Candidates to replace McGloin say they can work with Gaughan, including one dismissed last year
A former Lackawanna County economic development director who Commissioners Bill Gaughan and Matt McGloin dismissed early last year said she expects she'd work well with Gaughan if chosen to replace McGloin as commissioner.
Brenda Sacco, who led the county's Department of Planning and Economic Development for about five years before Gaughan and McGloin fired her shortly after taking office as Democratic majority commissioners in January 2024, is one of three potential appointees the Lackawanna County Democratic Party's executive committee advanced last week as possible McGloin successors. The others are Olyphant Borough Council President James Baldan and Scranton School Director Robert J. Casey.
Baldan and Casey, who is not related to the former senator, each said they could work well with Gaughan, too.
McGloin recently announced his resignation as commissioner effective Feb. 24, prompting a process under the county's Home Rule Charter that saw the party submit the names of three potential Democratic replacements — Sacco, Baldan and Casey — for consideration by the judges of the county Court of Common Pleas. Gaughan, who earlier last week announced Dunmore Mayor Mark 'Max' Conway Jr. as his preferred choice to succeed McGloin, continues to sharply criticize the process by which the party advanced those three candidates from a field of 18 applicants.
While the charter tasks the judges with choosing one of the three to fill the remainder of McGloin's term expiring Jan. 3, 2028, the court said Friday it will take no action on the vacancy until commissioners officially accept McGloin's resignation at a formal meeting.
It came a day after county solicitor Donald Frederickson noted in a memo to the court that, 'as a matter of law,' no vacancy exists until McGloin's resignation is accepted at such a meeting. And with commissioners meeting Wednesday, Frederickson said in a phone interview that McGloin could conceivably come back and rescind his resignation, though he hasn't publicly expressed any desire to return.
'Until the resignation is accepted, there is no vacancy to fill and any effort toward naming a successor is premature,' Frederickson wrote in the memo to the court.
A former Penn State and NFL quarterback, McGloin resigned as commissioner for a job with Boston College's football program. He then left that job, citing family reasons.
Frederickson also advised the court of an apparent conflict between the Home Rule Charter and a procedure set forth in Rule 1908 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Judicial Administration that the state Supreme Court adopted in 2019. That procedure for filling a vacancy involves the county court alone, not any political party.
How the court proceeds remains to be seen.
But, given her position atop the short list the county Democratic Party submitted to the judges, the newspaper asked Sacco on Friday if she had any concerns that her having been fired by Gaughan would create an awkward dynamic should she ultimately replace McGloin.
'Reasonable minds can disagree about how to regard my prior separation from Lackawanna County, but I certainly don't regard it as Commissioner Gaughan having fired me,' she said in a statement. 'The truth is I have great respect for Commissioner Gaughan and I supported him when he ran. If I am chosen I hope and expect to work very well with him given our combined experience and dedication to the county.'
Sacco joined the county economic development office in August 2013 as deputy director of operations and finance under Director George Kelly, who left in January 2019. Kelly ran for commissioner that year as incumbent Democratic Commissioner Jerry Notarianni's running mate, but didn't advance beyond the primary.
Commissioners elevated Sacco in early 2019 to replace Kelly as director, initially in an acting capacity. She served through the next administration of Notarianni, fellow Democratic Commissioner Debi Domenick and Republican Commissioner Chris Chermak, often earning praise for her performance.
Gaughan and McGloin dismissed Sacco in late January 2024 but gave no specific reasons at the time for letting her go. A contemporaneous news release noted the county had 'parted ways' with Sacco. It's not unusual for new majority administrations to replace department heads.
Longtime planning manager Mary Liz Donato served as Sacco's interim replacement until Gaughan and McGloin appointed Kristin Magnotta to the planning and economic development director position in February 2024.
Gaughan declined to comment Monday on Sacco's dismissal, calling it a personnel issue. He also declined to comment on Baldan or Casey, both of whom, like Sacco, expressed confidence in their ability to work with Gaughan should they fill McGloin's seat.
'I can work with anybody,' said Casey, now in his second stint as a Scranton school director after previously serving as a director from 1979-91. 'I spent over 14 years on the Scranton School Board, and, when you're dealing with nine people, in order to get anything done you need to be able to develop a consensus and work with people and understand … what their point of view (is).'
Baldan made a similar case for himself, citing his more than four decades working for Burlington stores.
