STARK "DEMS" DUKING IT OUT OVER SUCCESSOR TO ALLEN SCHULMAN?

UPDATED: 09:15 AM TO INCLUDE "CANTON" CENTRAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS

UPDATE:  11:15 AM (SPEAKING WITH BILLY SHERER, JR)

On December 17, 2018 Stark County's "Canton" portion of the Stark County Democratic Central Party (29 of them; see list below) will gather at the party's Oakwood Square (Plain Township) to pick a successor to Canton City Council president Allen Schulman who died in November.

The Stark County Political Report (SCPR, The Report) has learned that there could be an "old fashion, 'knock the down, and drag them out'" fight among Canton City precinct committee persons come the "on the 17th political showdown" between longterm Canton law director Joseph Martuccio and local Ironworkers union president and former Democratic Board of Elections member Billy Sherer, Jr.

Candidate Sherer has let it be known that he (presumably representing Stark County's organized labor movement) is no longer content to be in the background as "political worker bees" for the party which recently picked Sam Ferruccio, Jr. to be its chairman.

Ferruccio is a Democratic member of the Stark County Board of Elections (BOE) who replaced Billy Sherer, Sr in February, 2014 alongside:

• the immediate former Dems' chairman Phil Giavasis,
• who is the other Democratic BOE member.
• also who is the brother of Stark County Court of Common Pleas clerk of courts Louis Giavasis 
• who has been making noises about challenging "independent" (but a longtime former Democrat) mayor of Canton Thomas Bernabei if Bernabei chooses to stand for re-election in 2019

As the SCPR sees it, Sherer, Sr. was ousted from his 13 year, more or less, stint as the "labor" representative at the initiative of immediate previous chairman of the Dems Johnnie A. Maier, Jr (immediate previous to Randy Gonzalez who in collaboration with Maier, Jr engineered in February, 2014 the return of organized labor to the Dems side of the BOE in the person of Billy Sherer, Jr.

In the view of The Report, only the politically battle-hardened Johnnie A. Maier, Jr (learning political infighting for former long term, iron fisted Speaker of the Ohio House Vern Riffe could both been an author of setting Sherer, Sr. aside but when it became politically expedient to change direction did not miss a  heartbeat in moving the Executive Committee to appointing Sherer, Jr. onto the BOE.

Having written the SCPR for nearly 11 years, this blogger has the ability to dig deep into the archives of the upwards of 4,000, more or less, blogs of The Report and retrieve blog links and videos as a basis upon which to write blogs today.

To refresh Stark Countians on the unrivaled ability of organized Democrat to fight among themselves, readers owe to themselves to view this video (5 min, 11 sec) on the restoration of the solidly Democratic Sherer family to the BOE position.

In the background of this appointment was the still festing fight within the Stark County Democratic Party over a sheriff's position appointment on the untimely death of Sheriff-elect (2012) Mike McDonald regarding the appointment processes of George T. Maier (Johnnie's younger brother) over the politically unsophisticated Lou Darrow wherein Executive Committee member Larry Slagle challenges Chairman Gonzalez on whether or not the party picked sides in the Darrow/Maier face off.

As an aside, this blogger thinks the general public would be a lot more

accepting of the integrity of political parties if more party activists extended themselves beyond personal and individual political interest in which many party leaders use the party apparatus for personal enhancement rather than for the public good.

First, the video of the appointment of Sherer, Jr as a BOE member (5 min, 11 sec)



Second, a video which features the Slagle challenge. (8 min, 37 sec)



And, third, the SCPR's interview of the "we have overcome" them (the likes of Maier, Jr, et al) as a victory lap in having used organized labor's heft within Democratic politics to right what the Sherer's undoubtedly see as having been a political wrong perpetuated by Maier, Jr.  (3 min, 57 sec)



All the foregoing helps a reader of this blog to understand the possible showdown between Martuccio and Sherer.

An additional factor to be absorbed by readers of this blog is the history of Joe Martuccio becoming law director of Canton in succession to Tom Bernabei in 2000.  Martuccio was assistant law director for 12 years prior to getting the top job on Bernabei's 2000 retirement.

Former Stark County Democratic Party chairman fought Roy Gutierrez with Martuccio over who was going to become law director.

Many say that it was the position and action of Bernabei that was decisive in the selection to Martuccio.

Martuccio was likely seen by Bernabei and his allies on the  Stark County Central Committee as being "a lawyer's lawyer" whereas Gutierrez was likely seen as more a politico than a one who folks would want as the city's chief legal officer.

Undoubtedly, Martuccio was into the fray and worked hand-in-glove with Bernabei and central committee friends to turn things to Martuccio.

Martuccio recently retired as law director after serving 18 years thereby becoming Canton's longest serving law director.

This blogger talked extensively with Martuccio yesterday.

And, the take away is that Martuccio does not have "the fire and the belly" to get into a Darrow/Maier-esque fight over who is to replace Schulman.

This blogger knows Martuccio and the Sherers well (Senior better than Junior; Senior was a key advisor when this blogger ran for the 50th Ohio House District in 2004.

There is no doubt that Matuccio by personality and temperament would make an excellent successor to Schulman who, the SCPR thinks, has been the very best in terms of being citizen participation in government friendly as council president.

