Panel dismisses election complaint over Stainbrook, Gallagher flyer

The Ohio Election Commission dismissed a complaint from Ohio Citizens PAC that charged the Ohio Republican Party with making a false statement on flyers supporting Jon Stainbrook and Meghan Gallager (and others) for state central committee.

The flyers said that elected the two would "stop Obamacare." Ohio Citizen PAC said that was false. The dismissal came from the OEC's probable cause panel.

In filing the complaint, Tom Zawistowski, president of the PAC, said the statement was "clearly an intentional attempt to mislead voters by make a false claim of some legislative authority being held by Republican State Central Committee members, which simply does not exist."

OEC Executive Director Phil Richter recommended the dismissal as not rising to the level of a false statement, Gongwer reported. The panel agreed that there was no probable cause to believe the statement would be found to be false and dismissed the case.

Non-existent address on Stainbrook voter registration raises too many questions

When it comes to getting your address correct, you'd think most people would be pretty good at it.

Admittedly, there are some people who are dyslexic and might have trouble writing down their own address, but they at least know what it is and take steps to make sure they are accurate when communicating it.

Apparently, that's not the case with Robert C. Stainbrook II and the forms that have been submitted to the Board of Elections in his name.

Robert is the brother of Jon Stainbrook, chairman of the Lucas County Republican Party and a member of the Board of Elections. He moved from Ottawa County and registered to vote in Lucas last year.

He's not registered to vote in both places, which is a good thing.

He's registered to vote at 2526 Amara Drive, Toledo, 43615.

But there's a problem: there is no such address, according to the Auditor's AREIS system:

If you drive down the street, you won't find a house or dwelling - or a part of a house or dwelling - with that address on it.

When you register to vote, the BOE sends you a postcard telling you the ward and precinct numbers and your polling location. The postcard they sent to Robert was returned as undeliverable.

That wasn't the only one.

The Fallen Timbers Republican Club invited all candidates for precinct committee to attend a training/educational session. Their postcard to him was also returned.

Trying to give Robert the benefit of the doubt that perhaps he had the numbers mixed up, the FTRC reversed the numbers and sent a notice to 2625 Amara, which is in the Auditor's AREIS system. That didn't work. That postcard was also returned.

The returned mail isn't enough to make a fuss over, as there are many reasons such items are returned. However, combine the returned mail with the fact that no such number exists in the AREIS system and there is no such number on any dwelling and now you have too many questions with not enough answers.

The range of possibilities go from innocent to nefarious.

On the innocent side, Robert made a mistake when he put his address on his registration card. That's simple enough to fix - he just corrects it with the Board of Elections.

On the nefarious side, he doesn't live on the street and is fraudulently registered - with or without his knowledge.

To complicate matters, I've been told that the handwriting on Robert's voter registration card and his petition for precinct committee belongs to Meghan Gallagher.

Gallagher is the former executive director of the BOE who was recently removed. She is also known as a 'sometime' girlfriend of Jon Stainbrook.

Now, it's not too uncommon to have someone else fill out your forms so they're ready for your signature. But then there are what appear to be discrepancies in the signatures themselves.

Here is the signature on the voter registration card:

Here is the signature on Robert's petition for central committee:

And here is his signature on his voter registration card in Ottawa County:

I'm not a handwriting expert but I think there are enough differences to raise the question of whether or not all three are really Robert's.

Combining the signature discrepancy with the non-existent address, the information that the handwriting on the registration and petition forms is Meghan Gallagher's and even non-doubting people might begin to wonder.

I share this information not to cast dispersions on Robert Stainbrook II, but to ensure that the correct address is recorded for him and that he votes in the correct precinct.

And if the worse case scenario is true and the voter registration card and petition were NOT signed by him, the person who did so can be held accountable.

Public records raise questions about employee fired by BOE

Gina Kaczala being sworn in as the new
executive director of the Lucas County
Board of Elections. Her first act: fire one
 of the temporary employees in the office.
(Toledo Blade photo)

You might have heard about the recent shake-up in staff at the Lucas County Board of Elections, but you probably didn't know some of the details ... details revealed by a public records request.

The Blade has the story about Republican booth official Melissa Brogan being fired by the new Republican executive director, Gina Kaczala, and Democrat deputy director Dan DeAngelis.

She was a temporary employee, subject to employment "at will," so she could be let go without any cause or reason.

Jon Stainbrook, Lucas County Republican Party Chairman and one of three members of the BOE, strongly objected, as the news story reported:

“The only reason they did it is because they don’t like it, and they don’t like her,” Mr. Stainbrook said. “She did an exemplary job for more than two years and was an intricate part of the election process. They are abusing their new-found authority right off the bat.”

But public records tell a different story.

Brogan's time sheet

According to her time sheets, Brogan reported for work on Monday, Feb. 3rd, at 8:30 a.m. She signed in the time, but then crossed it out and wrote "sick" in the comments.

That's not an unusual event, but that's only part of the story.

On Feb. 5th, nominating petitions for five candidates were turned in to the BOE. The circulator was Melissa Brogan.

In total, she collected 25 signatures on the petitions - all on Feb. 3rd.

One of the petitions
Brogan turned in.

Now, it is conceivable that she gathered these signatures after she was feeling better, but if you're going to take a sick day and then turn in petitions all signed on the day you call off sick, you should expect questions to be raised.

In fact, I'm surprised that no one asked about it at the time the petitions were filed.

 Certainly others in the office would have known she'd gone home sick. At the very least, the director and deputy director should have asked for an explanation.

Perhaps, though, such 'oversights' in managing the staff are what contributed to the Board deciding to fire Meghan Gallagher and replace her with Kaczala? Who knows?

One insider commented that they wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing had been coordinated by Gallagher. But that speculation is probably more indicative of the lack of trust in Gallagher and Stainbrook, than of the truth.

Regardless, the existence of the questionable circumstances definitely belie Stainbrook's comment that she did an "exemplary job."

How long will Republicans tolerate such incompetence?

I just want to know how long Republicans in Lucas County are going to tolerate such incompetence from Jon Stainbrook, the chairman of the Lucas County Republican Party?

We have a chairman whose only success is getting enough of his supporters elected to the Central Committee and then getting them to show up to vote for him as chairman. In all other aspects of the job, he has failed miserably.

The top three priorities of a party chairman are:

1) raise money for the party and its candidates
2) recruit and elect good candidates
3) be the voice of the principles of the party

Stainbrook has done none of these.

When, if ever, have you heard him quoted in the news expressing support for the core principles of the Republican Party - or opposing any action promoted by the left?

When he is in the news it's usually because he's suing fellow Republicans or bashing fellow Republicans. Or he's doing something ridiculous like ignoring the Secretary of State's recommendation to fire the Board of Elections director and assistant director and, instead, making a motion to keep them and fire everyone else in the office.

Or he's voting AGAINST a motion to prohibit secretly recording conversations in the BOE. Seriously? What kind of party chairman votes against something like that?!?

(obviously, one known for secretly recording conversations...)

When there was a vacant Toledo City Council position, he threw in the towel - before the fight for the seat even began:

"...there isn’t anything the Republican Party can do to derail the appointment."

Actually, there was. Stainbrook could have been all over the news demanding that a placeholder - someone who wasn't going to run for the seat - be appointed until the election this year. I laid out a comprehensive strategy that would have set the stage on an important issue for our candidates this November.

Sadly, Stainbrook missed a wonderful opportunity for Republicans and demonstrated, again, his utter lack of understanding of the role of the 'loyal opposition' in a Democrat-dominated Toledo.

As for recruiting and electing Republicans, well, the lack of success is pretty telling.

