Sandusky commissioners get feisty over police chief search

City commissioner Pervis Brown Jr. defended himself against an accusation that he botched the search for a new police chief by refusing to consider any officers with present or past associations with the Perkins Township Police Department.
Aug 13, 2012

City commissioner Pervis Brown Jr. defended himself against an accusation that he botched the search for a new police chief by refusing to consider any officers with present or past associations with the Perkins Township Police Department. 

“I am concerned over the numerous phone calls I received this (past) week regarding the exclusion of certain candidates from a geographical location,” commissioner Diedre Cole said during Monday's commission meeting, suggesting Brown snubbed the Perkins officers because the Perkins Police Department had investigated or arrested Brown’s son, Pervis Brown III, on several occasions.

Cole's assertion led to a heated 30-minute exchange involving Cole and commissioners Brown and Jeff Smith, who defended the decision to exclude the Perkins officers without explaining why they were excluded. 


Get Tuesday's Register for more on this story. 





 Mr. Brown is just using one of his perks as a city commissioner.

Get over it.


For Ms Cole to actually admit she solicited other officers to submit their resumes is just unbelievable. If anyone tainted the group, it was Ms. Cole.  


If Cole follows past behavior on the commission, she will receive negative press and do a complete turn around and support what she was previously opposed to.


If you want to get feisty about the police chief search, get feisty about 2 committee members having criminal records. One for Domestic Violence, the other for Theft while employed in Muni court. Don't believe... check the record


Ms. Cole behaved badly in promising to hire someone as police chief, which is way beyond her scope of authority.  And in calling fellow commissioners liar for calling her out on it. 

Excluding anyone closely associated with the former Perkins police chief seems like good common sense.

Let the process move forward.  Make a decision.

Regarding the discussion about studying the relocation of city hall......common sense tells you bringing the numbers of people visiting city hall into the central business district will add to the resurgence of our downtown.   I applaud Mr. Smith for raising the topic and urge the commission to consider the idea at their strategy session October 1st. 

The sale of the present city hall site along with support from area foundations and local donors might make the move affordable. 

And turning the present city hall site into a taxable development would add to the tax base and spur the comeback of the Meigs Street area.  Of course, all while preserving the public's access to the waterfront.

T. A. Schwanger

Re: Reader

   Relocation of City Hall__ Commissioner Smith's reading of a prepared statement at Monday's commission meeting supporting the relocation of City Hall to downtown is a clear indication he is indeed being influenced by a small group that has been attempting to relocate City Hall since the 1990s.  I'm surprised Commissioner Smith, an outspoken supporter of the defunct 2006 Marina District Project at Battery Park, waited this long to promote his hidden agenda for running for commission.

  Relocating City Hall a mere few bocks from its present location should be based out of total community necessity not a want to impact a particular demographic area of the City. According to news reports, and personal observations, the downtown area is well on its way to flourishing without relocating City Hall. The long discussed idea of opening a college branch downtown, apparently well on its way to becoming a reality, will create further positive impacts.






Mr Schwanger.....Commissioner Smith's idea on relocating city hall was not to move it  a mere few blocks.  If you were thinking Adams Jr. high you were wrong.  That is not the location to which he was goning to refer. I happen to know that for a fact. 

I am intested to know what college branch will be moving into the Adams building as so many of them have campuses within driving distance of Sandusky already?



And were there any more explosions after we left and what did you say after we left last night?

Swamp Fox

Why was the chosen candidate of Ms. Coles not given the Perkins Chief job?   Answer the end of the felon chief's inner circle.

Home Boy

So, what is Mr. Brown's side iof the 'story'? Why DID he exclude possible canditates forn the PPD??

Just Asking

Ms Cole stated she had gotten calls saying residents of Perkins need not apply.

None of the three officers associated with the PPD live in Perkins.  Last I knew Matthews lived in the City or at least he did when first going to Hocking College.  IMO he has too much baggage and is more of a follower than a leader.  After all he let McClung talk him into filing that lawsuit and other questionable things.  

Also IMO he was given a chance to go through the Perkins evaluation just to be certain no one could say that the Trustees who at the time include Dwelle had just said no to him.  As it turned out the assessment center results were probably what took him out of the mix.

