County's Public Defender did not "upset the apple cart" on gender equity matter that is evident in Stark's justice system (i.e. the Court of Common Pleas and the Family Court as exemplified above).

Under the able leadership of Tami Johnson (with the office since 1985), both women and men get their fair due as shown in the following chart.

It is always a terrific day for the likes of the Stark County Political Report which takes great pains to take a critical look at the operations of various units of Stark County's government and its political subdivisions to come up with a wholly positive evaluation as is the case with today's blog.

A SCPR Hats Off! to the Stark County Court of Common Pleas, the Family Court and the Public Defender on their exemplary work in achieving gender equity plus in their employment, wage and promotion practices!

VIDEO OF JUDGE HAAS' DECISION - "MS. BUCHANAN TO GET HER CATS BACK!"

UPDATED:  5:51 PM

At the conclusion of today's court session on the question of whether or not Jodi Buchanan was going to get her cats back, it was a thumbs up for Ms. Buchanan.

She already had five (5) of them retrieved. 

Tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. she is to get the remaining four (4) back.  The transaction is to be videotaped.

The title of this blog comes from a comment by Buchanan attorney Michela Huth as Stark County Court of Common Pleas judge John Haas thanked the parties for working with him to resolve the dispute before  him on the city of Canton's contention that Buchanan had too many cats (10 in all; one, the SCPR is told, died) because Canton has a ordinance which allows for only five (5) cats to be kept in a city of Canton residence.

Huth, as Judge Haas shook hands with her could be heard to say, "Judge, you are a great mediator."

And indeed, if you are the City of Canton and the Canton Police Department (CPD) and maybe even the Stark County Humane Society (working at the request of and in conjunction with the CPD) and the various individuals involved in the taking of Buchanan's cats on May 5th, the wisdom that Judge Haas applied in bringing the parties to an agreement today likely spared them further litigation in the civil arena.

While Attorney Huth was gracious with and complementary of Judge Haas, she was not particularly happy the outcome of the negotiations which apparently took upwards of an hour (the hearing was set for 1:00 p.m., the articulation of the agreement by Judge Haas came shortly after 2:00 p.m.)

To be noted in the video which follows, the SCPR thinks, is the judge's emphasis on Ms. Buchanan's agreement to waive her rights to pursue any legal claims against any of the entities and personages connected with the May 5th and after actions.

Attorney Huth refused to comment on Judge Haas observation (as seen in the video) that he understood that Huth and her client were not happy with certain aspects of the agreement.

Knowing a thing or two about these sorts of things, the SCPR speculates that the displeasure had more to do with the waiver than any other part of the agreement.

The incident has to be embarrassing to the Canton Police Department and the Healy administration.

For the CPD it seems as if the department is up to enforcing ordinances on the number animals one can keep, but does not do such a great job on keeping the streets free of gunfire and other violent activity that makes Canton an unattractive place for anyone to live or visit.

An Internet site ranks Canton, for cities of its size, the 6th "most dangerous in terms of crime."  And the SCPR does not think that numbers of animals kept in residences in violation of city ordinances is part of the criteria used in coming up with the ranking.

For the mayor, the Buchanan matter, The Report thinks, places in doubt his ongoing testament to the effect that the CPD has its priorities straight.

JUDGE HAAS' DECISION 



MS. BUCHANAN'S AFFIDAVIT 
(FILED WITH THE COURT, AN EXTRACT)

(VIDEOS) IS STARK COUNTY GOV'T CREEPING TOWARDS "BIG BROTHERISM?"

In two words, the Stark County Political Report "thinks not."

However, there is definitely a county administrative effort to centralize operations and systematize the collection of information and to make the information accessible to all of Stark County law enforcement.

The motivation appears to be government efficiencies and enhancement of effectiveness of governmental functions (especially with regard to the security and safety [both from a law enforcement/emergency services standpoint] of our persons and neighborhoods) to be realized with centralized, systematized operations and information gathering and integration.

When The Report attends a local government meeting with camera in hand, there is always a "take away" in the sense of a gestalt impression of what transpired.

There was enough talk at Tuesday's (i.e. May 12th) meeting of Stark County Council of Government Executive Committee (SCOG-EC) about centralizing (e.g. centralized dispatch) and the systematizing of the gathering of information (e.g. the crime lab) that the thought of Big Brother does cross one's mind.

However, the SCPR hastens to add that the work now being done not seem at all to be of that order.  Of course, we are all interested that efficiencies and effectiveness pursuits not be taken to the point that our individual liberties are impinged upon.

At the national level of U.S. government there has been much debate of late as to whether or not government is getting too intrusive of our personal liberties in government's zeal to look after "we the people's" security and safety.