Yes, they have had candidates, but many of them complain that the party did nothing to help them.

It used to be that you could rely upon the party for some initial funds - perhaps enough to get a small postcard or flyer to hand out. The party would compile and events calendar so candidates wouldn't miss an important opportunity to meet-and-greet. They would hold weekly candidate meetings to plan the upcoming week and ensure that two candidates didn't hold press conferences on the same day. They provided advice strategic planning on everything from press releases to message development.

None of that happens under this chairman. Not all candidates complain about the lack of party support, but the new ones don't know what they don't know. They've not seen a fully-functioning GOP and don't know what they're missing in terms of potential support.

And where are our candidates for this year??? This is a local election year. City council, mayoral and school board seats are on the ballot for November. There is absolutely nothing on the party's web page about being a candidate, screening potential candidates or...well...anything whatsoever related to the upcoming election.

As for the county website...He can even keep the LCRP website current! Here's a link to a screen shot of www.lucascountygop.org. As you can see, it's been at least three months since it was update as the only item on the page is the advertisement for the Lincoln Day Dinner - which was on Feb. 21st.

I wonder how long the web page will remain like this? In 2011, the Lincoln Day Dinner was April 7th and on August 29th, they still had that notice up. That's five months without updating their web page!

He hasn't raised any money and what money he does raise from events like the annual Lincoln Day Dinner go toward paying for his own personal campaign for state central committee. Just how much party money did he spend on his own PERSONAL campaign for State Central Committee? His personal mini-billboards were also paid for by the LCRP. And why would you need mini-billboards for a state central committee position in the first place? Certainly other candidates on the ballot have not received such support for their races that Stainbrook provided for his own.

He's paid for a parliamentarian (usually a check for $1,000), security, lawyers, numerous reimbursements to himself, Meghan Gallaher and other known FoS (Friends of Stainbrook) - often without detailed accounting of what they are for. The amount of money spent on candidates is negligible compared to the amount spent on himself.

The Oct. 25, 2012 campaign finance report showed the party had just over $2,000 and, despite showing three different purchases of yard signs, showed only one of those purchases as an in-kind contribution to a commissioner candidate. But you should know, $614.46 doesn't go very far when you're purchasing yard signs for a county-wide race.

The Dec. 14, 2012 Post General Report showed about $7,000 on hand. Interestingly, the party raised just under $9,000 between the pre-general and post-general report, with over half the amount ($5,395) coming in on Nov. 7th, the day after the election.

How did the party spend that money? Most of it went to the costs of the headquarters, but they did purchase $744 worth of signs, though it doesn't say who the signs were for. Oh, and Stainbrook was reimbursed $1,208.04 - again, without online documentation for what was being paid.

The finance report also shows the party owes $6,000 for a loan from Jim Brennan, Jr. It was a $10,000 loan taken on Jan. 20, 2011 and they've owed $6,000 for quite a while now. So it's essentially broke.

There was the previously mentioned Lincoln Day Dinner with Gov. John Kasich and we won't know how much was raised or spent until after the semi-annual reports are filed in July. But my guess is that any money raised will not go primarily to candidates - or be saved for candidates for this year's election.

So on the the primary duties of a chairman, Stainbrook's performance is dismal at best.

But that's not all.

He's a hypocrite.

Without consulting with the party, he took it upon himself to demand the resignation of the state party chairman and signed a letter stating he was speaking for all Republicans in Lucas County.

He's had numerous issues with signatures that don't match on various legal filings, including campaign finance reports for the party and in one of the races for state central committee.

Then there is his dereliction of duty to the voters of Lucas County.

There is a vacant judge seat on Common Pleas Court. The other judges are handling increased case loads and the citizens of the county are being deprived of a judge all because Stainbrook has not scheduled a screening for the known applicants for the position. The local party needs to screen the applicants and then recommend at least one of them to the governor for him to appoint. These applicants were told in early February by Stainbrook that the screening would take place after the Lincoln Day Dinner, but so far - nothing.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. So how long are Lucas County Republicans going to tolerate such incompetence?

As The Elections Board Turns

Yes, it's a soap opera at the Lucas County Board of Elections, but unlike the TV version, this one has real-world implications for the future of the fair and impartial management of our voting system.

Let's recap some of the characters and story lines of our soap opera:

In a stunning display of brilliant community organizing, our lead character, Jon Stainbrook, manages to take over the Lucas County Republican Party. Unbeknownst to most, though, his real reason for doing so was not the election of Republicans and the advancement of Republican and conservative ideals. No, it was revenge...to exact revenge and retaliation on anybody and everybody who he ever perceived slighted him in any way. He looks the hero, but he's really the villain in this drama.

Stainbrook's sometimes girlfriend (as she has been identified in numerous news reports), Meghan Gallagher, is elected chairman of the LCRP central committee. This position is supposed to recruit and train the members of the central committee - the 'boots on the ground' portion of the party. The elected members of the central committee are supposed to represent their voting precincts and be the communicators between the party structure and the Republicans in the area. They're also the ones responsible for helping to collect signatures on petitions for candidates, going door-to-door, handing out yard signs and making sure the Republicans in their district turn out on election day.

In another story line, Stainbrook - desperate for the pay and PERS benefits associated with being a member of the Board of Elections - struggles to oust two extremely qualified individuals from the BOE in order to gain the seat for himself. He claims it's all about fixing the problems at the BOE, most of which are exaggerated by him and The Blade, but it sounds good to the people and makes for good articles in The Blade to prop him up as the solution to all the woes. After lawsuits and intimidation and innuendo, he succeeds in getting the appointment.

But that's not all...he names Gallagher as the Executive Director to ensure all that he wants to accomplish can be done. With his sometimes girlfriend in charge, he proceeds to get rid of people he doesn't like, firing long-time employees and installing his own crew, some of whom, it is rumored, became members of the central committee and voted for him in return for the promise of employment at the BOE.

Also hired was Gina Kaczala. Her husband Larry was County Auditor and a candidate for Congress. His tragic death in an apparent leap from a parking garage left many stunned and saddened by his loss. Widow Gina, with Stainbrook as her party chairman, ran for the County Auditor position but was defeated. Just to make things interesting, Stainbrook used to work for Larry, but was fired and then ran against him for in the primary for the County Auditor seat. You know politics makes for strange bedfellows....

Then there is Anthony DeGidio, an attorney who first entered our story as the lawyer representing Stainbrook and Gallagher on their many court challenges both against fellow Republicans and in other, unrelated cases. DeGidio was Stainbrook's choice for the second Republican seat on the BOE.

That's the major cast of characters and the general plot line of our soap opera, but it wouldn't be a soap without drama and drama seems to follow Stainbrook and his cronies wherever they go.

* lawsuits by former BOE employees
* questionable activity between Stainbrook and Gallagher in a stopped car
* theft of drugs from a hospital patient

Then there is the 'close, personal relationship' with John Robinson Block, the publisher of The Blade - a relationship Stainbrook has bragged about for years. Many speculate that the favorable media coverage Stainbrook gets is due to that relationship, but others believe it has more to do with the fact that Stainbrook must 'have something incriminating' against JRB, as he's known.

Stainbrook loved to brag that he used to 'set JRB up with girls' back in his younger days. Couple that with his known reputation for secretly recording conversations and editing the tapes to make it seem like the other party said something they didn't and you'll understand why people believe the speculation.

As any watcher of a soap opera will tell you, it's not drama without the friends becoming enemies after some event. Usually it's 'he slept with my sister' sort of thing, but with Stainbrook, it's 'he dared to disagree with me' that results in Friends of Stainbrook (FoS) becoming an enemy.