So in the end the committee got it right on him.  .

As for the other too.  IMO one may be qualified while the other is definitely not.  But the one that may be qualified I believe filed after the original deadline.  So why did he have to be talked into filing? 

But why pay for them to come in for an interview?  Maybe relocation expenses for the one you hire, but just to come for an interview I don' think so.

Just Asking

Is there going to be a video of last night's meeting?


 Welcome to Sandusky Ms. Cole.   Anyone want to take bets on how long it takes before she goes elsewhere?



I think the meeting will be aired on channel 81 on cable .... sometime this evening....and again next Monday at 8:30 p.m.

Worth watching.....


"Reader" is incorrect about the airings of the city commission meeting.  It airs 8:30 the night of the meeting and the next day on Tuesday, it airs at 5:00 p.m. and the following Monday at 7:00 p.m.  You can also call down to city hall and request a DVD of the meeting and for a $1.00 they will run it off for you as it is a public record which anyone can request. You have to see it to believe what happened.  It is a shame the Register doesn't live stream this anymore.  I hope the Register will reconsider doing it once again. 

Julie R.

I just happened to tune in right about the time Diedre Cole was calling one of the commissioners a liar. I thought I was hearing things............. 


Tim Schwanger....please, QUIT HOLDING OUR CITY BACK!!!!!  You and your group have done nothing but impede progress, and then turn around and complain about how nothing is getting done.  Instead of constantly criticizing those who HAVE BEEN ELECTED and are trying to use our tax dollars wisely, why not put your effort into actually HELPING Sandusky?  You and Sharon Johnson are so worried about the shoreline....why not HELP the small staff we have by looking for grants, asking for donations, going out there and picking up garbage, etc.  What qualifies YOU to be a constant critic?

Do you not realize that City Hall is an albartoss around the necks of taxpayers?  It's too large for our needs, is costly to maintain, needs a significant amount of renovating, and is an awful use for that piece of land.  I applaud Commissioner Smith for recognizing this, and looking for ways to move City Hall so that parcel may possibly generate taxes AND give me and my family a place to go for entertainment!

I only wish more commissioners had the intelligence to STOP listening to you, and the VISION to move this City forward.

T. A. Schwanger

RE: Sandusky Mom and Reader

  The best answer I have for you both is we can agree to disagree. 

   If downtown Sandusky was currently at the top of Ohio's most vibrant downtown list you would both still be screaming about how it's vital to move City Hall downtown and build condos and hotels on the waterfront. Why? Just to prove it can be not because it needs to be.

  If SOSP and others don't keep an eye on protecting the waterfront, who will?  Commissioners Smith and Farrar?

   Funny how the commissioners supporting this not so new idea of relocating City Hall are claiming the current building is "too large for our needs" today yet 5 years ago they claimed "city hall is cramped".  

  Wise use of tax dollars?  Recall the financing of the Service Complex on Cement Ave?  A $1 million project turned into a $7 million project.

  Let's have coffee downtown sometime and we can personally observe the private dollars being spent in a downtown well on its way to flourishing without the Marina District Project or a relocated City Hall.

  Sandusky Mom the next time a clean-up and painting of the Sandusky Bay Pavilion is planned I will place a notice in the newspaper so you can join in.

  Also, please visit Sandusky's new mini-park located at the foot of Shelby Street thanks to the efforts of a local Eagle Scout, Save Our Shoreline Parks, Panera Bread in Perkins and money, goods and services provided by local groups and individuals. No need to apologize. Just investigate first before you decide not to practice your own preaching.


T. A. Schwanger

Pres; SOSP




To T. A. Schwanger

Sandusky's downtown is not at the top of Ohio's most vibrant downtown what's your point ??????

What's your problem with the potential development of the present city building site as long as waterfront access is preserved and protected ???????

The entire city is aware of the need to preserve the public access to the waterfront.  Don't you think any development is possible with that access included ??????

How did you and Sharon ever let that Service Complex project get so out of hand ??????

You need to realize there are those who love this city just as much as you, yet we have different opinions on what's the best route to the city's future.