Billy Sherer, Jr. may also make a worthy successor to Schulman.

The SCPR simply does not know enough about Sherer, Jr. to evaluate whether or not he has the requisite diplomatic skills to prove to be a "worthy" successor to Schulman.

This blogger did contact Billy Sherer via telephone this morning.

Here is a summary of what Sherer had to say:

• He has the highest regard for Joe Martuccio, a sentiment expressed to The Report of Sherer by Martuccio,
• He decided to run in order to bring a fresh face into the formal structure of Canton City Council government,
• He has always been a background sort of person as a union guy who has supported Democratic Party candidates but that he thinks the time is ripe for him to front and center and actively participating in Canton government from the perch of being president of Council and thereby invigorate all the departments of Canton government as he gains insight and perspective on the functioning of the departments,
• He wants more of Canton's councilpersons to ramp up their involvement in Canton government and thereby help in the reconstruction of Canton government,
• He wants to push economic development issues as being a major impetus with Canton government with an emphasis on the Hall of Fame Village Project which he sees as ultimately getting built on a delayed timetable from that initially conveyed, and
• He wants to be a force for bringing divergent local Democratic power centers into communication so that the party can be more effective in serving the Canton community while minimizing preoccupation by some party leaders with self-centered interests.

Whether or not there is going to be a fight on the 17th remains an open question.

Martuccio says he will make a final decision by Tuesday December 11th.

The SCPR has been told by various sources that key Stark County Democratic persons had promised Martuccio that the presidency of council was his "for the taking" when it became apparent that Schulman's health was failing.

Sherer, Jr. did contact Martuccio person-to-person to tell Martuccio that he, Sherer, Jr., had been in the background of Democratic politics too long and hence the decision to contest, if necessary, whom would become Schulman successor.

Knowing Joe Martuccio as this blogger does, it is doubtful that Martuccio will make a fight of it with Sherer, Jr.

It could be, though, that there are central committee members who will take it on themselves to be dug-in proxies for Martuccio and carry the day for him.

But do not count on such a development.

Mayor Bernabei

• remember, he is a political "independent" who deprived Democrat William J. Healy, II of a third term as mayor,

when asked whether or not he would get involved in a fight if it materializes

laughed a hardy laugh!

Enough, said, no?

By the way, Bernabei has told the SCPR that he is getting very close to making a decision on whether or not he will run for a second term.

He says he is still on track to make a decision this month.

In the meantime he will sit back and observe from a distance, he says, the unfoldings of the Martuccio/Sherer match up.

"NO PIE IN THE SKY" FOR MASSILLON GOVERNMENT!

Massillon mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry along, perhaps, with a number of Massillon's councilpersons were into full blown fantasizing that Affinity Medical Center (AMC) could be raised from the "dead" in reaching a settlement of a lawsuit in January, 2018 with AMC's former owner that Massillon government be given the AMC building complex.

The Stark County Political Report is told by an eyewitness that the mayor was being "high-fived" after she and her administration

• (likely, by far, the most capable person in Massillon government; that is to say, Safety Director Joel Smith) 

announced jointly with Aultman Foundation officials earlier this week that Aultman would pay Massillon $2.06 million for a "no compete" 5 year arrangement on Aultman's plan to expand its Wales Road, Massillon facility to include emergency room services as well as a "heart" and "stroke" treatment center by the end of 2019.

"High-fived?" (the SCPR's expression, not the eyewitness)

For what?

Ending up with a continuing expense albatross (while the AMC still stands) in hopes Massillon government can entice the Massillon City Schools to purchase the main AMC grounds so that new schools can be placed on the site?

If this "being talked about in the background" arrangement (according to a SCPR source) becomes reality, it appears likely that Massillon schools likely will be gifted with the grounds in the understanding that the on site facility will be razed at Massillon schools' expense.

The Report is told that the AMC complex (which its former owner closed on February 12, 2018) was in a high degree of disrepair and that the thought that any prudent business operation would actually pay money for a capital purchase was in "looney-tune land."

It appears to the SCPR that Massillon government did not exercise "due diligence" before agreeing to take ownership of AMC.

Aultman Foundation president  Ed Roth provided credence to the notion that it was and remains foolhardy to think any investor would pay capital purchase money for the opportunity to spend some $6 million to $8 million (just for beginners) to get AMC in "usable" shape.

Returning to the Aultman Foundation offer to pay Massillon $2.06 million.

With all due respect to Foundation president Roth, there is no way that Aultman has to worry about Massillon finding a competing emergency/heart/stroke treatment center to reoccupy the former AMC building complex.

Let's call the $2.06 million what it really is.  An outright gift to Massillon government!

Obviously, Aultman is a class operation.

Massillon civic activist Scott Graber has provided this estimate of the financials on the proposed Aultman/Massillon deal:

At a glance on the basis of discussions with a Massillon individual (not Graber) who has entree to the inner circles of Massillon government, Graber's numbers appear to be in range of what the actual numbers eventually turn out to be.

From the get-go, the SCPR has written that Catazaro-Perry and others in Massillon government who believed that "the gift" of AMC to Massillon was going to result in millions of dollars of "in effect" 'free' money had taken up residence in Fantasyland.

The Report is told that the likely vote on the part of Council on whether or not to approve will likely be 7 for, 2 against (likely Manson and Cunningham-Hedderly).

