‘Irresponsible government': County close to losing $400k in taxpayer dollars after colleague botched multi-million dollar project, commissioners say
HARRISBURG, Pa. (WHTM) – Hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars are potentially squandered after Dauphin County Commissioners voted not to move forward with a multi-million dollar project.
In 2024, $10.4 million was allocated to turn a large building on Tecport Drive in Swatara Township into a 'one-stop shop' for county human services. That December, $400,000 was made as a down payment to get the building up and running, but since then, no progress has been made, according to Democratic Commissioner Justin Douglas.
'This is not political spin,' Douglas said at the weekly commissioners meeting in Harrisburg Wednesday. 'It's been 147 days since we acted.'
Douglas pinned most of the blame on fellow Democratic Commissioner George Hartwick, who recently returned to the weekly meetings after a month-long hiatus—he was participating in an alcohol rehabilitation program after a police report showed he crashed his county vehicle while intoxicated.
Douglas claimed Hartwick missed an important meeting to discuss the project with a stakeholder on Monday. Hartwick said he was in a different meeting and had another county official attend on his behalf.
'I certainly did not neglect it,' Hartwick said. 'I fulfilled one commitment and attempted to try to balance another.'
Because no plans have been finalized for the so-called 'Techport' building, Hartwick requested an additional 60 days to put forth an agenda. In a 2-1 vote, that extension was shot down, with Douglas claiming it would have cost the county an additional $300,000.
Download the abc27 News+ app on your Roku, Amazon Fire TV Stick, and Apple TV devices
Dauphin County has until the end of May to put together a plan and vote on moving forward with the project. If that does not happen, the $400,000 will be lost.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
23 minutes ago
- Axios
California to sue Trump administration amid LA protest standoff, Newsom says
California Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a Monday post that California will sue President Trump, saying he "illegally acted" to federalize the National Guard during protests against federal immigration enforcement in Los Angeles. The big picture: Trump on Saturday signed a memorandum calling in the National Guard — despite opposition from the state's and the city's Democratic leadership. Driving the news: Newsom, after saying Sunday that the Golden State would be taking Trump to court, wrote in a Monday X post that the president had "flamed the fires." He added, "The order he signed doesn't just apply to CA. It will allow him to go into ANY STATE and do the same thing. We're suing him." Trump's order cited "[n]umerous incidents of violence and disorder" and "violent protests" but did not specifically mention California or the Los Angeles area. The other side:"Gavin Newsom's feckless leadership is directly responsible for the lawless riots and violent attacks on law enforcement in Los Angeles," White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement provided to Axios. Jackson continued, "Instead of filing baseless lawsuits meant to score political points with his left-wing base, Newsom should focus on protecting Americans by restoring law and order to his state." Friction point: Newsom, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and other Democrats have argued Trump's deployment of the National Guard was an unnecessary escalation, while Trump administration officials have railed against their leadership. Border czar Tom Homan did not rule out arrests for Democratic officials in the state should they impede law enforcement or harbor undocumented immigrants in a Saturday interview with NBC News, but said he does not believe Bass had "crossed the line yet." "Come and get me, though guy," Newsom wrote in response. Homan, in a Monday morning interview on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" argued the NBC report was "dishonest." "I was clear they haven't crossed the line," Homan said Monday. "But they're not above the law either." Zoom in: Hegseth in his Monday post included a clip from an interview with commentator Brian Tyler Cohen in which the governor described Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth as "a joke" and characterized Trump as "unhinged." "This is a preview for things to come," he said. "This isn't about LA, per se. It's about us today, it's about you, everyone watching, tomorrow." Context: Trump's Saturday memorandum, which called into federal service some 2,000 National Guard personnel for 60 days, cited rarely used federal powers and sidestepped Newsom.
