George Vizmeg and Prestige Builder Group spent years trying to force Canterbury Meadows at Ravenna and Stow Roads through Hudson’s process and lost at every turn—Planning Commission, BZBA, a 6-0 Council vote, Common Pleas Court, and the Court of Appeals. But, he found another route. Vizmeg donated to the campaigns of Amanda Weinstein, Samantha D’Eramo, and Kyle Brezovec, and also circulated illegal campaign materials promoting them across the city.
The materials did not have a campaign disclosure which is required by law. Those three candidates are now on Council, and the City of Hudson that already won at every legal step, is suddenly settling and giving Vizmeg the approvals he couldn’t earn previously.
Weinstein, D’Eramo, and Brezovec must recuse themselves immediately. They cannot vote on a deal involving the same developer who helped put them in office or Hudson residents should hold them responsible for an obvious Quid Pro Quo.
Tuesday August 25th’s Council Workshop has the settlement allowing the development on the agenda.
The Record Is Clear
In 2023 Prestige applied for a 34-lot open-space subdivision on nearly 95 acres at Ravenna Street and Stow Road. Planning Commission rejected it. BZBA affirmed the rejection. Council made it unanimous, 6-0 denial.
Vizmeg took the City of Hudson to Summit County Common Pleas Court and lost in October 2025. Vizmeg appealed to the Ninth District. Despite winning at every turn, the City agreed to settle in favor of Weinstein, D’ MA Eramo, and Brezovec’s campaign donor.
The new deal approves a revised 32-lot plan, grants the conditional use, and sets the City Manager up to sign off on the final plat. In exchange, the developers drop their claims. The City of Hudson that had already prevailed in court is now giving the developer what the process denied him. This also violates the City of Hudson’s Charter. Council cannot approve a subdivision of land, which is what this is. Only the Planning Commission can approve it.
“SECTION 9.02 PLANNING COMMISSION – POWERS AND DUTIES.
…In addition to the foregoing, the Planning Commission shall be the Platting Commission of the Municipality,…” – Hudson Charter
The Political Layer
Shortly before last year’s election, Vizmeg sent an email to City Planner Nick Sugar. Vizmeg included information he planned to canvas for the election defaming the incumbents who voted against his new development. This was dropped to homes and voters across Hudson, but Vizmeg failed to put a disclosure, which is required when money is spent on campaigning. Since he sent it to Sugar on the City’s email server, it became public record.
Sugar is responsible for bringing issues like Vizmeg’s development to BZBA, which raises a red flag and an important question – Why did Vizmeg email this to Sugar of all people?
Campaign contributions are legal. Settling litigation can be rational. Combining the two—especially after the City had already won —creates the appearance of a payoff.
When the people who benefited from the developer’s support then sit on the body that delivers the developer his project, the conflict is obvious. Screenshots of donations for Weinstein, D’Eramo, and Brezovec are below. These donation reports are available on the Summit County Board of Elections website and were submitted by the campaigns of each of them. The screenshots below are easily accessible public records.
Recusal is not optional. Weinstein, D’Eramo, and Brezovec should step aside. The remaining members of Council should decide the settlement without them. Anything less looks like the fix is in.
Hudson residents did not elect a Council to reverse court victories for campaign donors. They elected a Council to follow the process and protect the public interest. This settlement fails that test on its face.
Have a tip? Email us at Clocktower44236@gmail.com
