S OHIO'S GOVERNMENT LOOKING TO GET ITS HAND ON PUBLIC PENSION FUNDS? WILL THE STARK COUNTY DELEGATION FIGHT TO PROTECT PUBLIC PENSIONS?

The Stark County Political Report remembers when ENRON went belly up (2000/2001) and cost members of the Ohio State Teachers Retirement System $56.6 million. PERS lost $58.8 million.

One of the guardians of STRS and PERS was supposed to be state Senator Kirk Schuring (R - Jackson). At least that's what the SCPR thinks. Schuring gets very angry (which is rare for him), when yours truly makes this allegation.

Why does the SCPR assign Schuring the guardian role during the time the ENRON fiasco unfolded?

Because Senator Schuring was president of the Ohio Retirement Study Council (ORSC) at the time. And the SCPR believes the ORC failed many of Ohio's retired public employees in neglecting to uphold its obligations spelled out in Ohio Revised Code Chapter 717.

Now Schuring is vice chairman of the ORSC.

One has to wonder whether or not a repeat of ENRON is in the offing for Ohio's public employee retirees? If not, what has been done to prevent a repeat?

It would be reassuring for Ohio's public to hear from Senator Schuring that ORSC security is improved.

In 2009, it is not the private sector that bears watching. Now it is Ohio's government.

Governor Ted Strickland is desperate to have the money to keep Ohio going. Until the state budget god tight, Strickland was against expanding gambling in Ohio. But just days ago he signed an executive order command the Ohio Lottery Commission to begin installing slots at Ohio's racetracks.

Now comes word that he and the Ohio General Assembly took at look at "borrowing" money from PERS (Ohio's Public Employess Retirement System).

Although STRS (the State Teachers Retirement System) was not being eyed by the governor, his look at PERS was not lost on STRS:

Here is a few excepts from an e-mail that STRS sent out:

OPERS CONTRIBUTION REDUCTION PROPOSED TO HELP STATE BUDGET
On June 19, 2009, Gov. Ted Strickland proposed that the state's contribution to public employees' pensions be reduced from 14 percent to 8 percent for two years, with a payback to the Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS) to occur over the subsequent 10 years. This proposal was made as a way to help balance the state's budget.

...

While STRS Ohio and the other public pension systems in the state were not included in the proposal, the executive directors of STRS Ohio, School Employees Retirement System (SERS) and the Highway Patrol Retirement System sent a joint letter to the governor and the members of the Ohio General Assembly also voicing their opposition.

...

The proposal was eventually rejected by lawmakers and was not part of the state's final budget. Going forward, all the systems will need to be vigilant to ensure such proposals do not surface again.

How much would the proposed raid on PERS brought the governor in his frantic search for dollars?

Here is what Akron Beacon Journal Statehouse reporter Dennis Williard has to say (Scrutiny missing in state budget, July 19):

... Strickland's proposal to reduce the state's contribution to the Ohio Public Employees Retirement System ... would have been a $250 million raid on the pension plan.

The SCPR believes Stark's public employees should heed STRS's warning. The questions that Stark County's public employees should be asking themselves should include:

"Do I want my pension fund to be making a ten year loan to the state of Ohio?

And, if not: "Can I trust my legislator to stop this from happening?"

Now that we know he uses The Repository opinion pages to explain his votes; perhaps, the good Senator Schuring would explain why public employment retirees have no worries about the security of their pension. Seeing as he is an expert of sorts on protecting public employees pension dollars.

And for good measure, maybe Oelslager, Slesnick, Okey, Snitchler and Schiavoni will chime in?

DISCUSSION: DID "THE REP" DEAL A BLOW TO STARK COUNTY EDUCATION ON THE "MRDD" LEVY ISSUE?

The STARK EDUCATION REPORT (The Report) has learned that some Stark County school officials are privately saying that The Repository's refusal to endorse the March, 2008 MRDD levy issue was the reason it lost and may cause huge economic damage to non-MRDD Stark County school districts.

The thinking among area school officials must be that if MRDD cannot get its financial house in-order, the financial burden will ultimately shift to each of the 17 Stark County school districts.

Costs for providing MRDD-like services are much more expensive than services that schools normally provide students in their respective communities.

The Report believes that the editors at The Rep were so focused on the MRDD financial picture, they did not see the elephant in the room - the potential adverse consequences that the MRDD levy defeat could have on the already financially strapped Stark County local school districts.

Although the school officials may be overstating the consequences of The Rep's failure to endorse (an 11,000 plus vote loss), theirs is a plausible assessment in a close election as this one was.

Just look at the defeats that Stark County school levies took in March. Can these districts afford to absorb the extraordinary costs of MRDD-esque services?

The Rep frequently admonishes others for being irresponsible in not looking at all the consequences of an action.

Question: Did The Rep Editorial Board act irresponsibly in not considering the probable adverse financial consequences of a MRDD levy defeat on the budgets of the 17 Stark County school districts?