It appears in what the SCPR is told is Councilman Manson's insistence that the approval process include three readings (in successive "regular" or "special" council meetings that Manson is hoping to convert three of the seven currently for the proposal so that Massillon continues with the AMC facility liabilities with no "profitable" end in sight.

Is it possible that Massillon Council will "look a gift horse in the mouth?"

Of course!

Governments do ridiculous things all the time.

Why should Massillon be any different?

Certainly, the Aultman/Massillon deal is mostly a "wash" for Massillon.

While there is nothing to "high-five" about inasmuch as accepting the AMC facilities was a mistake in judgment on the part of the mayor and her administration in the first place apparently in hopes that there was "pie in the sky" for Massillon revenues; now is the time for Council to "cut Massillon's losses and move on.

The mayor should send "a bouquet of flowers" to Independent reporter Steven Grazier for his investigative work on Paramount Matrix which vetting (that Massillon government should have done and utterly failed to do) brought the Massillon/Paramount Matrix proposal to "a crashing halt."

Undoubtedly, Mayor Kathy Catazaro-Perry has her strengths, but the unfolding of the AMC saga clearly indicates assessing, analysing in understanding how the profit making or efficient non profit business world operates is not one of them.

But for Steven Grazier's journalistic work, it is likely that Massillon would have made a decision that would have come back to haunt Massillon government for years and years to come.

Nonetheless, the SCPR's overall take on the AMC saga is that the mayor, her administration officials and Council are now "eating crow" on their initial expectation that getting title to AMC was going to end up perhaps being worth millions of dollars in Massillon city coffers.

VOLUME II (IN A SERIES) IS GEORGE T. MAIER UP TO MANAGING THE SHERIFF'S IN AN APPROPRIATE MANNER?

UPDATED:  2:30 PM RE:  MISSING AUDIO ON VIDEO PROVIDED TO

UPDATE:  (WEDNESDAY/8:25 AM) SCPR HAS ASKED FOR AT COPY OF VIDEO WITH PATCHED IN AUDIO

SEE SHERIFF'S OFFICE PRODUCED VIDEO (SOUND MISSING) 

OF

TYLER KING'S PRE-BOOKING INTERACTION WITH SHERIFF OFFICE EMPLOYEES

On November 25, 2018 The Stark County Political Report started what is to be a multi-volume series on Stark County Sheriff George T. Maier focusing on how he as performed as sheriff since he first ascended to the office by way of Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee appointment  (on and off as sheriff as a consequence of court decisions) and then elected in his own right of Republican Larry Dordea (2014) and then again (uncontested) in 2016.

In the previous blog in this series, this blogger cited that practically everybody who is anybody in Stark County leadership circles have nothing to say but good things about his sheriffing of Stark County.

Interested readers should get on Sheriff Maier's Linked-in page to get a take on what Maier's friends and professional connections are saying about him.

However he does have his detractors and those seem to be folks (sheriff office employees) who work with him day-in, day-out who are not part of his inner circle.

Because of an incident in which he was second in command in the Ohio Department of Highway Safety, this blogger thought it prudent in the public interest to delve into Maier's leadership style.

Quite a number of blogs (an example) on Maier by the SCPR acknowledge that he appears to have all the credentials to be an outstanding policeman.  However, there are many people in many professions are high quality on the technical aspects of their jobs BUT simply have temperament issues and lack other intangible factors which indicate that they would not make effective leaders.

The SCPR suspects that George T. Maier is such a person and has written about, the apparent to The Report, his lack of temperament and other non-technical factors which would make (pre-appointment/pre-election) not a good choice to be Stark County sheriff.

In Volume I, this statement:

Later on in this series The Report will focus on the more recent allegations by those in a position to see the internal operations of the Stark County sheriff office operations as to whether Maier is deficient as a manager or that the allegations are merely "sour grapes" on the part of those who are not part of the inner circle of Maier confidants.

This blogger has had extensive communication with persons in a position to know in detail the complaints that the sheriff is having to contend with:

• over his allegedly having a favorites list of Stark County Sheriff Office employees who are said to get promotions, duties and other perks as a consequence of being perceived by Sheriff Maier as being personally loyal to him,
• over allegations that while he clearly is a competent if not proficient "patrol duties" type of policing work, he has no clue on how to run a jail and staffs the jails as a sort of "off to Siberia" punitive measure for those he perceives to be personally disloyal and/or "too mouthy" in criticizing his official programs, polices and practices, and
• over allegations that he puts pressure on employees to staff the political side of his getting elected and maintained as the elected sheriff of Stark County.

Here is a comment made by a reader of the SCPR regarding an alleged incident involving Sheriff Maier:

A compliment to you about George Maier. 

Everything you wrote about him before becoming Sheriff was true and the Officers that work there are paying a heavy price for him being Sheriff. 

There is litigation pending against the Sheriff by ...  for putting hands on a Deputy in a fit of rage.

Actually there was no litigation and the SCPR understands that none is planned.  This blogger further understands that there was video of the incident but no audio.

Hmm?

No audio that was shared with The Stark County Political Report by the Sheriff's office in this blog's Public Records Request.  This blogger understands that an audio was patched together and provided to the parties attorneys in the King v. Maier et al lawsuit.

