Primary election 2025: 2 candidates running for Berks County coroner
Two candidates are seeking the Republican nomination to be Berks County coroner.
Local funeral director Matt Stitzel will face incumbent John Fielding, who is seeking a second term in the post, in the May 20 primary.
The coroner investigates deaths independent of the police. The office also rules on the cause and manner of sudden, unexplained or unnatural deaths, as well as natural deaths that occur outside the presence of medical officials.
The county coroner serves a four-year term and currently receives an annual salary of $101,694.
We asked the candidates to respond to two questions.
Question 1: Why do you believe you are the right person for this position?
Question 2: What is the biggest challenge facing the office today and what would you do to address that challenge if elected?
Matt Stitzel
Matt Stitzel, candidate for Berks County coroner
Background: Stitzel owns and operates two Stitzel Family Funeral Homes & Crematory locations in Berks County. He has also served as a firefighter and engineer with Spring Township and Goodwill fire companies, and is an advisory board member for Caron Treatment Centers.
Age: 54.
Website: Stitzel2025.com
Response 1: My character and experiences have prepared me to excel in this role. As a funeral director, I have been available 24 hours a day for over 30 years. This demonstrates not only my commitment, but also my proven ability to show up when needed, earning the trust of my community. My qualifications, knowledge and perspective make me uniquely positioned for this role.
As a spiritual saying goes, 'A shepherd should smell like their sheep.' This resonates deeply with how I view this role — being involved, present and connected.
My fundamental obligation is to lead with the utmost integrity, while also running an efficient office that delivers the necessary improvements our residents deserve. While the current coroner views this position primarily as an administrative role, I plan to lead from the front. With the coroner's office being relatively small, I believe it's crucial to take a hands-on approach.
Families deserve to experience dignity and care, starting with how they are notified in times of loss. Knowing what to say — and equally important, who to say it to — is critical for both families and the media. This is an area where the office can improve, and I am committed to filling that void.
Response 2: Staffing and the quality of personnel are critical challenges facing not only this office. To address these issues, I would prioritize building a team that is both highly skilled and deeply committed to serving the community with compassion and professionalism.
A workplace begins with strong and proven leadership, creating an environment where employees feel valued and motivated. I would lead by example, as I have for over 30 years, fostering a culture of respect, collaboration and accountability. By providing support, I would ensure that every deputy is empowered to perform at their highest level.
When recruiting staff, I would focus on qualities like empathy, compassion, critical thinking and composure in high-pressure situations — traits that are essential. To strengthen the team, I would conduct an assessment of staffing levels, identifying gaps in expertise or coverage and use this analysis to optimize performance.
Additionally, I would implement training programs in forensic science, communication and crisis management to prepare staff for the demands of the role. I am committed to making this office a place where employees are not only ready but happy to serve the residents. By cultivating pride and purpose, the team will deliver exceptional service with dignity and compassion.
John Fielding
John Fielding
Background: Fielding has served as coroner since 2021. Prior to winning election, he was a private practice attorney. He had also served as a member of Mount Penn Borough Council and Antietam School Board.
Age: 71.
Response 1: As the incumbent officeholder, and under my management, we have successfully brought more automation to the office.
Further, our investigations have successfully identified those who were previously unidentified, the most notable being Nicholas Grubb who was previously unidentified for 47 years, and whose story garnered worldwide media attention for my office. We have also successfully found a final resting place for unclaimed infants, and, through the good offices of Veterans Making a Difference, unclaimed veterans were buried with appropriate honors at Fort Indiantown Gap. This is in addition to our regular daily tasks of identifying and investigating the cause and matter of deaths in Berks County.
We have done this while keeping the costs of operation low for the taxpayers of Berks County.