DISCUSSION: STARK EDUCATION PARTNERSHIP PRESIDENT "W. DON READER" ASKS FINGERHUT FOR - OGT - WAIVER

Retired Stark County Court of Common Pleas Judge W. Don Reader, who is now president of the Stark Education Partnership, was a highlight of the Q&A session at Chancellor Eric Fingerhut's presentation of Ohio's "Strategic Plan for Higher Education (2008-2017).

Reader complained about the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) contradictory ways of doing business. On the one hand the ODE says, according to Reader, that a waiver of the Ohio Graduation Test (OGT) can be requested by school districts. But on the other, ODE says - if asked for - it will be rejected.

As reported previously in these pages, the glaring weakness of the Fingerhut's presentation was that while questions were taken; answers would have to wait because Fingerhut had a prior commitment he needed to get to. What kind of planning is this?

The STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT will be following up with Fingerhut on Reader's question.

Question: Do you agree or disagree with Reader? Should ACT results supplant the OGT as the measuring rod in Stark County school districts?

DISCUSSION: WILL OHIO GET ITS ACT TOGETHER FOR THE 88 COUNTIES INCLUDING STARK COUNTY?

There were about eight questions posed to Ohio Board of Regents (OBR) Chancellor Eric Fingerhut at the Stark State College of Technology this morning.

Because the chancellor was scheduled to be elsewhere later in the day, Fingerhut took one question after another without responding personally or via one the panel members. Fingerhut did have four of the five panelists respond in general to the questions posed by audience members but not in detail that each question merited.

Fingerhut implied that specific answers would be provided by the OBR and the panelist on a follow up basis in weeks to come.

Stark Countians should hope that Fingerhut and the OBR did a better job planning for its ten year Ohio plan for improving higher education than was done with the Stark State College of Technology (SSCT) presentation.

Question: If you would have been at the meeting (or were at the meeting); wouldn't you expect to have your question answered for having taking the trouble to attend the meeting?

DISCUSSION: WHY THE HIGH RETENTION RATE IN STARK COUNTY?

The STARK POLITICAL REPORT (The Report) has been puzzled over the high Stark County retention rate phenomenon.

The Report has quizzed public school official after public school official only to be met with a confused look or what The Report thinks is a silly answer.

Silly answer? Yes. Some officials say that the reason for Stark's high rate is that the school systems have not had access to the test that area colleges administer in order to assess a inbound student's need for remediation.

Isn't this "teaching to the test?" The Report agrees, if a student knows how to "fool" the test, then the student will not need remediation. But the result is an exercise in fooling oneself. Surely, Stark County's educators are not into doing this?

A better explanation is one made by the Ohio Board of Regents (OBR). In essence, the OBR says that too many college bound Ohio graduating seniors have had an inadequate "core" curriculum.

Question: What should Stark County educators be doing to rectify this problem?

RECOGNITION: "BEST PRACTICES" IN STARK COUNTY

As a member of the Stark County Schools' 21st Century Action Team (School Design Committee), yours truly was privy to a presentation by the Canton Local Schools of its 5 R's Academy.

5 R's? Rigor, Relevance, Respect, Responsibility, Relationships make up the 5R's.

This program which was started in 2007 with 50 freshmen, will eventually grow to 180 to 200 students by 2010.

The STARK POLITICAL REPORT - EDUCATION (Stark Education Report) is pleased to recognize this very promising program.

Character development is what jumps out to an observer as to the essence of the academy which is a "community school" sponsored by Canton Local Schools (CLS).

A key to the Academy's success? Students taking ownership of their learning.

The Stark Education Report buys into the personal development philosophy of Stephen Covey of The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. Covey makes the point that personal development is "inside-out." In other words, it is the internal qualities of a human being which determine the effectiveness of the person.

Commitment is another key to the CLS approach. Branching out from there, one hears terms/expressions like "listening," "befriending," "this is a goal I believe I can attain," as the language of student participants. Moreover, each 5 Rs class member has to complete 50 hours of community service each year.

5 Rs Academy demonstrates in results living examples of a changed student approach to learning.

DISCUSSION: A COURAGEOUS BOARD MEMBER?

Retire/Rehire is not setting well with many Stark Countians these days.

Most people who object merely talk about it. But not Jan Kishman of the Minerva Board of Education.

Kishman who runs an IGA (grocery store) business with her husband in Minerva, has been elected to the board twice. In November, 2003 she was the high vote getter (1,655) as she was in 2007 (1,698).

Yesterday, The Repository reported on Kishman's effectiveness in getting a retire/rehire high school principal to quit.

The vote was 3 to 2 in favor of the retiree/rehiree. But that was not good enough for him. The administrator is quitting early. He says:

I am ... tired of the nonsupport with the vote. That eats at me, especially after putting in over 38 years with this district."

In Stark County we have Sheriff Tim Swanson (Democrat) and Judge William B. Hoffman (Court of Appeals - Democrat) who have announced plans to retire before their new terms so that they can collect their retirement and the regular stipend that goes with the job. In Hoffman's case it will be the better part of $250,000.

Will Stark Countians follow the spunky Kishman's lead (who has consistently voted "no" on retire/hire) and vote "no" on Swanson and Hoffman?