The Report has resubmitted a Public Records Request for a copy of the video with the audio patched in.

A highly credible source confirmed to The Report that a Deputy Flowers (employed as a deputy since December, 2003) recently had an face-to-face with Sheriff Maier.

Here is an a source's (not Flowers) account of the chronology of events:

• Flowers is getting chewed out by two or three deputies and the Sheriff,
• Maier is said to get in his face, and
• screaming at Flowers in the vilest of language,

The SCPR has learned, it was a union/management process which the SCPR is told did not result in any consequence to Maier.

To focus on the point implied above, the weakness in the ability of Flowers proving the allegation was that though there purportedly a video of the encounter (now said to be lost), there was no sound which, of course, if the allegations were to be proven undoubtedly would require sound to complement the video.

While the SCPR is always keenly interested in talking with those who are in a position to know, this blogger  always is out gathering evidence that either disaffirm or tend to confirm any allegations written in SCPR blogs re:  public officials/figures who play into the life of Stark County political subdivision (county, cities, villages, townships, boards of education, and miscellaneous other entities)  governance.

Today, the blog focuses on Maier's management of the Stark County jail.

On March 26, 2018, a lawsuit was filed by one Tyler Dwayne King against:

• Sheriff Maier, 
• county commissioners Janet Weir Creighton (the president), Richard Regula (the vice president) and member Bill Smith.
• Sgt. Chane Cline, Deputy Kristopher Ousley and a "John Doe" and "Sarah Doe," the later two of which is designed to include any "as of the date of the filing of the lawsuit" other persons who may have legal accountability for what Tyler King alleges to have happened to him while in the Sheriff's official custody

Here is a copy of that lawsuit:

Each and every reader ought to read (the complaint is "only" nine pages long) the entirety of the complaint.

Moreover, here is what a person definitely in a position to know says about the incident:

• King is thought by a familiar with him source to be about 5'8" and 245 pounds,
• He got into a "jawing" session with two deputies in the sheriff office "interview room,"
• A consequence was that he got slammed to the floor,
• Suffering (it is alleged):
• a broken neck,
• sustains a fractured skull,
• a traumatic brain injury, 
• a broken eardrum, and, consequently said to be:
• permanently disabled

Initially, according to the SCPR's source, King was transported to an area hospital at which the family purportedly was told that he might not survive the altercation, which we know, he did, but has resulted in the lawsuit filed and the complaint inserted into this blog asking for $10 million in damages.

However, for those who do not, here is a summary of the essence of the complaint from the "introduction" contained in the complaint itself:

And here is a video (provided by the sheriff's office in response to a SCPR "Public Records Request") which appears to be the cornerstone of Tyler King's lawsuit against Stark County, the sheriff and various sheriff office employees.



Let it be said however that the core allegations in the complaint have been denied by defendants and the case seems to be headed to trial.

Here is a pdf file copy of the answer:



From the complaint,  it appears to the SCPR that Maier's alleged culpability is likely centered on his (as the responsible elected official) is alleged to "fail[ed] to adequately trained" the named jail officials which, it is alleged, resulted in injuries to Tyler King.

Presumably, the part of the pre-booking process of King that generated the lawsuit
was what appears to be a takedown of King by two deputies that, it is alleged, caused the injuries listed above.

The portion of the video which focus on the takedown:



According to Stark County auditor payroll records Chane Cline has been employed with the sheriff's officer since April 25, 2001 and Kristopher Ousley since August 17, 2000.

Currently, ordered on November 28, 2018, the case is set for a mediation session on January 10, 2019.



In the interest of fairness, the SCPR has compiled a representative list of allegations/complaints re:  Sheriff Maier's management style, this blogger has sent the list via e-mail to the sheriff.

To date, The Report has not received a response.

However, as regular readers of the SCPR know, The Report publishes responses by amending the original blog.

Hopefully, Sheriff Maier will account to Stark Countians on the issue of whether or not any of the allegations are accurate, and, to the degree they are justify his actions.

PART 2: ONCE AGAIN NORTH CANTON SHOWS ITS ANTAGONISM TOWARDS "EVERYDAY" CITIZENS!

PERHAPS NORTH CANTON'S FOREMOST CITIZEN ACTIVIST-MIRIAM BAUGHMAN- COMMENTS ON LAW DIRECTOR'S "NOT UNDER OATH" ADMONITION

LINK to Part 1 of this series.

In this continuing series on North Canton City Council's demonstrated antagonism, seemingly since Tim Fox became the Council appointed law director in September, 2012, towards its any critically minded day-in, day-out citizen especially in the context of what this blogger calls "Public Speaks" but which Council terms as being "Recognition of Visitors."

Of course, any who come to Council to "praise Caesar" are welcome with wide open arms.

The point being even in its agenda listing terminology, Council distances itself from North Canton taxpayers and voters.

North Canton Council is a model of how local government should not conduct itself vis-a-vis its constituencies.

For a local government body that is at the pinnacle of how government interacts with its citizenry and, by the way, with the media is the Board of Stark County Commissioners.

The only North Canton Council member who comes anywhere what a councilperson ought to be is Daryl Revoldt.

However, it appears to the SCPR that Revoldt has made several switches in terms of embracing citizen accessibility over his long term service in North Canton government as the city's mayor, council member and council president interrupted here and there with breaks in service.