Response 2: The biggest challenge continues to be performing the legally mandated duties of the office with minimum cost to the taxpayers. We will continue to keep a sharp eye on expenses while performing the competent job that the office has performed since I took office in 2022.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
38 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
What's left for the Supreme Court to decide? 21 cases, including state bans on transgender care
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is in the homestretch of a term that has lately been dominated by the Trump administration's emergency appeals of lower court orders seeking to slow President Donald Trump's efforts to remake the federal government. But the justices also have 21 cases to resolve that were argued between December and mid-May, including a push by Republican-led states to ban gender-affirming care for transgender minors. One of the argued cases was an emergency appeal, the administration's bid to be allowed to enforce Trump's executive order denying birthright citizenship to U.S.-born children of parents who are in the country illegally. The court typically aims to finish its work by the end of June. Here are some of the biggest remaining cases: Tennessee and 26 other states have enacted bans on certain treatment for transgender youth The oldest unresolved case, and arguably the term's biggest, stems from a challenge to Tennessee's law from transgender minors and their parents who argue that it is unconstitutional sex discrimination aimed at a vulnerable population. At arguments in December, the court's conservative majority seemed inclined to uphold the law, voicing skepticism of claims that it violates the 14th amendment's equal protection clause. The post-Civil War provision requires the government to treat similarly situated people the same. The court is weighing the case amid a range of other federal and state efforts to regulate the lives of transgender people , including which sports competitions they can join and which bathrooms they can use . In April, Trump's administration sued Maine for not complying with the government's push to ban transgender athletes in girls sports. Trump also has sought to block federal spending on gender-affirming care for those under 19 and a conservative majority of justices allowed him to move forward with plans to oust transgender people from the U.S. military . Trump's birthright citizenship order has been blocked by lower courts The court rarely hears arguments over emergency appeals, but it took up the administration's plea to narrow orders that have prevented the citizenship changes from taking effect anywhere in the U.S. The issue before the justices is whether to limit the authority of judges to issue nationwide injunctions, which have plagued both Republican and Democratic administrations in the past 10 years. These nationwide court orders have emerged as an important check on Trump's efforts and a source of mounting frustration to the Republican president and his allies. At arguments last month, the court seemed intent on keeping a block on the citizenship restrictions while still looking for a way to scale back nationwide court orders. It was not clear what such a decision might look like, but a majority of the court expressed concerns about what would happen if the administration were allowed, even temporarily, to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally. Democratic-led states, immigrants and rights groups who sued over Trump's executive order argued that it would upset the settled understanding of birthright citizenship that has existed for more than 125 years. The court seems likely to side with Maryland parents in a religious rights case over LGBTQ storybooks in public schools Parents in the Montgomery County school system, in suburban Washington, want to be able to pull their children out of lessons that use the storybooks, which the county added to the curriculum to better reflect the district's diversity. The school system at one point allowed parents to remove their children from those lessons, but then reversed course because it found the opt-out policy to be disruptive. Sex education is the only area of instruction with an opt-out provision in the county's schools. The school district introduced the storybooks in 2022, with such titles as 'Prince and Knight' and 'Uncle Bobby's Wedding.' The case is one of several religious rights cases at the court this term. The justices have repeatedly endorsed claims of religious discrimination in recent years. The decision also comes amid increases in recent years in books being banned from public school and public libraries. A three-year battle over congressional districts in Louisiana is making its second trip to the Supreme Court Lower courts have struck down two Louisiana congressional maps since 2022 and the justices are weighing whether to send state lawmakers back to the map-drawing board for a third time. The case involves the interplay between race and politics in drawing political boundaries in front of a conservative-led court that has been skeptical of considerations of race in public life. At arguments in March, several of the court's conservative justices suggested they could vote to throw out the map and make it harder, if not impossible, to bring redistricting lawsuits under the Voting Rights Act . Before the court now is a map that created a second Black majority congressional district among Louisiana's six seats in the House of Representatives. The district elected a Black Democrat in 2024. A three-judge court found that the state relied too heavily on race in drawing the district, rejecting Louisiana's arguments that politics predominated, specifically the preservation of the seats of influential members of Congress, including Speaker Mike Johnson. The Supreme Court ordered the challenged map to be used last year while the case went on. Lawmakers only drew that map after civil rights advocates won a court ruling that a map with one Black majority district likely violated the landmark voting rights law. The justices are weighing a Texas law aimed at blocking kids from seeing online pornography Texas is among more than a dozen states with age verification laws. The states argue the laws are necessary as smartphones have made access to online porn, including hardcore obscene material, almost instantaneous. The question for the court is whether the measure infringes on the constitutional rights of adults as well. The Free Speech Coalition, an adult-entertainment industry trade group, agrees that children shouldn't be seeing pornography. But it says the Texas law is written too broadly and wrongly affects adults by requiring them to submit personal identifying information online that is vulnerable to hacking or tracking. The justices appeared open to upholding the law, though they also could return it to a lower court for additional work. Some justices worried the lower court hadn't applied a strict enough legal standard in determining whether the Texas law and others like that could run afoul of the First Amendment. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
American Press
43 minutes ago
- American Press
Landry wants special session to revive controversial legislation that died