But no one should think that imbalances cannot happen at the local level.  Accordingly, we all have a duty to ourselves and to each other to be vigilant in ensuring that we do not empower government to go too far on centralization/information gathering aspects of governance.

The Report has put together a video collage of excerpts from Tuesday's meeting to give readers a sense of the discussion that may have prompted the thought of  Big Brotherism to come to mind.  (SCPR Note:  the entire SCOG-EC session video is presented at the end of this blog).

In the video, the aspects of the discussion that point to a greater centralization of operations and  information collection, the SCPR thinks, include:

• going from an initial concept of a SCOG approach (which includes all of Stark County's political subdivisions [35 entities]) to three (3) entities, likely in the form of a three member COG (Council of Governments),.to wit:
• the RED Center,
• the Canton Communications Center, and
• the Stark County Sheriff center
• Documentation of SCOG approach in this excerpt from North Canton City Council resolution date March 2, 2010:
• Resolution No. 19-10 A resolution declaring the City of North Canton's support in principle of a Countywide 9-1-1 Dispatch Center, and authorizing the Mayor of the City of North Canton to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding by- and between the City of North Canton and the Stark Council of Governments and declaring the same to be an emergency.
  
  WHEREAS, the Stark Council of Governments ("SCOG"), whose membership includes 37 Townships, Villages and Municipalities in Stark County, has created a subcommittee of its organization called  the Countywide 9-1-1 Dispatch Center Governance Board ("Board"); and
  
  WHEREAS, the Board is comprised of nineteen members from Stark County including representatives from the public, Police Chiefs Association, Fire Chiefs Association, large and small townships and villages,  Red Center ("LOGIC"), Alliance Dispatch, CenComm Dispatch, Canton Communication Center, Sheriff's Dispatch Center, Stark 9-1-1 Call Center, Criminal Justice Information ("CJIS"), City of Canton, Stark county Government, Stark Regional Transit Authority, the Stark County Sheriff and the Administrator of SCOG; and
  
  WHEREAS, the Governance Board has been appointed to oversee and recommend to SCOG the appropriate operational functions of the Countywide 9-1-1 Dispatch Center.
  
  NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH CANTON, COUNTY OF STARK, STATE OF OHIO:
  
  Section 1. That the City of North Canton, be, and hereby supports, in principle, a Countywide 9-1-1 Dispatch Center.

• establishment of a centralized records management (RMS) system which would enable (as the SCPR understands the concept) law enforcement entities and, perhaps, other government units to access individual records across political/governmental jurisdictional lines,
• other uses of collected information as spin off benefits to government as value added factors to the primary purposes of centralization and systematization operations and information gathering

The edited video.



And here is the video of the entire SCOG-EC session of May 13th.

(VIDEO) DESPITE HAVING MADE WHAT APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN A GOOD HIRE OF A NEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, MAYOR CATZARO-PERRY "OVERALL" IS HER OWN WORST ENEMY IN GETTING ALONG WITH COUNCIL?

 VIDEO

LARRY MARCUS

NEWLY APPOINTED

MASSILLON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIRECTOR

Recently, the Massillon Financial Planning and Recovery Commission (MFPRC) voted to approve a "compromise" financial recovery plan negotiated between Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry and Masillon City Council.

Although council gave far more than the mayor did on the details of coming to an agreement, it was refreshing to see this mayor give even an inch in the negotiating process.

Her problem from the get-go of her becoming mayor on January 1, 2012 has been that it was apparent that she viewed the new council then controlled by the Republicans as being her enemy.  From the Republican councilpersons' standpoint, the SCPR has been repeatedly told by various members of that political caucus that they were hopeful that the new mayor was going to be more accessible to and more communicative with council than predecessor mayor Frank Cicchinelli had been.  But that did not happen.  If anything, the Mayor Catazaro-Perry has been more stand-offish that Cicchinelli ever was.

With the Democrats regaining control of council with the elections of November, 2013, one might think that a Democratic mayor could get along with a Democrat dominated council, no?

Wrong!

Not this mayor.

In essence, this mayor has been her "own worst enemy" in terms of getting Massillon's finances and economic development in order and improving.

So - in the context of a continual stormy mayor/council relationship - what is a mystery to the Stark County Political Report is why anybody would want to be a leader in the Catazaro-Perry administration.

Yet she has hired some "well-thought-of" department heads notwithstanding that they would have to join her - at least, in a politically correct/indirect sort of way - in doing battle with council.

One such person is Al Hennon (a Republican) as safety-service director.  Hennon, a former highly respected Massillon City Schools superintendent, unfortunately, the SCPR thinks, was put in an awkward position by the controversy surrounding his appointment.