The zenith of his "pro-citizen" (even those who critique council) was during a recent break in which he worked at the Ohio Department of Economic Development and at Stark State College.

Here and there during that space he stuck his nose into the functioning or or lack thereof into the council side of North Canton government.

It has been amazing to see.  A former insider to North Canton government who the SCPR believes has been the most "over all the place" and engaged with fellow council members and the administration and from the perspective of a private citizen being rudely treated by his former fellows in the "Public Speaks" forum seemingly reverting to a "make no waves" councilman.

This blogger fully understands the need of elected officials to be collegial, somewhat diplomatic in differing with fellow officials in order to not be marginalized by the "group think mentality" that appears to have the remaining council members in its grip.

And it may be that the North Canton voting public may be waking up to stagnant, "status-quo," and its seeming nobody on the "outside of North Canton government" has anything to offer and therefore be as chilling to public input as feasible and still function as a semblance of citizen interactive government.

This is where Law Director Tim Fox comes into the picture.

The SCPR believes that in late 2011 and through September, 2012 when he served as Ward 3 councilman was a segue for him ultimately becoming council appointed law director as part of "let's keep it the family" mentality of the councilpersons at the time of which Daniel "Jeff" Peters appears to The Report as being the primary architect of.

This blogger has come to believe that Fox was appointed by council with an understanding that his "off-the-record" mandate was to rein-in a particular citizen activist and beyond that any North Cantonians who questioned the actions, policies and practices of North Canton Council.

Council members have wanted to have it both ways.

On one hand they have wanted to appear citizen friendly even those citizen who might not bringing "good tidings" to the ears of Council during Public Speaks.

On the other, they appear to provide Law Director Fox with cover  (in the context of recalling of an apparent primary reason he was hired in the first place) to lash out at those citizens doing the critiquing.

In this vein, it was gratifying to hear from one of North Cantons high quality citizens who takes seriously a citizen's responsibility to interact with government, to wit:

From:  Miriam Baughman  ...

To:Martin Olson
...

Nov 28 at 9:42 PM

Hi Martin,

...
My Comment:

Regarding today's blog:        You should never have had to write this blog about the problems that occur during North Canton City Council meeting's public speaks between residents and the Law Director.     The City Council President should not have to run interference between the Law Director and residents during public speaks.

The function  of the Law Director during City Council meetings is not to respond to residents during public speaks.    The functions of the Law Director during Council meetings is to give legal advice to Council members upon request.

City Council meetings should be conducted according to Roberts Rules.       All City Officials who partake in City Council meetings should stay in their own lanes. 

Miriam Baughman

In Part 1 of this series the SCPR wrote, in part:

As long as North Canton Council allows Law Director Tim Fox and his seeming  chronic anti-public participation in government ways persist, there will continue to be a North Canton Council that appears to be out-of-touch with its public ...  .

On reflection "allows" in not what the SCPR believes with respect to council's failure to keep the law director in his lane.  Rather The Report thinks that Council in majority sentiment demands that Fox act the enforcer in Council's apparent desire to chill dissent.

The SCPR does not think the the "restructuring" of the North Canton Council order of business trumpeted by Revoldt as some sort of enhancement of citizen participation in North Canton governments abates in any fashion what appears to be an overall Council agenda of only wanting to hearing the praises of citizens and to tamp down on any critiquing.

Of course, everybody knows that if one speaks out at a local government meeting and has not been put under oath beforehand, anything the citizen has to say should be taken with "grain of salt."

The Council governors themselves have taken an oath of office to support the U.S. and Ohio Constitutions which as a primary goal sanctifies and encourages citizen participation of a government "of the people, for the people and by the people."

In chilling incisive citizen participation, North Canton Council brings into question their upholding their respective oaths of office.

With Law Director Fox being unleashed by Council on November 12th, it, notwithstanding the addition of  Daryl Revoldt to its ranks,  is sending a signal that only the fawning need participate in the "Public Speaks" part of North Canton City Council meetings.

In recognizing the achievements of Council, why would anybody want to put them under oath beforehand.

Isn't their being "truly factual" self-evident?

PART 1: ONCE AGAIN NORTH CANTON COUNCIL SHOWS ITS ANTAGONISM TOWARDS "EVERYDAY" CITIZENS!

AND

AS OFT IS THE CASE, NC LAW DIRECTOR TIM FOX 

IS AT THE CENTER OF THE CONTROVERSY

The Stark County Political Report has a great deal of direct contact over nearly 11 years with many Stark County political subdivision processes of government, which, is to say, includes the cities, villages, townships and boards of education and other government entities.

Of those political subdivisions, North Canton is far and away the most adversarial with its citizens who differ in the context of "Public Speaks" ("recognition of visitors," on the published North Canton Council meeting agenda document).

Here is a summation of the latest flap.  (from a citizen e-mail to the SCPR among other media types, reporting on an November 12, 2018 North Canton City Council meeting) 

North Canton Law Director Tim Fox apparently is of the opinion that if a citizen addresses City Council in a public meeting and is not under oath, that person is not giving truthful testimony. 