'I worked for over 40 years in the same company,' he said. 'To make that happen you have to be able to conform and be able to work with anyone or work for anyone. … Yes, I would be able to work with anyone in the county, anyone in government or anyone in the private sector.'
At this point the appointment process is in the hands of the county judges, Gaughan said.
'They have to go through their process and I respect that, so I'm refraining from commenting on any of the individuals who had their names submitted,' he said.
But Gaughan did reiterate his objections to the process county Democratic Party Chairman Chris Patrick used to determine which three candidates should advance to the judges, calling it 'pretty pathetic.'
He criticized Patrick last week for not interviewing potential candidates before the full executive committee and for lacking transparency more broadly. Patrick has not released the names of everyone who applied to fill the vacancy or details about a scoring rubric used to grade the candidates.
In a Friday statement defending the process, Patrick said that the three highest-scoring applicants were put before the executive committee, which advanced them to the judges. He also noted the relatively short window of time the party had to conduct the process as part of his broader defense.
'(Patrick) wants to be the kingmaker instead of being transparent and honest,' Gaughan said Monday. 'And it's my opinion that he has absolutely no interest in good government.'
Patrick rejected the charge.
'My response still stands from last week and my only goal as chairman is to make sure we elect Democrats in every election,' he said. 'I totally support good and responsible government on all levels.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
5 minutes ago
- CNN
Analysis: Trump's top general just undercut his ‘invasion' claims
One of the problems with making a series of brazen and hyperbolic claims is that it can be hard to keep everyone on your team on the same page. And few Trump administration claims have been as brazen as the idea that the Venezuelan government has engineered an invasion of gang members into the United States. This claim forms the basis of the administration's controversial efforts to rapidly deport a bunch of people it claimed were members of the gang Tren de Aragua – without due process. But one of the central figures responsible for warding off such invasions apparently didn't get the memo. At a Senate hearing Wednesday, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman retired Lt. Gen. Dan Caine acknowledged that the United States isn't currently facing such a threat. 'I think at this point in time, I don't see any foreign state-sponsored folks invading,' Caine said in response to Democratic questioning. This might sound like common sense; of course the United States isn't currently under invasion by a foreign government. You'd probably have heard something about that on the news. But the administration has said – repeatedly and in court – that it has been. When Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act to rapidly deport migrants without due process, that law required such a foreign 'invasion' or 'predatory incursion' to make his move legal. And Trump said that's what was happening. 'The result is a hybrid criminal state that is perpetrating an invasion of and predatory incursion into the United States, and which poses a substantial danger to the United States,' reads the proclamation from Trump. It added that Tren de Aragua's actions came 'both directly and at the direction, clandestine or otherwise, of the Maduro regime in Venezuela.' So the White House said Tren de Aragua was acting in concert with the Maduro regime to invade; Caine now says 'state-sponsored folks' aren't invading. Some flagged Caine's comment as undermining Trump's claims of a foreign 'invasion' in Los Angeles. Trump has regularly applied that word to undocumented migrants. But the inconsistency is arguably more significant when it comes to Trump's claims about the Venezuelan migrants. Perhaps the administration would argue that Trump has halted the invasion and it is no longer happening; Caine was speaking in the present tense. Caine did go on to cite others who might have different views. 'But I'll be mindful of the fact that there has been some border issues throughout time, and defer to DHS who handles the border along the nation's contiguous outline,' he said. But if an invasion had been happening recently, it seems weird not to mention that. And if the invasion is over, that would seem to undercut the need to keep trying to use the Alien Enemies Act. The Department of Homeland Security is certainly not in the camp of no invasion. On Wednesday, DHS posted on Facebook an image with Uncle Sam that reads: 'Report all foreign invaders' with a phone number for ICE. When asked about the image and whether the use of the term 'foreign invaders' had been used previously, DHS pointed CNN to a number of posts from White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller using terms like 'invade' or 'invaders' when referring to undocumented immigrants. Plenty of Trump administration figures have gone to bat for this claim. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said soon after Trump's proclamation that Tren de Aragua gang members 'have been sent here by the hostile Maduro regime in Venezuela.' Then-national security adviser Michael Waltz claimed Maduro was emptying his prisons 'in a proxy manner to influence and attack the United States.' We soon learned that the intelligence community had concluded Venezuela had not directed the gang. But Secretary of State Marco Rubio stood by Trump's claim. 'Yes, that's their assessment,' Rubio said last month about the intelligence community. 'They're wrong.' Trump administration border czar Tom Homan has said the gang was an 'arm of the Maduro regime,' and that Maduro's regime was 'involved with sending thousands of Venezuelans to this country to unsettle it.' The question of Venezuela's purported involvement actually hasn't been dealt with much by the courts. A series of judges have moved to block the administration's Alien Enemies Act gambit, but they've generally ruled that way because of the lack of an 'invasion' or 'predatory incursion' – without delving much into the more complex issue of whether such a thing might somehow have ties to Maduro's government. One of the judges to rule in that fashion was a Trump appointee, US District Judge Fernando Rodriguez Jr. So the intelligence community and a bunch of judges – including a Trump-appointed one – have rebutted the claim the underlies this historic effort to set aside due process. And now, the man Trump installed as his top general seems to have undercut it too.