T. A. Schwanger

READER: I'll spell it out again. You and others would clamor over a false need to move City Hall downtown even if Sandusky's downtown was at the top of Ohio's most vibrant list--- just to prove you can.

Now you've been around long enough to understand this issue, but I'll review.

Many Ohio, national and international cities with waterfronts realized many years ago "best land use practice" is private development a few yards away from the waterfront--what we at SOSP refer to as "private development across the street". Sound familiar? In order of geographical importance, the concept is--the waterfront, public gathering space(s), the main transportation route (in this case E. Water Street or Meigs Street) then private development. If you remember we tagged the Marina  District Project the Great Wall of Condos Project because it created significant obstructions to Sandusky Bay.

"The Banks" in Cincinnati, Ohio and Louisville Kentucky's Waterfront Development Corporation are examples. Check it out at GOOGLE. When we showed the Louisville Development Corporations CEO the Marina District Project Plans he had to sit down and catch his breath out of disbelief.

Take a day trip to Windsor, Ontario. Our friends to the north get it. A miles long park along the waterfront followed by streets and private development.  I'll give you a $100 bucks for the slots and you can keep half. I'll donate mine to the Sandusky Bay Pavilion.

So you see, it's not myself or others opposed to relocating City Hall and protecting century old parks and public access from private land grabbing holding back this city. It's the 'lost in the last century' past and two present City Commissioners and what we call the town oligarchy holding us down.

T. A. Schwanger

Pres; SOSP



Mr. Schwanger, rest assured I am not part of any oligarchy .....not a business owner, not from a local family of wealth or influence.  Just an ordinary citizen weary of the tyranny of your group of anti development, anti progress bullies. 


Mr. Schwanger, if Sandusky's downtown was vibrant, there would be no empty spaces  available to consider moving the city hall into.

Are you so caught up with yourself that you're determined to prevent any relocation just because you can ?



Reader - You clearly miss the point.  By revitalizing the shoreline people would be drawn (pull marketing) downtown.  It is unlikely that there will ever be a resurgence of retail downtown but the increase in traffic created by shoreline access and improvement would create demand for restaurants and entertainment venues. 

One more thing Reader.  Tim Schwanger has no ego and to imply that he does is malicious.  I know Tim and his selfless work for this City should be admired. 


Tim Schwanger has no ego ?


" The increase in traffic created by shoreline access and improvement would create demand for restaurants and entertainment venues. "

I  enjoy visiting Shoreline Park on a nice winter day and enjoying the winter views of the bay and Cedar Point.

There's nobody around. 



Remember when one of the proposals for the transient marina was greeted with derision because it included a restaurant on the outer end of the project ?

It finally took a restaurant entrepreneur to breath a little life into the marina.

Until then there were only gulls and geese.

T. A. Schwanger

READER: I want to make it clear to you and everyone on this comment page I realize my attempts at appeasing Reader are in vein. However, I feel it is important to respond to his/her comments hoping to reach others.

I have supplied below a link to the Louisville Waterfront Development Corporation's web-page. It provides some stunning photos of what "best land use practice" is all about. Please open.+


The below is a rendition of the proposed "The Banks Project" in Cincinnati. Note the "public open spaces" between the two stadiums with main transportation between the open space and private development.


What's with this City Commission?  The building is too small, the building is too large, the building needs repairs, the budget is in deficit, the police commissioner isn't hired.  I don't have much occassion to visit City Hall but when I do it appears to be ok.  Someone mentioned on this blog that private entities were willing to contribute to building a new city hall, well let them make repairs to the current facility.  With the property tax base dwindling I don't understand how the commissioners could even consider replacement of the current building. Is this new discussion is related to the sale of public lands on the waterfront for private development?  I thought that was a settled matter.  If it is not, then I will do what I can to oppose any sale and support Tim Schwanger opposing this so called "development" again. Our City should intensify efforts to improve the shoreline (see Tim's comments) and make it more accessable to City residents and visitors.  If you want to market our City do so by pulling people in to relax and enjoy our biggest asset.  The very last thing we should do is give the shoreline away to private development.  


re: T. A. Schwanger comment

Don't you think a revitalized downtown and a tax paying development on the present city hall site will benefit the city as a whole ?