USA Today
24 minutes ago
- USA Today
Waymo suspends some Los Angeles service after cars torched in protests
Waymo suspends some Los Angeles service after cars torched in protests Show Caption Hide Caption National Guard and protesters clash over ICE raids Hundreds of demonstrators fought back with the National Guard and local authorities as ICE protests escalated. Waymo has temporarily suspended its ride hailing service in downtown Los Angeles after several of the company's self-driving cars were set on fire in immigration raid protests over the weekend. A Waymo spokesperson told USA TODAY on Monday morning, June 9, the company has removed its vehicles from downtown Los Angeles and is currently not serving the area "out of an abundance of caution." The spokesperson said the company is still operating in Los Angeles and is working in coordination with the Los Angeles Police Department. Members of the National Guard arrived in Los Angeles on June 8 after President Donald Trump ordered troops to quell protests against immigration crackdown in the city, a move that the state's Democratic governor has called unlawful. Footage shared on social media captured several Waymo driverless taxis engulfed in flames in the June 8 protests. Others were vandalized with messages against Trump and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, videos show. LAPD said around 9:15 p.m. EST that a portion of Los Angeles Street had been closed indefinitely after "multiple autonomous vehicles" had been set on fire. Live updates: Gov. Newsom blames Trump for unruly LA protests Video: Waymo cars set on fire during LA protests Protesters set Waymo cars on fire in Los Angeles anti-ICE protests Footage showed flames and thick smoke as demonstrators set Waymo cars on fire during an anti-ICE protest in Los Angeles on Sunday afternoon. Photos: Waymo cars engulfed in flames What are Waymo cars? Waymo cars are self-driving taxis operated by computers instead of humans. The company uses electric Jaguar I-PACE cars. According to Waymo, it completes more than 250,000 paid trips each week across four major U.S. cities: Phoenix, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Austin. Waymo said it is planning to expand to Atlanta, Miami and Washington, D.C. in 2026. The ride-hailing service is available through the Waymo One App, which allows customers to request a ride and indicate pick up and drop off locations. Is Waymo safe? Seeking solitude and safety, riders flock to robotaxis driven by computers Waymo, a subsidiary of Google's parent company Alphabet, launched service in Los Angeles in 2023 and operates 24/7 across 89 square miles of the city, according to its website. Why are people protesting in Los Angeles? People began protesting against immigration raids at several businesses in the downtown Los Angeles area on Friday, June 6. By that evening, more than 100 people gathered at the city's immigration services building and detention center, according to Reuters. Police declared the protest an unlawful assembly and ordered the crowd to disperse; shortly thereafter, at least 50 police officers in riot gear arrived. Protests continued into the next day, leading Trump to sign a presidential memorandum ordering at least 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles. Timeline: LA protests went from small to substantial over three days. Here's what unfolded. Tensions escalated after the National Guard arrived in parts of Los Angeles on Sunday morning. Protesters continued to gather as the day wore on, and demonstrations eventually grew violent. LAPD said on X that it had placed officers across the city on "tactical alert" and later declared an unlawful assembly in a portion of downtown. By 11 p.m. local time Sunday, police said "a number of people have been arrested." California Gov. Gavin Newsom said around 9:30 p.m. local time on June 8 that he "formally requested the Trump Administration rescind their unlawful deployment of troops in Los Angeles county." Trump has referred to protesters as "troublemakers and insurrectionists" and commended the National Guard's efforts. This story has been updated with additional information. Contributing: Elizabeth Weise, USA TODAY Melina Khan is a national trending reporter for USA TODAY. She can be reached at
Miami Herald
28 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
To keep the middle class in California, should developers build homes to rent? Or own?
When you imagine a renter of affordable housing, Christopher McCormick is probably not who comes to mind. The 38-year-old software developer was on his way to work in early 2020 when he passed an affordable apartment building under construction in Emeryville, California. He was surprised to find that his annual income - $79,400 - qualified him for a below-market-rate one-bedroom unit. The rent was just $2,100 a month - nearly $600 less than similar market-rate apartments. He entered the lottery and, a few months later, moved in. McCormick's moderate-income apartment is part of California's effort to keep its middle class from moving away. The state has a goal to build 2.6 million new units by 2032 to meet demand and keep costs from further ballooning. Of those, 420,800 are meant to be affordable to moderate-income households, who make between 80% and 120% of the area median income - for a family of four, between $125,050 and $191,750 in Alameda County, and $159,550 and $234,250 in Santa Clara County. For the most part, the market doesn't build this kind of housing - which is why the state and local governments provide incentives to developers, such as allowing more density or less parking if they include below-market-rate units. Middle-income housing doesn't qualify for the same property tax exemptions that low-income housing does. Still, five years into its plan, developers in California have built only 22,316 moderate-income units. With high interest rates and rents not growing as some predicted, they say they need more incentives for this type of housing to pencil out financially. But there's disagreement on where government should intervene: Should it encourage more