And on Tuesday she hired Larry Marcus (a registered non-partisan, but who voted Republican in 2006 and Democratic in 2008).  Marcus has built a solid if not superlative reputation as a Stark County-based banker and economic development facilitator with the Stark Development Board.

His professional reputation brought him instant recognition and deference at the hand of Stark County's commissioners at their regular weekly meeting yesterday that he attended only one day after his hire.

Here is video of his exchange with commissioners and his response to SCPR questions after the conclusion of the commissioners' meeting.



Marcus does not officially start until Monday.

The Report talked with a councilperson last night who, though hopeful that Macus will perform as advertised, was disappointed that council members learned of his appointment through the newspaper.

Again, such is a real problem with mayor.  If she is going to quit being her "own worst enemy" in terms of having a better relationship with council, this sort of thing needs to stop.

Like with Hennon's appointment, she needed to do better by Marcus in terms of letting council know of her decision of his hire in direct communication and not through the media.

If he doesn't get caught up in and consumed by the negative Massillon government environment that The Report thinks his new boss is largely responsible for, Marcus has all the credentials and experience one needs to be successful.

The recent flirtation that Massillon had with some folks who were trying to interest Massillon in helping out in getting a waterpark aqua marine business up and running seems to reveal an underlying panic on the part of Mayor Kathy to get something, anything going on the economic development front.

Panic?

Well, that's how The Report interpreted Canton mayor William J. Healy's remarks in a conversation with Canton's CEO on Tuesday afternoon.

The SCPR has been told by a number of sources that Healy has been one of Catazaro-Perry's mentors as she has endeavored to get a handle on being a government chief executive officer herself.

Healy says that he and North Canton mayor David Held have been mentoring the Massillon mayor, on and off, but that the relationship has tailed off recently.

In the conversation, Healy revealed that he thought that Catazaro-Perry's move to have the State of Ohio Auditor declare Massillon as being in fiscal emergency to be a brilliant move but too late in terms of her waiting until May, 2013 (nearly one and one-half years after her taking office) to push the matter with Ohio officials.

Too late?

Yes, too late if Catazaro-Perry was going to be able to successfully implant in Massillon voters' minds that the dire fiscal condition of was all the work of her predecessor and arch political enemy Frank Cicchinelli.

While he acknowledged that he was part of advising Mayor Catazaro-Perry to press for emergency stress designation and all that such entailed (i.e. the creation of the Massillon Financial Planning and Supervision Commission), he gave Held credit as being the primary proponent of the idea.

With her original economic development person Ted Herncane moving on to the Chamber of Commerce,  the mayor has been presented with an opportunity to get a fresh start in getting Massillon out of economic development stagnation.

Healy mused to The Report that he was asking himself whether or not he should telephone Catazaro-Perry as soon as news broke of her enchantment with the idea that the warterpark/aqua marine project in Massillon to tell her that he had had experience with the promoters and was not impressed with their plan for getting up and running in Canton.

But he didn't and, perhaps conequently, Massillon seemed to have been "played the fool," in treating, at least initially. the proposal as being a viable one.

With this background to work with,  Marcus has his hands full in bailing the Catazaro-Perry administration out in the financial/economic development decline of Massillon during her stewardship of Massillon government.

Marcus may well have the skills to pull off the seemingly impossible in a time frame that will help the mayor

If he is successful in the next 11 to 17 months (Catazaro-Perry faces a voter referendum on, perhaps, in the Democratic primary in May, 2015, and, for sure in the November general election), he will have performed a herculean act in redeeming the mayor from a self-created condition of being her "own worst enemy."

Now, the SCPR hears, her political enemies are already working to undermine the plan that she and council recently settled on.

The Report is told that a meeting was called to be held last night on the question of putting on the ballot a measure to undo council's voted reduction in the city income tax rate applied to those Massillonians working outside the city.

On May 5th, council unanimously passed an ordinance reducing to 75% of the current city income tax rate (1.8%) which out-of-town working Massillons are permitted to take on their Massillon Income Tax return as a credit against the 1.8% tax rate.

One has to suspect that any such talk, if it has substance, involves Stark County prosecutor and former Massillon law director John Ferrero.

Ferrero, through his long time confidant and chief legal counsel at the prosecutor's office; namely, John Kurtzman has appeared at Massillon council meetings arguing against Catazaro-Perry's insistence that any financial recovery plan include an income tax credit reduction.

So in addition to the mayor having been her "own worst enemy," she appears to be in for a new round of battling with "outside herself" enemies (on the tax reduction) and perhaps others on the issue on whether or not the city's base rate shall increase in November.

The odds of her and her administration surviving the next election diminish by the day.

Had she not self-inflicted her troubles, her and the city's future would be much brighter.