DeGidio is the latest in that long line of people.

First there was a review of the BOE by the Secretary of State who is responsible for overseeing elections in Ohio. Stainbrook's reaction to the recommendation that Gallager (and the Democrat assistant director) be fired was to keep the two of them and fire everyone else.

DeGidio disagree...and thus began Stainbrook's attempt to oust him from the board. But DeGidio knows things too...will he tell all in his defense of his seat?

Then came the legal challenge to DeGidio's residency - and the appearance of two more characters, including another 'sometimes girlfriend' Kelly Bensman. And also the professional challenge as Gallagher filed an ethics complaint against DeGidio, her attorney in a car accident lawsuit, thus preventing DeGidio from voting on firing her.

While all this is going on, Stainbrook is not raising money for the party (a primary duty of a chairman) and he's violating the bylaws by refusing to notify past chairmen of executive committee meetings. Of course, the past chairman not being notified is the same individual he tried to kick off the BOE...as you know, everyone and everything in a soap opera is interconnected.

And just yesterday, a new twist arose. John Irish, a past party chairman of the Lucas County Democratic Party and new member of the BOE, introduced a new policy at the BOE meeting forbidding the unauthorized recording of conversations. ZING! Stainbrook voted against the policy - wonder why?

It was also revealed the Kazcala filed a harassment complaint against Gallagher. The board voted 3-1 to refer the investigation to the county's human resources department. Stainbrook voted no on that as well.

Enter Stainbrook's persecution complex - it's all about trying to get rid of him and Gallagher - there's nothing to any of this and it's all political.

So now you're primarily caught up on the various story lines and ready for the next episode.

Will Stainbrook manage to succeed in getting a second challenge to DeGidio's residency heard by the board?

Will Gallagher be found guilty of harassment?

Will Kaczala and DeGidio join together to write a best-selling tell-all book about their experiences with Stainbrook?

Will The Blade grow weary of this and turn on Stainbrook?

Will the Republicans manage to get an actual chairman more focused on the party than personal vendettas?

Will Gallagher be blamed for the blank audio recording of the last meeting? (that's one you didn't know about) And was there something on that audio tape that might have proved incriminating to someone?

Will the board follow the recommendations of the Secretary of State and fire Gallagher and Dan DeAngelis, the assistant director?

Will the board remember that they gave Gallagher and DeAngelis until yesterday's meeting to finalize a working organizational chart or face possible firing?

Stay tuned for the next episode of As the Election Board Turns....

Lucas County GOP - Jon Stainbrook's foolishness and dereliction of duty

The executive committee of the Lucas County Republican Party met last night at Mickey Finn's Pub to handle two agenda items:

1. Discussion of whether Anthony J. DeGidio Jr. provided false information to the Executive Committee in order to secure a recommendation to the Lucas County Board of Elections.
2. Retraction of the previous recommendation made to the Ohio Secretary of State for the appointment of Anthony J. DeGidio Jr. to the Lucas County Board of Elections.

Here is a copy of the postcard notice.



In case you're at a loss, here's a quick summary:

* DeGidio used to be an FoS (Friend of Stainbrook) until he disagreed with LCRP Chairman and fellow Board of Elections member Jon Stainbrook over a Secretary of State report that recommended firing close friend (sometimes girlfriend) of Stainbrook, Meghan Gallagher.

* Before DeGidio could actually vote on any firings, Gallagher filed an ethics complaint against him with the local bar association. DeGidio, an attorney, had represented her in an unrelated car accident case.

* With the ethics complaint pending, DeGidio was 'conflicted out' of any discussion and action.

* DeGidio, having failed to support Stainbrook, was now an enemy and the dirt started to fly with Stainbrook trying everything to see what might stick and get DeGidio removed from the board.

Last night's executive committee meeting was the most recent step in that process, though I did expect another hit piece in The Blade as a result.

If you want all the details you can read this post: "Blade bias, Board of Elections and abuse of process"

or otherwise titled:

Everything you didn't want to know about what's going on at the Lucas County Board of Elections

I'm not a member of the executive committee, so I didn't attend the meeting, but I understand that the executive committee did vote and 'unrecommended' DeGidio, though there were some who expressed their disagreement with the action.

What does the 'unrecommendation' mean?

Absolutely nothing.

The executive committee recommends individuals to the Secretary of State, who then has the sole authority to appoint them to the BOE - or not. The SoS has not always followed the recommendations of the local party. Appointees serve a four-year term, unless being appointed to fill a vacancy, then they serve until the end of the term.

Only the SoS can remove an individual from the Board. The fact that the local party chairman has a fellow board member who disagrees with him is NOT a valid reason for removal.

Ah - that's where the dirt comes in. He has a girlfriend who is much younger. He doesn't live in the county (though that issue was resolved, after a BOE hearing, in DeGidio's favor). He has an ethics complaint pending against him - though that is not yet decided.

But, but, but....he disagrees with me, Stainbrook whines. He has to go!

This is the foolishness of what remains of the Lucas County Republican Party under Stainbrook's leadership.

Interestingly, DeGidio (the accused) was not invited to the meeting to present his side of the story - not that he would have gone if he had been, I'm sure.

I reached out to him to ask for a comment. His written reply:

"This is just another example of Jon and Meghan spending their time attacking people that have evidence against them. I really wish they would spend some time doing their jobs at the BOE and the LCRP then we might have a vibrant party instead of a joke with the two jokers in charge."

Violating the LCRP Bylaws

DeGidio wasn't the only one not invited to the executive committee. I understand that several others conveniently didn't get a notice of the meeting, including former LCRP Chairman Patrick Kriner.

Now, Kriner is certainly not a FoS, especially after Stainbrook tried numerous ways to kick Kriner off the BOE when Stainbrook first became party chair. But he is a former chairman and the bylaws of the party clearly state that members of the executive committee include all "LCRP past chairmen who reside in Lucas County."

Kriner, who is also a duly elected member of the central committee, was tired of not being notified so he could attend both meetings, especially the central committee where it is his responsibility, as an elected official, to communicate back to his precinct on the activities of that body. So on Feb. 28th he wrote a letter to Stainbrook, copied Ohio Republican Party Chairman Bob Bennett, and sent it certified. He wrote:

Dear Chairman Stainbrook,

This letter is written as a request to include me in any and all communications regarding the Central Committee of the Lucas County Republican Party as well as its Executive Committee. I am a duly elected representative to the County's Central Committee from the Sylvania 13 Precinct. And, according to the LCRP By Laws, as a former Chairman residing in Lucas County I am a member of the County Party's Executive Committee. Since my election to the Central Committee during the 2012 Primary Election, I have only received one notice regarding Central Committee meetings. The meeting being the organizational meeting held shortly after the Primary. Since then I have not been informed of any meetings of either the Central Committee or the Executive Committee.

This communication includes my current address, on file with the Board of Elections, and my email address for your use. Please keep me up to date on scheduled meetings.

Kriner got a follow up from Bennett:

Dear Pat,

I apologize for the delay in getting back to you. I have spoke (sic) with Jon in regards to this matter and informed him that he may be in violation of the party's bylaws by not informing the entire committee of scheduled meetings.

Please let me know if he does not get in touch with you in the future.

Apparently, Stainbrook didn't heed whatever advice Bennett offered.

Dereliction of Duty

Clearly, failure to follow the party bylaws is a dereliction of his duty as chairman. But that's par for the course for Stainbrook.

However, that's not all.

Rumor has it that the delay in appointing a replacement to fill Judge James Jensen's seat on the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas is due to the failure of the local party to actually screen the applicants.