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘We've lost the culture war on climate'
President Donald Trump's latest climate rollback makes it all but official: The United States is giving up on trying to stop the planet's warming. In some ways, the effort has barely started. More than 15 years after federal regulators officially recognized that greenhouse gas pollution threatens 'current and future generations,' their most ambitious efforts to defuse that threat have been blocked in the courts and by Trump's rule-slicing buzzsaw. Wednesday's action by the Environmental Protection Agency would extend that streak by wiping out a Biden-era regulation on power plants — leaving the nation's second-largest source of climate pollution unshackled until at least the early 2030s. Rules aimed at lessening climate pollution from transportation, the nation's No. 1 source, are also on the Trump hit list. Meanwhile, the GOP megabill lumbering through the Senate would dismember former President Joe Biden's other huge climate initiative, the 2022 law that sought to use hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks and other incentives to encourage consumers and businesses to switch to carbon-free energy. At the same time, Trump's appointees have spent months shutting down climate programs, firing their workers and gutting research into the problem, while making it harder for states such as California to tackle the issue on their own. The years of whipsawing moves have left Washington with no consistent approach on how — or whether — to confront climate change, even as scientists warn that years are growing short to avoid catastrophic damage to human society. While the Trump-era GOP's hardening opposition to climate action has been a major reason for the lack of consensus, one former Democratic adviser said her own party needs to find a message that resonates with broad swaths of the electorate. 'There's no way around it: The left strategy on climate needs to be rethought,' said Jody Freeman, who served as counselor for energy and climate change in President Barack Obama's White House. 'We've lost the culture war on climate, and we have to figure out a way for it to not be a niche leftist movement." It's a strategy Freeman admitted she was 'struggling' to articulate, but one that included using natural gas as a 'bridge fuel' to more renewable power — an approach Democrats embraced during the Obama administration — finding 'a new approach' for easing permits for energy infrastructure and building broad-based political support. As the Democratic nominee in 2008, Obama expressed the hope that his campaign would be seen as 'the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.' But two years later, the Democrats' cap-and-trade climate bill failed to get through a Senate where they held a supermajority. Obama didn't return to the issue in earnest until his second term, taking actions including the enactment of a sweeping power plant rule that wasn't yet in effect when Trump rescinded it and the Supreme Court declared it dead. Republicans, meanwhile, have moved far from their seemingly moderating stance in 2008, when nominee John McCain offered his own climate proposals and even then-President George W. Bush announced a modest target for slowing carbon pollution by 2025. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin contended Wednesday that the Obama- and Biden-era rules were overbearing and too costly. 'The American public spoke loudly and clearly last November: They wanted to make sure that all agencies were cognizant of their economic concerns,' he said when announcing the rule rollback at agency headquarters. 'At the EPA under President Trump, we have chosen to both protect the environment and grow the economy.' Trump's new strategy of ditching greenhouse gas limits altogether is legally questionable, experts involved in crafting the Obama and Biden power plant rules told POLITICO. But they acknowledged that the Trump administration at the very least will significantly weaken rules on power plants' climate pollution, at a moment when the trends are going in the wrong direction. Gina McCarthy, who led EPA during the Obama administration, said in a statement that Zeldin's rationale is "absolutely illogical and indefensible. It's a purely political play that goes against decades of science and policy review." U.S. greenhouse gas emissions were virtually flat last year, falling just 0.2 percent, after declining 20 percent since 2005, according to the research firm Rhodium Group. That output would need to fall 7.6 percent annually through 2030 to meet the climate goals Biden floated, which were aimed at limiting the rise in global temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius since the start of the Industrial Revolution. That level is a critical threshold for avoiding the most severe impacts of climate change. Those targets now look out of reach. The World Meteorological Organization last month gave 70 percent odds that the five-year global temperature average through 2029 would register above 1.5 degrees. The Obama-era rule came out during a decade when governments around the world threw their weight behind blunting climate pollution through executive actions. Ricky Revesz, who was Biden's regulatory czar, recalled the 'great excitement' at the White House Blue Room reception just before Obama announced his power plant rule, known as the Clean Power Plan. It seemed a watershed moment. But it didn't last. 'I thought that it was going to be a more linear path forward,' he said. 'That linear path forward has not materialized. And that is disappointing.' Opponents who have long argued that such regulations would wreck the economy while doing little to curb global temperature increases have traveled the same road in reverse. Republican West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey said he felt dread when Obama announced the Clean Power Plan in 2015. Then the state's attorney general, he feared the rule's focus on curbing carbon dioxide from power plants would have a 'catastrophic' impact on West Virginia's coal-reliant economy. 