 In spite of the fact that Law Director Tim Fox is not an elected representative of the citizens of North Canton, he is regularly given a bully pulpit to attack citizens of North Canton who choose to speak to their elected representatives at what is termed on the Council Agenda as RECOGNITION OF VISITORS and also referred to as Public Speaks. 

Although Mr. Fox interjects his opinions and thoughts throughout the course of every meeting, these particular remarks came at the end of the evening's meeting, during the portion of the meeting agenda termed COUNCIL REPORTS. 

        Mr. Fox begins his remarks at 1:01:35 and his remarks quickly turn into an attack on anyone who addresses City Council at PUBLIC SPEAKS. 

(PHOTO NOT PART OF EMAIL) 

(Verbatim remarks of Tim Fox beginning at 1:01:45) [SCPR NOTE:  SEE VIDEO LINK ABOVE}

"…I just want to point out to those that may not attend meetings as regular as some others, for those that appear and offer their opinions; you notice that they're not under oath. There is no legal requirement that they give truthful testimony. And that's so they can give their opinion.
... . (enlarged portions of text for emphasis sake)

A primary reason for the SCPR blog is to hold Stark County political subdivisions accountable for the substantive and procedural actions with "process" being the priority.

Of all North Canton councilpersons, only former mayor and council member (also president for a period of time) Daryl Revoldt gets anywhere near treating citizens wishing to be heard by Council to be heard attentively and taken seriously.

Accordingly, the SCPR sent this e-mail to Councilman Revoldt which is shared, in part, in this excerpt:

So it "appears" that Law Director Fox in picking up on your (Revoldt's)  "opinion" that you and perhaps many if not all of Council have that North Canton Public Speaks input is to be indulged but not examined for value? 

Everyone knows that "Public Speaks" contributions are opinion and so why would you in particular and Council in general not dress down Fox for his (in my assessment) officiously devaluing of citizen input 

Moreover, in the meeting post-Fox commentary, on what seems to me to be a continuing attack on North Canton citizens (with particular emphasis on Chuck Osborne); [why] did you allow the Fox attributed to comments go unclarified? 

As you know the SCPR has attended many, many, many city council, township trustee and board of education meetings over the 10 plus years, North Canton has stood out to me as being the most antagonistic to citizen input. 

Is there something in this story that Osborne is misrepresenting?

Councilman Revoldt did respond via telephone to the points made/questions made in the SCPR email.

Here is a summary of the key parts of his response:

• He values public opinion and cites examples in which he thinks Council has demonstrated that it is authentically hearing North Canton citizens,
• the SCPR, nonetheless, questions whether or not his six colleagues value citizen input, and, this blogger thinks Fox's "under oath" thing is absolutely ridiculous.  He and council members are not "under oath."  What's to keep them from being "less than truthful."
• Law Director Fox's "under oath comment" was not very artful,
• Seems to justify Fox's "under oath" admonishment (what The Report thinks is chilling on public input) that Council only deals with facts.
• the SCPR says that for the law director to a priori seems to determine that anything a citizen says is pure speculation and that only he and council members offer factual material is an expression of the height of government arrogance,
• On the substantive issue of whether or not North Canton accepts Maple Street Commerce's (Stu Lichter) offer to deed a parcel for building of a North Canton Safety Centers will be determined by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)  "factual" determinations,
• Revoldt seemingly dismisses the possibility that citizens might through questioning Council provoke Council to urge the EPA to take a deeper look at environment safety factors in the context of placing an open to public access government facility on it to say nothing of North Canton government employees who would be working in the facility,
• Some North Cantonians think that the short (in terms of time) notice of the  EPA's meeting with the general North Canton public on October 24th, on the overall Hoover contamination issue, was an attempt by North Canton government to get the EPA by incisive public inquiry and therefore more likely to see things favorable to redevelopment of remains of the former Hoover complex,
• In somewhat in a paradoxical fashion, Revoldt then says that North Canton Council needs to avoid "group think,"
• Hmm.  Really? The Report's take on North Canton Council is that by and large its processes are an example of "locked in arms, 'group' think,"
• Revoldt:  "Your worst critic is your best friend,"
• Amen!!! to that.  But North Canton Council is a long way from embracing criticism and reaching out to its citizen base to achieve "win-win" results,  And such is the case for much of government in Stark County, in Ohio and across the nation,
• Though generally understanding and supportive of Fox because he thinks Fox has been more restrained in recent times from "getting out of his lane" (the SCPR's characterization; not Revoldt's) and appears to be hopeful that Fox will limit himself rendering legal advice to his client (i.e. North Canton Council and its members) in the context of the official business of Council.

Yesterday, post North Canton Council meeting of Monday, November 26th, Revoldt tells the SCPR that on Monday Council agreed to restructure the order of business so as to facilitate council member responses to questions/points made and the like during the Reports section of agenda which is to be the last item on the agenda going forward.

Revoldt has noted and the SCPR agrees that Fox's obvious dissing of the public

• (e.g. unreliable to be truthful, not factual because they are not in the legal straight-jacket of being "under oath; a standard that apparently in his mind does not apply to Fox himself, the Held administration and the members of Council),
• While Fox has not previously  been so audacious as in  the foregoing November 12 example indicates in the past; there have been times and places in the functioning of North Canton government that he has as an "unelected" official gotten out-of-hand in attacking the public with special asides directed at a particular member of the public,
• apparently, doing so, in his perception was he was carrying out a private understanding back in 2012 that such is what Council expected of him,

appeared, before the 12th, to be tamped down.