Jensen was elected in November to the Appeals Court. Six individuals applied to fill the vacancy. The normal process is that the local party screens the candidates and then makes a recommendation to the governor who then appoints the replacement. Sometimes, the party recommends several candidates. The deadline for applications was January 28th.

I was told that Stainbrook informed the candidates they would be screened following the party's annual Lincoln Day Dinner which was on Feb. 21st. This makes sense since it is a major event and primary fundraiser for the party. I can't imagine anyone being upset at letting the party focus on the dinner, though past chairmen have managed to do two things at once. But scheduling a screening after the dinner didn't cause any concern.

However, by March 14th, no screening had been scheduled and a Blade article profiling some of the applicants said:

"Applicants submitted their names to the Lucas County Republican Party, which is expected to screen candidates sometime in the next three weeks, party Chairman Jon Stainbrook said."

That was five weeks ago - and still no word on when the screening will be scheduled.

But the executive committee can meet to "unrecommend" a new enemy of Stainbrook's.

Definitely, this qualifies as a dereliction of duty, and a complete and total disservice to the residents of Lucas County who depend upon a full court to hear their issues.

Stainbrook's failure to perform the necessary duties of chairman while pursuing his own personal vendettas is not new.

He doesn't raise anywhere near the money for the party and its candidates as all previous chairmen have done. And some of the money he raised went not to local candidates, but to his own, personal race for state central committee. At least, that's what the mandatory disclosure on his campaign signs indicated when they said "paid for by the Lucas County Republican Party."

He doesn't field candidates and has said nothing about recruiting and endorsing a candidate for Toledo mayor or council - and the primary is less than five months away! That's not nearly enough time to do a proper job of running for office, I know.

He can't even keep the LCRP webpage current, for goodness sake! As of the publication of this post, it still had the Lincoln Day Dinner as the landing page. That was nearly two months ago!



He doesn't act as a spokesman for Republican principles, rarely - if ever - taking a position on issues or matters in the community. He and his executive committee (probably without many of the actual members present due to lack of notification) even endorsed tax increases!

Many are afraid to even speak privately with him for fear he is secretly recording their conversation and will edit it and use it against them in the future.

He is known for suing fellow Republicans for slights real or imagined (and most believe they are imagined). In fact, a common phrase heard among Republicans in the county is "I wish he spent as much time actually recruiting and supporting candidates as he does on going after fellow Republicans."

He uses the office of Chairman of the party for his own personal advancement and revenge on those he has perceived as enemies. He tries to execute ages-old vendettas against any and all who might have offended him in some way years ago. He definitely holds a grudge and never forgets a slight.

He needs to go, many agree.

But who is willing to stand up and face his onslaught and the vindictiveness of the Blade which continues to support Stainbrook because of his "close, personal relationship" with John Robinson Block, the publisher?

As the Bard wrote so long ago, "aye, there's the rub."

Are some of Stainbrook's chickens coming home to roost?

My, oh my...this is what happens when you decide you disagree with Jon Stainbrook....

Stainbrook aims to oust GOP board member

Apparently, Tony DeGidio is inclined to support the recommendation from the Ohio Secretary of State to fire the Board of Elections direct and assistant director. But the director is Meghan Gallager, FOS (friend of Stainbrook) and that doesn't sit too well with the GOP county chairman.

So...all the dirt is coming out.

Stainbrook claims:

* DeGidio doesn't actually live in the county
* He has a pending ethics complaint and that makes him ineligible to serve on the BOE

DeGidio claims:

* Stainbrook has a conflict of interest because he and Gallagher were or are romantically involved
* Stainbrook takes money from Gallagher

What a mess!

First, if DeGidio doesn't live in the county, isn't that something Stainbrook has known all along?

Didn't he investigate that fact before presenting his name to the Lucas County Republican Party's executive committee for them to recommend him as the board member?

And if Stainbrook has known this all along, why is it only now an issue?

Could it be because now it's useful to Stainbrook? That would certainly be in keeping with his modus operandi.

And so what if DeGidio has a *pending* ethics complaint. Having an unadjudicated charge against you could be a concern but is it cause for removal? If so, I can think of a significant number of people who will gladly file similar types of ethics charges against Stainbrook just to get rid of him.

Now, if the charges pan out, then that's a different discussion. But we're not there yet - unless there's more that Stainbrook knows that he's not yet telling.

DeGidio's charges, however, are more serious. If you receive funds from an appointee, you clearly have a conflict of interest - on both sides. A romantic relationship is also a conflict, but harder to prove when both parties are denying it.

But does DeGidio, knowing Stainbrook's penchant for gathering dirt and holding it against someone, have dirt of his own?

Knowing Stainbrook's history, did he gather evidence to protect himself, or at least take Jon down with him?

Aye, there's the rub.

Only time will tell, but until then, expect the pile of dirt to get higher as this is certain to get more ugly as the chickens come home to roost.

Careful, though. As Chris Myers as Swamp Bubbles warns: eating your own can give you indigestion.

Stainbrook's reaction to Sec of State report: Fire everyone except the two named in report

According to reports from today's Lucas County Board of Elections meeting, the recent review done by the Ohio Secretary of State isn't sitting well with Jon Stainbrook, a Republican member of the board and the chairman of the Lucas County GOP.

The SoS report recommended firing the top two administrators, Republican Director Meghan Gallagher and Democrat Dan DeAngelis.

Stainbrook's solution: keep them and fire everyone else instead!

Talk about 'stuck-on-stupid' ...

The motion by Stainbrook to do just that was not seconded, but discussion ensued, so the board called a brief recess and, upon returning, ended all discussion due to a lack of second on the motion.

No other action regarding the report was taken.

Interestingly, after having had issues with the lack of public comment previously, the BOE still has not developed a policy for accepting public comment on board matters or items on the agenda. As a result, John Mac Avoy, a member of the Northwest Ohio Conservative Coalition, was prevented from speaking or asking questions during the meeting about the report and its recommendations.

Considering this latest, perhaps the county would be better served by firing Stainbrook from the BOE.

Toledo - one of America's most miserable cities

Toledo has made another list - the Most Miserable Cities of 2013.

Living in Toledo, I can think of a lot of places that are worse than this city, but by the criteria of the Forbes list, we end up #11 of the 20 cities on the list.

Job growth has been anemic in Toledo and residents are voting with their feet and leaving the city. The net migration rate out of the city was the nation's fourth highest behind Detroit, Flint and Cleveland.

The sad part about this is that people and voters in the city don't seem to have hit rock bottom yet to know they need to change.

Just look at what's going on with the presidency of Toledo City Council. The seats are supposed to be non-partisan but the Democrats, who hold a majority, are being dictated to by their party. After a 'come-to-Jesus' meeting last night, they're all going to support Paula Hicks-Hudson for the role - and she's pretty much on board with removing any Republicans from their committee chairmanships.

Heaven forbid that the non-partisan body would reflect diversity in who runs the various committees!

The Republican Party, under the current chairman, Jon Stainbrook, is virtually non-existent, except when they're agreeing with one of the most liberal newspapers in the country, the Toledo Blade.

We are the quintessential definition of stupidity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

No wonder I have a 'stuck-on-stupid' designation for so many things I write about on this blog.

2012 Election Reflections Part 3: Where do we go from here?

This is Part 3 of my speech to the Fallen Timbers Republican Club. Part 1 was "What went wrong" and Part 2 was "What went right."

Where do we go from here?

Nationally – we need to stop the idea of the ‘next in line.’

The Republican Party needs to learn from the left and build coalitions – focusing on where we agree rather than where we don’t. The party needs to embrace and welcome the Tea Parties – looking upon them as the conscience of the party rather than the challenger to power.