If we always do what we have always done, we'll always get what we already have.

Your constant opposition to progress has stifled this city.



I was AT that meeting last night.  What this story does not tell you is that Mr Icsman read what the PROCESS is for selecting the candidates and the committe is FOLLOWING it to the letter of the law. If the committee was doing wrong, it would have been told LONG before this. 

That is something major being left out here. A lot of ducked heads were seen during that reading, including that of Ms Cole.

It was a shameful sight at that meeting to see Ms Cole admit that is the City Commissioner's job to solitite people to be the chief of police.  And here all this time I thought it was there duty to run the city of Sandusky to the best of their ability.....what a shame.  Apparently someone should sit her down and explain her job to her. 

Why would you wait this long to bring up objections to a committee and how it is being run until the 11th hour?  I can guess?  Here is my GUESS....1). because you may have made some promises you cannot keep 2.)  Your person didn't make the final cut and you are upset about that.  3.) you have no control over the final selection of the top people and you can't handle it.  4.) you think the commissioners should be allowed to have their "say" on who should be on the short list and you don't like it.  

I could go on and on.  But whatever her reason, it was a shameful display by a sitting city commissioner who obviously has an agenda and backed up by another sitting city commissioner who obviously has an agenda (and one, I might add whom I used to respect up until last night).

You do NOT sit there and call people "LIARS" like she did in an open meeting. "mistaken" perhaps, but not "liars".  Now is understand why the SR sometimes gets upset with the commission for not doing anything.  They are too busy snipping at each other.  They really do.  And that is pretty evident. 

Whatever their "beef" is with this process, this committee is doing what is right, fair and necessary under the rules of this city and its charter. 

I feel badly for Mr Brown.  I am certain that whatever the committee of five is doing they certainly do NOT have to answer to the commission for their work.  They were charged with this responsibility and now, because TWO people on the commission do not like what they see so far, those two are crying foul.  Mr Brown should be commended for his work, not criticised.  I think Ms Cole or Mr Pole may have wanted this job and didn't get it. Mr Brown did and he is the right one for the job. 

Grow up....even your own LEGAL EAGLE explained it to you and said they were right.  So you best take a lesson, Ms Cole.   

You claimed all kinds of things last night but brought not ONE shred of evidence with you.   Most people when they are going to argue a point, bring proof.  You brought none.  And you leveled some nasty comments.  Where is the proof? 

You took a terrible couple of jabs at Mr. Brown, but you couldn't prove one bit of what you said.  Mr Icsman was really saying what he did to YOU and to Mr Pool.  The committee is doing just fine without you and Pool getting in their way.  The committee does not owe you any explanation of a thing. 

Like it or not the decisions are made now and the five will be tested by the Association of Police.  That is how it should be.  So all your so called checking is for nothing (of course you brought nothing to prove any of what you were saying). 

Then it goes to three from the committee's decision based on the results and recommendations of the testing. Ms Ard will make the final decision after that. 

So you really have nothing to say and nothing more you can do. 

Or, I am wrong about that.  There is something you can owe Mr Brown and Mr Hammond and Mr Smith a HUGE apology for calling them LIARS in a public meeting. 

That was totally inexcusable. 

After are supposed to represent this City and its people. 


It amazes me how the Register print article focused on the allegation that Mr. Brown had it in for the Perkins applicants because of his son's run ins with law enforcement in the township.  The reason for the alleged exclusion of Perkins applicants never came up at the meeting.

Anyone who has watched the commission meeting on cable came away with the foolishness of Ms. Cole raving about the process being compromised when she made no bones about her hopes to fire Chief Lang and fill the position with her favored candidate.  Two commissioners, Mr. Smith and Mr. Hamilton, both attested to having heard that plan from Ms. Cole's mouth last November.

Mr. Brown came across as having done what he was assigned to with a committee to narrow the list of candidates to 3 to present to Manager Ard for a hiring decision.

Maybe the Register doesn't care to air the commission meetings live on this web site so the newspaper may present their slant on what goes on ???????

Ms. Cole came across as a blustering fool at the meeting.

Watch for yourself next Monday at  7 p.m. on cable channel 81.