But his November 12th outrageous questioning of the credibility of the commenting public, indicates that he probably is not a chastened law director (behind the scenes) by various council members law director.

Revoldt can be optimistic that Fox  will "stay in his lane" going forward, this blogger is not unless and until it becomes apparent to him that Council's expectation of him has changed.

As long as North Canton Council allows Law Director Tim Fox and his seeming  chronic anti-public participation in government ways persist, there will continue to be a North Canton Council that appears to be out-of-touch with its public and may at least explain in part why its November, 2018 levy attempt failed.

A 15%  loss might be viewed by some as one whale of a being "out-of-touch" indicator, no?

The Report has learned that it is likely Council will try on November, 2019 to get  voter approval of a increase in the North Canton income tax rate.

This space of nearly a year gives Council ample opportunity to "turn over a new leaf" and do what all elected officials ought to do and that is listen carefully to their constituents and engage them frequently but respectfully in public forums.

VOLUME I: (IN A SERIES) IS GEORGE T. MAIER UP TO MANAGING THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE IN AN APPROPRIATE MANNER?

UPDATE:  MONDAY, 08:13 AM

(COMPARE 2006 TO 2018 GOVERNOR ELECTION RESULTS)

TROUBLES IN MANAGEMENT OF THE STARK COUNTY JAIL?

TODAY:  THE BACKGROUND OF GEORGE T. MAIER BECOMING SHERIFF

Nearly everyone that The Stark County Political Report (SCPR/The Report) talks to these days about Sheriff George T. Maier's management of the Stark County sheriff's office say that Sheriff Maier is doing a terrific job as the elected sheriff of Stark County.

On one dimension, even the SCPR agrees that Maier, on a "technical" policing level, has the tools to be an excellent county policing manager.

However, as regular readers of The Stark County Political Report (SCPR, The Report full-well know, this blogger thinks that Sheriff Maier has some growing to do to be the kind of employee-relationship manager that matches his technical know how.

The endeavor in this series is to present material to readers for readers to make up their own minds as to whether or not George T. Maier's temperament as translated into management style will one day become a leading issue in Stark County governance.

Since 2013, the year Maier surfaced as a contender to be appointed sheriff by the Stark County Democratic Party Central Committee on the untimely and tragic death of Sheriff-elect Mike McDonald, the SCPR has had many, many, many sources that have presented a different picture of Maier in the context of his management style which, according to these sources, is in stark contrast to the technically accomplished George T. Maier.

NOTE:  The Report had so many inside the Stark County sheriff's office sources that this blogger  could not resist chiding Maier that the first hire as sheriff should be a plumber who could fix the leaks.  However, it appears that he did not heed the advice)

As another factor in assessing him (from the perspective of those who buy into the image one projects as an indication of their competence), Maier, when he dons his sheriff dress attire, looks like a "dressed to the nines" county sheriff that rivals the stylish Stark County commissioner Janet Weir Creighton.

It used to be Canton councilman Jimmy Babcock compared to Commissioner Creighton on Stark County's "best dressed" politician.

Now maybe just maybe Babcock has been replaced by George T. Maier.  How can you beat that "sheriff's dress uni" in terms of impressiveness?

Later on in this series The Report will focus on the more recent allegations by those in a position to see the internal operations of the Stark County sheriff office operations as to whether Maier is deficient as a manager or that the allegations are merely "sour grapes" on the part of those who are not part of the inner circle of Maier confidants.

Maier has been in policing since 1981 as a Hartville (Lake Township) police office after graduating from Massillon Washington High School in 1978.

Hartville was "small potatoes" for Maier and consequently he moved on in 1982 to the Ohio State Patrol.

It was no small irony that in 2013, it was in support of then and now Hartville chief of police (Republican Larry Dordea) who the "organized" Stark County Republican in the guise of the Republican members of the Stark County Board of Elections fought "tooth and nail" to keep Maier from becoming sheriff.

Though with the onset of troubles in the Stark County treasurer's office, the Stark GOP has done reasonably well in countywide elections EXCEPT for getting one of theirs to come anywhere near becoming Stark County sheriff.

The last time local Republicans were able to elect a Republican sheriff was Robert Berens 1981 to 1984, approaching 40 years now.

Most of Maier's technical policing training came during his stint as a Ohio State Highway Patrol  (OSHP) officer where, by 1991, he as selected "Trooper of the Year" by virtue of his life-saving actions in March of 1991.

From 1991 through 2007, Maier says he worked his way through the echelons of the OSP to the point of becoming district commander of the Jackson Township Post of the Patrol.

In November, 2006, the political gods smiled on Maier's future as possibly one of Ohio's highest ranking law enforcement officials.

Folksy Democrat Ted Strickland (a man who loved to show humility by referring to himself a being from "Aw shucks" Duck Run, Ohio), reached the pinnacle of his political career in being elected governor of Ohio over the disaster of a Republican nominee Ken Blackwood.

And as luck will have it for some of us, George's older brother Johnnie A. Maier, Jr. was at the time chairman of the Stark County Democratic Party.

The key opportunity for the Maiers was the good fortune they had in prominent Ohio Democrat Bryan Flannery contesting Strickland for the Democratic nomination for governor in the 2006 election.