The economy will remain a key factor, especially if Pres. Obama continues his failed policies and we need to remember that minorities are as interested in jobs as non-minorities. But the way we communicate that message has to be better than the Democrats' message.

Kevin Williamson, National Review reporter, wrote:

"…offering Americans a check is a more fruitful political strategy than offering them the opportunity to take control of and responsibility for their own lives. This is what Oakeshott had in mind when he wrote that liberty was something that many people simply are not equipped to “enjoy as an opportunity rather than suffer as a burden.”

For many years, Republicans have relied on Jude Wanniski’s “Two Santa Claus” theory, the strategy of using the promise of tax cuts to compete with Democrats’ promises of cash and other benefits. In part as a consequence of that strategy, a great many Americans pay little or no federal income taxes, while many of the other federal taxes they pay are indirect or partly hidden. Mitt Romney was right: You can’t use tax cuts to buy off people who are net recipients of tax transfers. Figuring out what we can offer them that is consistent with our principles is the task of conservatives between now and the next election.

Rush Limbaugh also referenced the idea of Obama as Santa Claus. While many of us still believe in the concept of Santa, we know there is no army of elves working tirelessly day and night to magically create whatever toys or goodies are on wish list. The American public, as much as they might like to believe that, knows it as well. That is the analogy we use.

House Republicans need to continue to hold the line. We maintained control of the House in spite of being demagogued as obstructionists. We need to understand that our House wins are as valuable and as much of a mandate as Obama’s White House win.

We do not capitulate to Obama, but maintain our position as the loyal opposition.

We must also remember that all things political are cyclical. So we’re not on top right now. It’s natural to feel demoralized at what is occurred, especially because so many in the fight are actually new to it. But the fact that Obama won, or the levies passed, does not mean that our principles are any less valuable to the nation or the people that they were on Monday.

We just haven’t made the case as well as we could and should have.

People are forgetful and they’re becoming accustomed to having everything happen like in a 30-minute sitcom.

Erick Erickson of RedState.com wrote today (Thursday):

No immigrant comes to the United States wanting to be on welfare. They come for a better life of hard work and success. What conservatives forget is that people forget.

And conservatives have done a terrible job reminding people.

Since Ronald Reagan rose from the ashes of the Goldwater movement, Republicans have articulated a message of freedom and opportunity — a rugged individualism that says if you work hard you can be what you want and do what you want. But people forget.

In the last decade or so, Republicans began to assume everyone just naturally agreed. They stopped explaining. They stopped being evangelists. Worse, conservatism morphed into Republicanism and instead of being about ideas, both became about the acquisition of power for the sake of power. Republicans no longer articulated a core set of principles through policy, but policies designed solely to keep them in power. The party leaders and many of its candidates began to do the same — freedom became a platitude, not a policy.

During Barack Obama’s tenure, Republicans tried to blur every line, make every compromise, and often surrendered before a weapon was even pointed at them. They did not articulate a positive conservative vision, but a defensive position that Obama was bad and they were good with little to show for it. They cut deals that sold out their core to preserve their power. They do so even today.

Republicans assumed Americans got it. They assumed Americans and Republicans were still speaking the same language. But they weren’t.

Politics is cyclical and Americans are forgetful. Republicans forgot that. They failed to keep advancing. They failed to keep explaining. They relied on the tried and true that became the tired and stale.

Tax cuts? Yay!
Pro-life? Yay!

But what else? Under Republicans and Democrats alike, the tax code has grown more complex, the lobbyist class has grown richer, and the banks have gotten too big to fail.

Moving forward, the conservative movement from within the GOP needs to advance new ideas, not just dust off and repackage old ideas. The principles remain the same. The principles are fixed. But the ideas that advance those principles must fit into the twenty-first century.

Issues like education reform, tax reform, welfare reform, repealing Obamacare are all popular topics. Americans still agree with these things and, like I said before, talking about welfare reform did not hurt us with seniors and actually helps us with younger voters.

Erickson further explains that Conservatism’s ideas don’t just make people prosperous, they help the poor and the needy. People who need – and deserve – a helping hand are best helped by a limited government that lifts people up.

He also notes something very important: being an obstructionist is not a bad thing when we are preventing really bad ideas that history shows are failures. America is great and it is conservatism that helped make it that way.

Additionally, we have to challenge and end the careers of Republicans who claim to uphold our party’s principles and then vote otherwise – nationally, at the state level and at the local level.

We have to pick battles big enough to matter but small enough to win. We have to learn from the left in this regard. They are often willing to sacrifice a few elected offices to move their ball down the field, as they did with the passage of Obamacare. We need to be willing to sacrifice a few "Republican"-held seats when the individuals who hold them are not acting in concert with the core principles of the Republican Party.

Locally:

We need to re-take the Lucas County Republican Party. It has utterly failed. It raises no money to support candidates, it has no candidate recruitment plan, it does not espouse the principles of the Republican Party, and it does not speak for Republicans.

We need to stop supporting people simply because of their party designation and hold them accountable for their votes, comments and positions that are contrary to our Republican principles.

When democrats go against their party, they are crucified for doing so. There’s a lot to be learned from that tactic. Elected Republicans should feel more heat from us when they go against our principles than they do from Democrats for standing for them.

Let me repeat that: Republicans should feel more heat from us when they go against our principles than they do from Democrats for standing for them.

We need to be MORE involved. We need to attend school board meetings, township trustee, council and commissioner meetings. We need to record what is going on and share that with others.

And we need to take advantage of the tools available to us – the Internet, social media, and opportunities to talk to others – to share the message.

We need to counter the media – loudly. How many here still subscribe to The Blade or watch local TV news? Why???? Why are you supporting entities that directly go against your best interests? Did any of you see local media talking about the percentage increase in funding the levies were asking for?

They didn't - and it's our fault because we allow it to stand without rebuttal and then put money in their pockets to continue their biases.

We need to be the fact-checkers on everything local politicians say and local media repeats. And we don’t demonize the source in doing so - the facts will stand without personal attacks on the individual.

We need to strategize better – we as individuals, because that used to be something left up to the party and, well ... see above.

Right now, you may be discouraged, depressed or even heart sick as I was yesterday (Wednesday).

I read a post by KrisAnne Hall who teaches the Constitution. She had some good quotes that should remind us about the real struggle for freedom – from people actively involved in the revolution:

John Adams, in a letter to his wife Abigail, wrote:

"I am wearied out with expectation that the Massachusetts troops would have arrived e’er now at headquarters. Do our people intend to leave the continent in the lurch? Do they mean to submit? … Do they wish to see another crippled, disastrous, and disgraceful campaign, for want of an army? I am more sick and more ashamed of my own countrymen, then ever I was before…I am a fool, if ever there was one, being such a slave. I won't be much longer. I will be more free in some world or other. It is not tolerable, that the opening spring, which I should enjoy with my wife and children, upon my little farm, should pass away…Posterity! You will never know how much it costs to the present generation to preserve your freedom! I hope you will make good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in heaven that I ever took pains to preserve it."

And one from Mercy Otis Warren – do you know her? She was a poet and a historian, and one of the few women who wrote about the Revolution. Her brother was the noted patriot and lawyer James Otis, who is credited with the quote "taxation without representation is tyranny", the principal slogan of the American Revolution.

She wrote:

"I have my fears. Yet, notwithstanding the complicated difficulties that arise before us, there is no receding; and I should blush if in any instance the week passions of my sex damp the fortitude, the patriotism, and the manly resolve of yours. May nothing ever check that glorious spirit of freedom which inspires the patriots in the cabinet, and the hero in the field, with the courage to maintain their righteous cause, and to endeavor to transmit the claim to posterity, even if they must seal the rich conveyance to their children with their own blood."

