Valley should be inspired by Cuyahoga County vote

When the votes were counted Nov. 3 and the tally showed that residents of Cuyahoga County had opted for a dramatic reorganization of county government, the explanation from political observers was that the ongoing federal investigation into widespread corruption set the stage for the revolt at the ballot box.

If that’s so, why hasn’t such change taken place in the Mahoning Valley, where government corruption has long been part of the political landscape and was most recently illustrated by the conviction and imprisonment of a slew of officeholders?

It may be because the proponents of reorganization of county governments in Mahoning and Trumbull have been emphasizing the savings and the efficiencies to be derived from replacing the three commissioners with a part-time legislature, having a full-time county executive responsible for the day-to-day operation of the county, and perhaps getting rid of the county-wide administrative offices of auditor, treasurer and recorder.

By contrast, voters in Cuyahoga County were obviously sold on the notion that a new system would be better than currently exists, especially with one of the commissioners reportedly at the center of the federal probe involving kickbacks and other crimes.

As Joel Lieske, a political science professor at Cleveland State University, told The Plain Dealer, “The county commissioner system was kind of speak no evil, see no evil, hear no evil. The county has lacked leadership.”

The voters agreed 2-1 to enact a new charter.

County council

An 11-member Cuyahoga County Council will be elected next year to take office in January 2011, as will the county executive. The county prosecutor will also be elected, but the auditor, clerk of courts, coroner, engineer, recorder, sheriff and treasurer will be replaced with appointed officeholders.

In the Mahoning Valley, the Regional Chamber has been spearheading the drive for reorganization in Mahoning and Trumbull counties, but after two years, public support is still not at the level that would assure passage of a ballot issue.

But the chamber hasn’t given up. It is well aware that both counties have attempted to enact charter-style government in the past and those attempts have fallen victim to heavy opposition from the political establishment. People in office tend to prefer the status quo.

Two charter commissions formed by the Regional Chamber in October 2007 should take a cue from the voters in Cuyahoga County and make the case for change by focusing on how the system does not lend itself to checks and balances.