Although this blogger (an active member of the Stark Dems at the time,  now a political independent) remembers Chairman Johnnie A. Maier, Jr grousing about Flannery's run; the primary contest was likely a key factor in what appears to have been the chairman's ability to get his brother appointed to the #2 position in Ohio's Department of Public Safety.

For Johnnie persuaded the Dems' executive committee to change local party policy of not endorsing any Democratic candidate in a primary election to make an exception for the Strickland/Flannery race.

Consequently, under the guidance of Maier, Jr., Stark Dems became the first county Democratic Party organization to endorse Stickland.

The endorsement seems to have been "worth in 'political' gold" inasmuch it appears that Strickland and his handlers were so appreciative of Maier Jr's maneuver that the Maier, Jr was able to get:

• brother George T.,
• appointed as assistant Director of the Ohio Department of Highway Safety,
• became "interim" director in 2010,
• Stark County commissioner Gayle Jackson (mother of Stark Dems' political director Shane Jackson, Maier's "right hand man in the Massillon clerk of courts office), 
• appointed to Lottery Commission, 
• Steve Meeks (formerly a Jackson Township elected official), and
• appointed as Region 9 economical development office, 
• himself,
• the only non-RN, as a consumer representative of the Ohio Nursing Board

appointed to political patronage positions controlled by the, what turned out to be, one-term Strickland administration.

It was his stint in the Department of Highway safety that complaints surfaced with George T. Maier's management style.

George T. Maier in his Stark County sheriff's uniform in the recently concluded 2018 gubernatorial race campaigned for Democrat Richard Cordray.

Governor-elect Mike DeWine returned "tit for tat."

Anyway one slices it, such, the SCPR thinks, is an abuse of the taxpayers right not have uniformed at public expense officials of Ohio government appear in official garb on behalf of either Republican/Democratic candidates.

But in Ohio/America we have a political Duopoly and the controlling Democratic/Republican operatives merely point the finger at each other as justification for the abuse.

The same thing happens on the issue of gerrymandering.

That "both monopolistic parties (i.e. "the political duopoly) do it," is no answer at all.

Both in perpetuating such abuse contribute to the growing public cynicism on the arrogance of each.

Confirming at the national level is President Donald Trump's use of the U.S. military as political backdrops in picture and word for his political agenda.

But when one has the power to do self serving, political party perpetuating things; only a fool would do the ethical thing, no?

The results as compared to Strickland's 2006 victory:  (Ohio Dems chairman David Pepper undoubtedly is beside himself of how over 12 years the Dems have declined statewide)

What if Cordray had won?

How would the Maier brothers tried to capitalize on that?

In the next blog in this series, the SCPR will pick up with the Strickland administration years and beyond in the fortunes of Stark County sheriff George T. Maier.

GOOD GOVERNMENT IS A CAUSE FOR THANKSGIVING!

UPDATED: 10:00 AM 11/22/2018 (ON GOOD GOVERNMENT PART OF BLOG)

UPDATED: THANKSGIVING NIGHT (10:00 PM)  

PRESIDENT TRUMP GOES FROM WISHING EVERYBODY A HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO A RANT THAT BELIES HIS SALUTATION

UPDATE (11/23/2028)  THANK YOU GOD!  CHRISTINA HAGAN HAS ONLY 38 DAYS LEFT IN OFFICE

WHAT IS GOOD GOVERNANCE?

FIND OUT AT THIS LINK!

And, how about a little political satire?

LINK TO BOROWITZ PIECE

Josh Dawsey (Washington Post)

Reporter covering the White House

November 22 at 9:27 PM

An Excerpt (LINK)

PALM BEACH, Fla. — President Trump’s Thanksgiving began, as his days often do, with an all-caps tweet: “HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO ALL!” (emphasis added)

Minutes later, he tweeted of potential “bedlam, chaos, injury and death,” a harbinger of what would be a frenetic Thanksgiving morning.

Over the span of a few hours, the president would mix the traditional pablum of Thanksgiving tidings with renouncing the findings of his Central Intelligence Agency, threatening Mexico, criticizing court decisions, attacking Hillary Clinton over her emails, misstating facts about the economy, floating a shutdown of the government — and per usual, jousting with the news media.

Asked what he was most thankful for on this Thanksgiving Day — a question that for commanders in chief usually prompts praise of service members in harm’s way — Trump delivered a singularly Trumpian answer.

“I made a tremendous difference in our country,” he said, citing himself.

Interesting, no?

Also interesting how many national, state and local Republican officials, by and large, sit back and say nothing publicly about the outbursts, no?

Anyone who reads the SCPR on a regular basis knows the low "political/governance" regard that this blogger has for "thankfully" 'lame duck' state Representative Christina Hagan.

As the father of three highly accomplished daughters who demand/get respect from men in all stations of life and in all contexts, this blogger is particularly offended by Hagan's embracking of Donald Trump.

LINK

That Hagan tanked up on political hubris and took on far more than she could chew (running for the 16 Congressional which contains a small portion of Stark County)  and consequently tereby has taken herself out of political/governance circulation come December 31, 2018 is something that all Ohioans and Stark Countians ought to be thankful for this Thanksgiving Day weekend 2018!