I agree with Hall when she said (paraphrased), 'We don't do this for us. We certainly don't do this for the millions out there who obviously have no intent to think for themselves. We do this for liberty. We do this for our children.'

This reasoning is why our founders were able to pledge life and fortune and sacred honor for a generation that they would never know. They believed in their hearts and in their souls that without liberty, life was not worth living. Mercy said, "we will stand against tyranny today, or our children will bow tomorrow." How can we, have any less resolve? How can we even consider wavering in our stand, much less quitting altogether? What an insult to our framers.

As Andrew Breitbart preached, this is a war. It’s a never-ending, constant struggle for the hearts and minds of our fellow man - and it is not over with a single battle.

Now is not the time to give up… now is the time to lead. Are you ready to do so?

Give Stainbrook enough rope....

It was only a matter of time.

Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted has placed the Lucas County Board of Elections under administrative oversight. But it's much more than that.

The BOE has been under administrative oversight in the past and I believe some (though certainly not all) of that was purely political, having more to do with internal party politics than actual running of the board.

Under the urging of The Blade, two good Republican members were chased off the board. Patrick Kriner and Lynn Olman had done phenomenal work in straightening out the BOE and putting it back on the path of running elections - not worrying about partisan politics.

They were aided in their efforts by the Democrat board members, Rita Brown and Gary Johnson - and then Ron Rothenbuler, who also focused on their responsibilities to run the elections.

But Jon Stainbrook ended up the chairman of the Lucas County Republican Party and made it part of his mission to get the BOE job for himself and his cronies - many of whom had been promised jobs at the BOE for supporting him, if rumors can be believed.

He worked within the rules - for the most part - in getting his executive committee to appoint him to both seats - but not before having 'deemed' Kriner and Olman to have resigned. He also claimed one seat was not properly filled and actually filed suit to have Kriner removed. The Executive Committee voted to Stainbrook in that seat.

Then Olman's term expired and Stainbrook had his executive committee appoint him to that seat as well.

Talk about confusing...and whatever happened to that lawsuit anyway?

He finally managed to actually gain the BOE seat, but it was only a matter of time before things started to unravel. Unable to work with Stainbrook and unwilling to take his abuse, Democrats appointed to the BOE resigned.

Recent Stainbrook appointees to staff positions, including Megan Gallagher, were quickly advanced to supervisory positions and then Gallagher ended up director, despite having no experience whatsoever in either the BOE or in any supervisory position.

The failure of the board to perform such basic tasks, like create an organizational chart, was a clear testament to the incompetence of the people Stainbrook wanted in control.

And for his own part, other than being able to turn out people (either for phone banks or at the central committee meetings to get his way), Stainbrook has no experience in managing or running anything.

He failed in his responsibility as chairman of the party to properly file the paperwork to put Jan Scotland on the ballot.

He failed in his responsibility as chairman of the party to properly file the party's campaign finance reports.

He has failed in his responsibility as chairman of the party to train and recruit qualified candidates.

He has failed in his responsibility to raise money to support those candidates (though he somehow finds party money to pay for his own personal campaign for the state central committee).

He has failed in his responsibility to advance the limited-government, lower-taxation principles of the Republican Party, supporting measures that expand government and endorsing tax increases.

He has failed to grow the party, resulting in fragmented groups going out on their own, often in contradiction to what he wants, in order to engage Republicans and support Republican principles.

He has failed at even keeping the party's web page current.

You can search on his name for my blog posts on all of these failures - they're too numerous to link to here, which is an indication of just how bad things have been.

Considering all these failures, I'm not surprised at his failure on the BOE, though I am surprised that it took Husted this long to act. Perhaps it was just a matter of giving Stainbrook enough rope with which to hang himself.

The sad part isn't that all of this was predictable. Nothing in Stainbrook's past performance indicates that he was ever going to be able to be a good board member intent on performing a reliable election process.

The worst part isn't even the devastation his actions have had on good people along the way - though that's clearly bad enough.

No, the worst part is that the integrity of the voting system in Lucas County is at risk.

The BOE hasn't hired an IT manager. I was told the other day when I was in the office that because no one had been hired, the staff hadn't been able to post the campaign finance reports from January on the BOE website. Being able to access those filings is part of what allows citizens to hold their elected officials accountable. That clearly wasn't - and still isn't - a priority, though bickering about who said what to whom still is.

At least Husted is assigning someone to handle the IT responsibilities, which include preparing all the voting machines for use. Of all things, this should have been top priority for the board, but they're too busy bickering over nonsense - which is what Stainbrook has always done.

So while everyone has been waiting for Stainbrook to put that rope around his neck and tighten the noose, voters in Lucas County are suffering and what was a smoothly-operating office (despite what you might have read in the local daily who distorted every issue in order to make the case that Stainbrook was "needed" on the BOE and the other members had to go) is now chaos with early voting beginning in less than 60 days.

Sometimes, the only thing you can do is to give enough rope. It's just too bad that so many have to suffer in order for the majority (and The Blade) to find out just how bad Stainbrook's tenure as chairman and on the BOE really is.

More questions on Stainbrook filings are raised

Lucas County Republican Party chairman Jon Stainbrook has now come to the attention of my fellow Ohio blogger, Justin Higgins - and he doesn't like what he's found.

On behalf of all Republicans in Lucas County (despite no meeting of the party to actually decide the issue), Stainbrook signed a letter urging current Ohio Republican Party chairman Kevin DeWine to resign immediately.

This follows his election in the primary as a member of the state central committee in which he defeated incumbent Johnathan Binkley and an unknown, never-before-registered-Republican, Sean Binkley.

Higgins takes a look at the filings in that race and correctly labels it "dirty dealings."

The battle for control of the Ohio Republican Party turned ugly a while ago, but in no place has it been uglier than Lucas County. Jon Stainbrook, the embattled party chairman, won the election for the 11th District State Central Committee (Male) seat. He didn’t do it cleanly. Facing up against a pro-DeWine candidate in Jonathon Binkley, Stainbrook resorted to qualifying a third candidate for the ballot, a Sean Binkley. I requested the candidate filing petitions from the Lucas County Board of Elections, and the results are interesting.

...

Stainbrook allies ran Sean Binkley for the sole reason that his last name would confuse voters intending to vote for Jonathon Binkley. Meghan Gallagher (who appears with Bensman on Sean Binkley’s petition) is also a Stainbrook ally who is featured in a photo with Bensman in the “close associate” article above. Multiple signatories of Sean Binkley’s appeared on Stainbrook’s petition. The pro-Kasich side has been chanting “the voters have spoken” since the Ohio primary, but did they even know who they were voting for in Lucas County?

...

Finally, I’m not a handwriting expert and will make no claims I can’t back up, but look at the candidate handwriting in the two full petitions. Awfully similar. If the same person filled both out however, that would be election fraud. You make the call.

To this, add my previous information about the back-room deal to eliminate contested races in Lucas County for the GOP state central committee.

Oh - and this isn't the first time that signatures on filings from Stainbrook and the LCRP have been called into question.

Not surprisingly, Higgins comes to a correct conclusion about Stainbrook:

Operatives like Stainbrook should be viewed with scrutiny and disdain, not touted as influentials calling for DeWine to get out.

When did the LCRP decide to demand DeWine's resignation?

According to Bytor at Third Base Politics, the Republican chairmen of the seven largest counties have signed a letter to Ohio GOP Chairman Kevin DeWine demanding that he resign now.