'It was really an audacious and outrageous attempt to regulate the economy when they had no power to do so,' said Morrisey, who led a coalition of states that sued the EPA over Obama's proposal. 'You can't take the actions that they were trying to take without going to the legislature.' Meanwhile, Congress has become harsher terrain for climate action. In May, House Republicans voted to undo the incentives for electric cars and other clean energy technologies in Biden's Inflation Reduction Act, the nation's most significant effort to spur clean energy and curb climate change. That same week, 35 House Democrats and Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) crossed the aisle and voted to kill an EPA waiver that had allowed California to set more stringent tailpipe pollution standards for vehicles to deal with its historically smoggy skies. California was planning to use that waiver to end sales of internal combustion engine vehicles in 2035, a rule 10 other states and the District of Columbia had planned to follow. The Supreme Court has added to the obstacles for climate policy — introducing more existential challenges for efforts to use executive powers to corral greenhouse gas emissions. In its 2022 decision striking down the Obama administration's power plant rule, the court said agencies such as EPA need Congress' explicit approval before enacting regulations that would have a 'major' impact on the economy. (It didn't precisely define what counts as 'major.') In 2024, the court eviscerated a decades-old precedent known as the Chevron doctrine, which had afforded agencies broad leeway in how they interpret vague statutes. Many climate advocates and former Democratic officials contend that all those obstacles are bumps, not barriers, on the tortuous path to reducing greenhouse gases. They say that even the regulatory fits and starts have provided signals to markets and businesses about where federal policy is heading in the long term — prodding the private sector to make investments to green the nation's energy system. One symptom is a sharp decline in U.S. reliance on coal — by far the most climate-polluting power source, and the one that would face the stiffest restrictions in any successful federal regulation to lessen the electricity industry's emissions. Coal supplied 48.5 percent of the nation's power generation in 2007, but that fell to 15 percent in 2024. Last year, solar and wind power combined to overtake coal for the first time. 'Regulation has served the purpose of moving things along faster,' said Janet McCabe, who was deputy EPA administrator under Biden and ran EPA's Office of Air and Radiation during Obama's second term. 'The trajectory is always in the right direction.' Freeman, who is now at Harvard Law School, said federal regulations plus state laws requiring renewable power to comprise portions of the electricity mix helped justify utility investments in clean energy. That, in turn, accelerated price drops for wind and solar power, she said. Clean energy advocates point to those broader market shifts, calling a cleaner power grid inevitable. 'There are people in each of these industries who wouldn't have taken the climate problem seriously and cleaner technology seriously, and invested in it, if it weren't for the pressure of the Clean Air Act and the incentives that more recently had been built into the IRA,' said David Doniger, senior attorney and strategist at the Natural Resources Defense Council. 'So policy does matter, even when it's not in a straight line and the implementation is inadequate.' But even if those economic trends continue — an open question given the enormous new power demand from data centers — it will not bring the U.S. closer to cuts needed to keep the world from overheating, multiple climate studies have concluded. And the greatest chunk of the emissions decline since 2005 comes from shifting coal to natural gas, another fossil fuel, which fracking made cheap and abundant. Biden's power plant rule, now being shelved by Trump's EPA, would have imposed limits on both coal-burning power plants and future gas-fired ones, requiring them to either capture their greenhouse gases or shut down. Staving off regulations may well keep coal-fired power plants running longer than anticipated to meet forecast demand growth, belching more carbon dioxide into the air. The Trump administration has even sought to temporarily exempt power plants from air pollution rules altogether and is trying to use emergency powers to prevent coal generators from shuttering. Without federal rules that say otherwise, power providers would also be likely to add more natural gas generation to the grid. Failing to curb power plants' pollution, scientists say, means temperatures will continue to rise and bring more of the floods, heat waves, wildfires, supply chain disruptions, food shortages and other shocks that cost the U.S. hundreds of billions of dollars each year in property damage, illness, death and lost productivity. 'I don't think the economics are going to take care of it by any means,' said Joe Goffman, who led the Biden EPA air office. 'The effects of climate change are going to continue to be felt and they're going to continue to be costly in terms of dollars and cents and in terms of human experience.' Some state governors, such as Democrats Kathy Hochul of New York and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, have vowed to go it alone on climate policy if need be. But analyses have shown state actions alone are unlikely to achieve the greenhouse gas reductions at the scale and speed needed to avoid baking in catastrophic effects from climate change. The Sierra Club, for example, has helped shutter nearly 400 coal-fired units across the U.S. since 2010 through its Beyond Coal campaign, which has argued the economic case against fossil fuel generation in front of state utility commissions. While Joanne Spalding, the group's legal director, said it can continue to strike blows against coal with that strategy, she acknowledged that 'gas is a huge problem' — and left no doubt that the Trump administration's moves would do damage. 'Given what the science says about the need to act urgently, this will be a lost four years in the United States,' she said.