middle-income homes for people to rent, or to own? The answer, most housing experts would agree, is both. California needs more of all types of housing to climb its way out of its deep affordability crisis. Developers tend to favor building rental housing in high-cost areas because it offers steadier cash flow, lower legal risk, and stronger demand from renters who can't afford to buy. Moderate-income housing policy has followed this status quo, largely focusing on renters. Still, even generating support for rental housing incentives has proved an uphill battle. Two bills this legislative session sought to offer tax breaks for middle-income housing. The first, SB 336 from San Francisco Democratic Sen. Scott Wiener, would have extended a property tax exemption to buildings with units set aside for such renters - a benefit currently reserved for developers serving lower-income renters. On the for-sale side, AB 595, proposed by Democratic Assemblyman Juan Carrillo of Palmdale, would have created a new tax credit for home builders constructing income-restricted homes. Both bills died. As California faces a $12 billion budget shortfall, legislators balked at most measures that might drain city or state coffers. But the ideas aren't going away. A version of SB 336 has appeared before the Legislature almost every year since 2019. Many of its backers say it's the kind of structural fix that will help build moderate-income housing at scale. One of the major backers, unsurprisingly, is a Bay Area developer - Enrique Landa. His company, Associate Capital, is leading a major redevelopment of the 29-acre Potrero Power Station along San Francisco's waterfront, which will include 2,600 new homes - a third of them at below-market rents. The first building is set to open this fall, with all 105 apartments reserved for moderate-income renters. "We were only able to do this because we had a larger project that was able to cross-subsidize this effort," Landa said at a Senate hearing in May. "This wasn't a replicable path - but with this legislation, it could be." But there's a question of whether moderate-income housing offers enough of a discount to justify a major tax exemption. A recent Bay Area News Group investigation found that outside of extremely high-cost areas, such as San Mateo County and San Francisco, moderate-income units don't always provide a meaningful discount to market rates. Notably, 7% of the moderate-income housing units built in recent years around the Bay Area are vacant - double the vacancy for units targeted at renters making below 80% of the area median income. Rich Wallach, an affordable housing developer with Burbank Housing in Santa Rosa, said it's critical that any policy that would subsidize moderate-income housing include a provision that rents provide a significant discount. "The trick to not having vacant units sit is to undercut the market - not be at market," Wallach said. But other housing activists suspect there's something else at play that explains the somewhat higher vacancy at moderate-income units: an exodus to lower-cost regions. "Moderate-income families may reach a point in struggling with housing affordability where they just decide to leave the region," said Adam Briones, CEO of California Community Builders, which advocates for access to homeownership. "These are people who want to buy a home, and they absolutely cannot do it in the Bay Area." That's eventually what happened for McCormick, the Emeryville renter. "I was giving someone else money without building equity myself," McCormick said. When he looked into below-market-rate for-sale housing, he found a few options in Emeryville - most were condos, and with the homeowners association fee tacked onto a monthly mortgage payment, plus property taxes, he would have had to pay around $3,200 a month. It was more than he felt he could comfortably afford. So McCormick bought a house in the suburbs - of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. For his $310,000, five-bedroom house, he pays a monthly mortgage of $2,800. Briones sees stories like McCormick's as evidence the state needs to do more to help people buy - not just rent. "For a rental, the landlord retains the economic benefit," Briones said. "If we subsidize units for a homeowner, that helps to create generational wealth for a moderate-income household." Rental housing has been the focus of most federal subsidies since at least 1961, when the federal government created the Below Market Interest Rate Program to provide low-interest loans for multifamily rental developers in exchange for affordability restrictions. The focus was further entrenched when former President Ronald Reagan created the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit in 1986, which provided tax incentives to private developers building affordable housing. The program is still the primary tool for financing new affordable housing throughout the country. But before that, policymakers were thinking of ways to subsidize for-sale product. In 1955, New York passed the Mitchell-Lama program, which allowed for the creation of limited-profit housing companies. These companies could get low-interest-rate financing to cover up to 95% of a project's cost, plus major property tax breaks, which allowed developers to build housing middle-income New Yorkers could afford. In return for the incentives, developers were limited to a 6% profit on dividends (later increased to 7% in 1969.) The program produced over 130,000 units in New York City alone-half of them for-sale. Today, it'd be unimaginable for developers to envision a mere 6% return. In 2023, homebuilders reported an average gross profit margin of 20.7% in 2023, according to the National Association of Homebuilders. Alex Schafran, a housing policy researcher, said there are benefits to both renting and owning - but that right now the Bay Area's middle-income households are relegated to the rental market, because home-buying is only possible for the highest earners. "But everyone should have a real choice," he said. "Regardless of income." Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