The text of the letter:

Dear Chairman DeWine:

As the Chairmen of seven of the largest county Republican Party organizations in the State of Ohio, we represent hundreds of thousands of loyal Republican activists, elected officials, candidates, donors and voters in Ohio. In fact, our seven counties represent nearly half of Ohio’s voting population, and our organizations, together with the Ohio Republican Party, must be focused on reaching those voters in order to win the important elections that are at stake this year.

For the past few months it has been apparent that the contentious relationship between top ORP leadership and the party’s elected officials is untenable and irreconcilable. For reasons unknown to us, you have been either unable or unwilling to find common ground to facilitate an effective and trusting relationship with our elected officials.

Your recent announcement that you will not seek re-election as ORP Chairman is an acknowledgement that new party leadership is needed, and we recognize how difficult a decision this must have been for you. Although we respect your current decision on this matter, we believe that it does not provide the necessary resolution to the situation.

You have admitted that the situation is unsustainable, yet you ask to sustain the status quo for 10 more months in a critical year for this party, state, and nation. We believe that it is fruitless to continue the finger pointing and unnecessary public airing of differences that has occurred.

Since the Primary Election earlier this month, it has become objectively clear to us that a majority of the incoming State Central Committee is intent upon new leadership at the state party. Now is the time for the party to unite under party leadership that can work with all of our elected officials and nominees; however, a majority of your Committee does not believe that you have the capacity to provide that unified leadership.

Therefore, it is with deep regret that we ask you to resign as chairman of the Ohio Republican Party immediately. It is our hope that, as you have already done with your announcement this past weekend, you will continue to demonstrate your commitment to the Republican Party and do what is right for the institution for which you have such great respect.

And it is signed by Lucas County Republican Party Chairman Jon Stainbrook.

So when, exactly, did the Lucas County Republican Party vote or decide to demand DeWine's resignation?

Was there a central committee meeting wherein the question was put to the party representatives?

Did Stainbrook speak to every elected Republican official in the county and get their permission to speak on their behalf? Did he contact local donors to the ORP? (doubtful considering how most of them are shunning the local party.)

How, exactly, did Stainbrook decide that a majority of Republicans in the county want DeWine to go?

It's clear that Stainbrook did NOT ask the sense of the local Republicans before signing his name to this document which purports to speak for all Republicans in the county - and that's wrong.

Personally, I'm not that big a fan of DeWine, but before he steps aside, I'd want to know who Gov. John Kasich would want instead. Republicans may decide that DeWine isn't the chairman we want, but that he'd be better than Kasich's pick.

And a party chairman should know that.

If Stainbrook was speaking for himself, that would be one thing. But he's saying he's speaking for "hundreds of thousands of loyal Republican activists, elected officials, candidates, donors and voters in Ohio." It was wrong of him to purport to speak for the LCRP when the LCRP has not taken a position on the internal conflict between Kasick and DeWine.

And if the other chairman didn't first go to their parties before signing, they are in the wrong as well.

Matt Hurley at Weapons of Mass Discussion has some thoughts on the letter, including an observation that the letter signers are all from Democrat-dominated counties. He also asks a very critical question: Who do these chairman support as a replacement to "the devil we know"?

Where the Lucas County Republican Party gets its money

Yesterday, I looked at how the Lucas County Republican Party was spending its money - primarily for the personal benefit of chairman Jon Stainbrook.

Today, I want to share with you where the LCRP gets those funds.

I looked at the campaign finance reports on file with the Lucas County Board of Elections for 2009 to present.

The party has four separate funds: Judicial Fund, Building Fund, Candidate Fund and General Fund. The first three are restricted in how the funds can be used. The general fund pays for regular party expenses.

The Judicial Fund had $872.91 in it according to the filing of July 31, 2009. As of the last filing on January 31, 2012, there is $2.91 in that account. Interestingly, none of the reports show any expenditures to account for where the $870 went.

The Candidate Fund had $225.92 in it on July 31, 2009. As of the January 31, 2012 filing, it has only $.92. Again, there is no report that shows any expenditures from this fund so there is no accounting for the $225 discrepancy.

The Building Fund, as of the January 31, 2012 filing, has $63,663.19. There have been no expenditures from this fund - but no contributions either. The only income has been from interest paid on the fund account by the bank.

In yesterday's post I also included the following information regarding the general fund:

Interestingly, their 2011 Semi-Annual Report filed on July 29, 2011, doesn't add up.

It lists the following:

$25,034.50 total funds available

$19,797.03 total expenses

$ 2,940.68 on hand

However, when you subtract expenses from total available, you get $5,237.47 - not the $2,940.68 that they have on the form.

There has been no correction filed as of this posting.

According to the last filing for the general fund on December 16, 2011, the party has $64.75 on hand.

So Stainbrook has not raised any money for the Building Fund, the Candidate Fund nor the Judicial Fund since becoming chairman.

So where is the money he's spending coming from?

Well, primarily, from regular fundraising events like election night parties and the Lincoln Day Dinner.

The largest individual contributors over the 2009-2011 period are:

* $3,000.00 from Allan Block of Buckeye Cablesystem in 2010

* $3,000.00 from Citizens for Sarantou in 2011 (probably to help cover costs of his legal challenge to the outcome of the Lucas County Commissioner race)

* $3,500.00 from Jim Brennan Jr. of Brennan Industrial Truck in 2010

* $3,134.98 from the Ohio Republican Party in 2009

* $1,000.00 from Gina Kaczala in 2010

* $1,809.33 from the Kaczala Campaign Committee in 2010

* $1,000.00 from John Eldred in 2010

Jim Brennan Jr. also made a $10,000 loan to the party in January of 2011 and has received a repayment of $4,000 with a balance of $6,000 still due.

There are other donations of less than $500, but few of the donors are repeated. It appears that they gave small amounts and usually only on one occasion. There is an entry for $200 in donations of less than $25 amounts, though how many people that represents is not required on the form.

The total number of itemized donors, not counting the above list, is 10.

That's all.

Just 14 people have made a decision to donate more than $25 to the LCRP since 2009. And only 2 people donated in 2011.

Let that sink in for a minute.

By contrast, the 2006 pre-general report for the general fund had well over 50 individual donors, though several were under the $25 amount and a couple were repeat donors. But that is just for the pre-general report, not the entire year.

Stainbrook's Lincoln Day dinners have been somewhat successful. According to the reports, these events have raised a net of $32,222.57 over the last three years. This averages just under $10,750.00/year. But the amount raised by Stainbrook at these events is less than what other chairmen raised. For example, the 2005 Lincoln Day dinner netted over $17,000.

The lack of other donations shows that Republicans are willing to come to an event to hear special speakers and guests, but are not willing to make a direct contribution to the party. Clearly, Stainbrook is not seeing anywhere near the financial support that other party chairman have been able to attain. And big-dollar donors who routinely gave in the past have not given since he became chairman.

Stainbrook will probably say that these absent donors are 'old-guard' Republicans or make other excuses as to why he has been a failure at fundraising. But despite issues the past, previous party chairmen have raised the monies necessary to support the candidates they recruited.

The primary role of a local party chairman is to get local Republicans elected. This is accomplished in several steps:

1) Recruit good candidates. Sadly, the lack of names on the 2012 Republican primary ballot shows he's not been able to recruit any candidates for most offices, much less good ones.

2) Raise money. The funds will support campaign literature, signs, wires, advertising, slate cards and get-out-the-vote efforts. Again, Stainbrook has failed to do this.