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Stephen Miller Explicitly Ordered ICE Raid Home Depots
Stephen Miller explicitly ordered ICE to target Home Depot parking lots to arrest undocumented day laborers, a report alleges. The White House deputy chief of staff gave the order in late May, gloating in a meeting that he could leave ICE's D.C. headquarters and arrest 30 people outside the nearest Home Depot, sources told the Wall Street Journal. Miller, 39, is also said to have reminded top immigration officials they are not just targeting the 'worst of the worst' criminals, but anybody who is in the country illegally—even if that is their only alleged wrongdoing. 'Just go out there and arrest illegal aliens,' he said, according to the Journal. ICE officials appear to have heeded the White House's call. The Journal reported that ICE conducted an immigration sweep at a Home Depot on Friday in a predominantly Latino neighborhood of Los Angeles. The raid was among those that spurred widespread anti-ICE demonstrations and occasional riots in the city, which escalated after President Donald Trump activated the National Guard and deployed Marines against the wishes of Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Day laborers are known to use Home Depot parking lots to find work at locations across the country, often waving down contractors or homeowners as they exit the home improvement store. Home Depot has acknowledged the practice, but does not explicitly allow it. Some stores feature signage to make clear that soliciting work is illegal in their parking lots. MAGA influencers have seized on this practice by migrants and are now encouraging ICE to continue targeting Home Depot parking lots. 'I'd like to report the front entrance of @HomeDepot at 5 am,' said Laura Loomer on Wednesday, responding to a promotion for the Department of Homeland Security's tip line to report undocumented immigrants. 'Location: Every Home Depot in the U.S.' Recent Home Depot raids have occurred at a minimum of seven locations in California, according to the Journal, The Guardian, and NBC Los Angeles. This appears to have workers skiddish about finding work in their go-to spot. Martha Arévalo, the executive director of the Central American Resource Center of Los Angeles, told the Journal that Home Depot parking lots in Southern California, once filled with hundreds of willing workers, have dwindled down to a 'handful.' Home Depot spokeswoman Beth Marlowe told the Daily Beast that the Atlanta-based corporation is not working in conjunction with ICE and that it does not receive any advance notice of raids at or near its locations. 'We tell associates to report [raids] immediately and not to engage with the activity for their safety,' she said. 'If associates feel uncomfortable after witnessing ICE activity, we offer them the option to go home for the rest of the day, with pay.' ICE did not respond to emails from the Daily Beast. White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told the Beast in a statement, 'If you are present in the United States illegally, you will be deported. This is the promise President Trump made to the American people, and the administration is committed to keeping it.' Miller has reportedly orchestrated the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. In the same meeting he reportedly ordered ICE to target Home Depot locations, he also allegedly threatened to terminate officials if their arrest numbers did not rise significantly. Miller told ICE it needed an arrest total at or near 3,000 migrants per day. A plan, dubbed 'Operation At Large,' was implemented shortly after. It saw thousands of federal law enforcement officers and special forces, who don't typically assist with immigration, being activated to help ICE round up migrants accused of being in the country illegally. This supercharging of arrests resulted in several notable mishaps. That included ICE briefly detaining a U.S. Marshal in Arizona by mistake last week.