3) Provide a support system for the candidates: helping with parades, festivals and events, phone banking, putting together mailers and absentee voter communications, emails, keeping track of events and providing experienced advice. I don't know what the party has done in this respect, but the track record of candidate failures speaks for itself.

4) Be the spokesman for Republican Party principles of limited government, individual responsibility, personal property rights and lower taxation. Other than his negative comments about other Republicans I've not seen much from this chairman where he has spoken out against government spending, taxation or in favor of conservative principles. I'll admit that I may have missed something along the way, but the lack of a consistent advocacy for conservative principles is clear.

In all the major tasks of a party chairman, Stainbrook has failed. And the inability to raise funds is a clear reflection of that fact

Just how is the Lucas County Republican Party spending its money?

For the March primary, I received a lot of mailings regarding the Ohio Republican State Central Committee races. All but one of these were paid for by the Ohio Republican Party or an organization called Restoring Ohio (believed to be a pro Gov. John Kasich group).

The one that wasn't paid for by these two groups was actually paid for by the Lucas County Republican Party.

Now, having a mailer from the LCRP for a primary isn't an unusual thing. In the past, they've sent out slate cards and urged Republicans to vote in the primary.

This one, however, was only for LCRP Chairman Jon Stainbrook, urging Republicans to vote for him in the contested race for the state central committee.


It was billed as an 'endorsement alert' but it was the only mailer the local party sent out for the election.

They didn't send a slate card. They didn't endorse for the contested Republican judicial race. They didn't send anything on other contested races. Just this one for Jon Stainbrook.

Stainbrook also had yard signs for his state central committee campaign - also paid for by the LCRP:





Note, too, that these are the large 3x5 mini-billboards - not the regular campaign yard signs ... for a state central committee race!

Which raises a lot of questions - primarily about how Stainbrook is using party money for his own personal purposes.

In looking back through the LCRP's campaign finance reports, the last time the party spent any money designated for particular candidates was in 2009 when they paid about $2,000 for signs and wires for the primary.

They did spend $2,000 in 2011 for printing and signs though there is nothing to identify what that money was for. And they did spend over $6,600 for the lawsuit they filed on behalf of George Sarantou in his loss for Lucas County Commissioner - a suit they later dropped.

But they've spent a lot more money on items that have nothing to do with promoting the election of Republicans.

The campaign finance reports show numerous expenditures for 'food for volunteers' where the amounts are under $5.00. How many volunteers are you feeding at McDonald's or Rudy's when you spend less than $5.00?

There are 'snacks for volunteers' purchased at coffee shops and gas stations. Again, how many volunteers are you feeding when you're spending under $2.00 for snacks?

My educated guess is that these expenses are not for 'volunteers' but for Jon Stainbrook personally.

There are also car rentals totalling more than $1,000. Now why in the world would the LCRP need to rent a car on multiple occasions?

They've spent another $1,600 in legal fees - not counting the amount mentioned above - and have paid out nearly $2,900 for parliamentarian services using a parliamentarian from Cleveland and one from the Columbus area. Couldn't they find a parliamentarian in Toledo? Or even a Republican one willing to donate their services?

They've spent $550 on security, $420 on a volunteer appreciation party, but only show rent being paid in 2010. They've also reimbursed Stainbrook and his close friends Meghan Gallagher and Kelly Bensman for their expenses (though there were many questions about those reimbursements due to a lack of documentation as to what they were for).

And other than incumbents or well-known former elected official being re-elected, they've not won any elections.

But they have money to send out a full color, first-class mailer on behalf of a personal race the chairman is involved in against a fellow Republican.

Sad - but perhaps this is why they can't seem to raise any money other than at the Lincoln Day Dinner.

The purpose of the local Republican Party is to elect local Republicans to local office while supporting the state-wide and national candidates. Our local GOP and its chairman, Jon Stainbrook, are failing miserably.





***SIDE NOTE:

The Lucas County Republican Party campaign finance reports are available for viewing at the Lucas County Board of Elections website's document center.

Interestingly, their 2011 Semi-Annual Report filed on July 29, 2011, doesn't add up.

It lists the following:

$25,034.50 total funds available
$19,797.03 total expenses

$ 2,940.68 on hand

However, when you subtract expenses from total available, you get $5,237.47 - not the $2,940.68 that they have on the form.

There has been no correction filed as of this posting.

Kasich-DeWine-ORP split and Lucas County

I'm not really sure where to start on this Ohio Republican Party Chairman Kevin DeWine - Governor John Kasich split over control of the ORP but it has resulted in very strange goings-on in Lucas County.

Kasich has, for a long time, wanted his own person in charge of the party. DeWine hasn't wanted to go. DeWine made the issue public and, in 2008, spent party money to protect incumbent state central committee members from tea party candidate challengers.

At the last state central committee meeting, DeWine passed a rule change (by a one vote margin) which says that you have to have been a registered Republican in at least three prior elections in order to be eligible for service on the state central committee. Many saw this as an attempt to keep newly registered Republicans - tea party members who took to heart the advice to change the party from within - from actually serving if elected. That he did this after the ballots were printed was just sheer stupidity.

If you want a good recap, Tom Blumer at BizzyBlog has been following the issue and has details, including this most recent update on mailers paid for by the state.

The strange thing is the impact this division has had on Lucas County - not that Lucas County doesn't have its own share of issues with central committee seats.

Wednesday, I shared breaking news with you about the deal worked out by DeWine to avoid three contested races for state central committee in Senate Districts 2 and 9.

When I learned that this deal was pending, I was confused as at least one individual now unopposed was listed on this 'alternate slate' list - a group of people supposedly opposed to DeWine.

It was my understanding that Lucas County Republican Party Jon Stainbrook was instrumental in working out the deal - and we all know that Stainbrook doesn't do anything that isn't, first and foremost, in his own best interest, or intended to exact revenge against those he believes have slighted him.

But now comes the interesting part. Meghan Gallagher, an incumbent state central committeewoman is running unopposed thanks to Chairman DeWine - but a Kasich organization has paid for the mailings for Stainbrook and Gallagher that just hit homes yesterday.

It's also my understanding that DeWine was not aware of the mailings and learned of them only after they were received by voters.

Now, why would DeWine work to have a Kasich supporter unopposed? And do you think DeWine would have brokered the deal if he'd known that the Kasich mailer was in the mail the day he did it?

Obviously, Stainbrook was aware that the mailing was going out, so it means he withheld the information from DeWine.

Stainbrook withholding information isn't news, but it may be to DeWine, though if DeWine had heeded the information and advice he's received from other Republicans in Lucas County, this would not have come as a surprise.

Additionally, did Kasich know that Stainbrook was working out a deal to protect potential DeWine supporters when his organization agreed to pay for and send out these mailings?

Is Stainbrook playing both sides against the middle for his own personal benefit?

Sadly, there's not much local Republicans can do when it comes to the state central committee races. A vote cast for the candidates who withdrew will not be counted. Mickey Wagoner, Dee Talmage and Gallagher are going to be elected.

Stainbrook, however, may not be. He lost this seat in 2008 to incumbent Jonathan Binkley by a 5,310 to 4,097 vote. In fact, I understand Stainbrook was so angry at losing that he decided he needed to confuse voters by recruiting a Sean Binkley to run with him against Jonathan Binkley this year, though he denied he did so.

Interestingly, Sean Binkley has never voted in a Republican primary, making him ineligible to serve, based on the new party rule change, if elected.

So Republicans can - again - defeat Stainbrook by electing Jonathan Binkley, and I would urge them to do so. Unlike his opponent, Jonathan is a man of integrity and will do as he says rather than play petty games pitting people against each other or use his position to exact revenge on those he believes have wronged him years in the past.