(Special to the American Press) With just minutes to spare, Louisiana lawmakers concluded the 2025 legislative session on Thursday — but, per usual, it ended with a bang. Before lawmakers could even walk out the Capitol doors, Gov. Jeff Landry said he planned to call a special session in the future, with the hopes of reviving controversial legislation that died Thursday. It is unclear when exactly lawmakers would be asked to return. Last-minute amendments to bill, which would prohibit companies from owning both pharmacy benefits managers and drugstores, caused a frenzy in the final days of session — complete with fiery testimony from lawmakers, a massive lobbying campaign to block the measure by retail giant CVS and promises of legal action by the Attorney General. Also in the final hours of session lawmakers approved the state's $51 billion budget. Lawmakers earmarked $1.8 million for 'expenses related to the recapture of fugitive offenders' in the aftermath of a massive New Orleans jail escape. They also pulled $1.2 billion from a state savings fund mainly to spend on infrastructure improvements and spruce up sites seeking private sector investment. In a blow to Landry, the GOP-dominated Legislature allocated less than half the $93.5 million he requested for expanding a school voucher program. Traditionally this year's gathering is fiscally focused, But the GOP-dominated legislature filed hundreds of bills to tackle issues that lawmakers felt were plaguing the state, from fiscal matters to social issues. Here's a look at some of the bills. Passed ABORTION LIABILITY EXPANSION: The measure expands who can be sued over abortions, targeting out-of-state doctors and activists who prescribe, sell or mail pregnancy-ending drugs to residents in Louisiana — where abortions are banned with few exceptions. MAKE AMERICA HEALTHY AGAIN: Louisiana passed its own package of nutrition reforms. The measures restrict certain food additives in schools, set nutrition education requirements for health care providers, require food manufacturers to disclose the use of certain artificial ingredients, and order restaurants to post if they are using seed oils. INSURANCE: Despite facing stiff opposition from the insurance industry and pushback from Republican lawmakers, Landry succeeded in passing legislation giving the state's insurance commissioner more authority to block auto insurance rate increases by companies. Other passed bills aim to limit the damages for people involved in vehicle accidents, such as barring damages to cover injuries for the driver primarily responsible for a crash. IMMIGRATION: Lawmakers passed a package of legislation that expands the state's role in immigration enforcement and promises cooperation with federal efforts. One bill would make it a crime for law enforcement agents and public officials to obstruct federal immigration enforcement efforts. Another measure requires state agencies to verify and report anyone illegally in the U.S. who is receiving state services. ETHICS: Lawmakers overwhelmingly approved a bill written by the governor's personal attorney that makes it harder for the state's ethics board to investigative allegations of wrongdoing and file charges against elected officials. IVF TREATMENT: In an effort to avoid what happened in Alabama, lawmakers passed a bill that protects in vitro fertilization providers from criminal charges and lawsuits. CAMPAIGN FUNDING: Lawmakers raised the disclosure thresholds for campaign finance matters, meaning less information will be shared with the public about the donations they receive and their spending of donations. They also expanded the ways elected officials' campaign funds could be spent, including on Mardi Gras celebrations in Washington, D.C. IVERMECTIN: One measure allows the antiparasitic drug, a discredited COVID-era treatment, to be sold for over-the-counter use. WEATHER MODIFICATION: Louisiana is the latest state to prohibit anyone from 'intentionally' injecting, releasing, applying or dispersing chemicals into the atmosphere with the purpose of affecting the 'temperature, weather, climate, or intensity of sunlight.' Rejected DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND INCLUSION: After emotional pleas from Black lawmakers, a bill that bans state government DEI programs died on the vine in the Senate. SPLIT JURY: Incarcerated people, who were convicted under the now-banned practice of split juries, would have had the opportunity to ask for a new trial under one proposed measure. However, Republicans rejected the bill. MINIMUM WAGE: One bill would have gradually increased Louisiana's minimum wage, which currently stands at $7.25, over the next four years. Similar bills have repeatedly been shot down. ABORTION BAN EXCEPTIONS: For the third year, lawmakers rejected a bill that would have added rape, in cases where the victim is under the age of 17, to the narrow list of exceptions to the state's abortion ban. LGBTQ WORKPLACE PROTECTIONS: A measure that would prohibit employment discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation failed in committee. FLUORIDE BILL: A bill that would have outlawed fluoride in Louisiana's public water systems failed.
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
What's left for the Supreme Court to decide? 21 cases, including state bans on transgender care
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is in the homestretch of a term that has lately been dominated by the Trump administration's emergency appeals of lower court orders seeking to slow President Donald Trump's efforts to remake the federal government. But the justices also have 21 cases to resolve that were argued between December and mid-May, including a push by Republican-led states to ban gender-affirming care for transgender minors. One of the argued cases was an emergency appeal, the administration's bid to be allowed to enforce Trump's executive order denying birthright citizenship to U.S.-born children of parents who are in the country illegally. The court typically aims to finish its work by the end of June. Here are some of the biggest remaining cases: Tennessee and 26 other states have enacted bans on certain treatment for transgender youth The oldest unresolved case, and arguably the term's biggest, stems from a challenge to Tennessee's law from transgender minors and their parents who argue that it is unconstitutional sex discrimination aimed at a vulnerable population. At arguments in December, the court's conservative majority seemed inclined to uphold the law, voicing skepticism of claims that it violates the 14th amendment's equal protection clause. The post-Civil War provision requires the government to treat similarly situated people the same. The court is weighing the case amid a range of other federal and state efforts to regulate the lives of transgender people, including which sports competitions they can join and which bathrooms they can use. In April, Trump's administration sued Maine for not complying with the government's push to ban transgender athletes in girls sports. Trump also has sought to block federal spending on gender-affirming care for those under 19 and a conservative majority of justices allowed him to move forward with plans to oust transgender people from the U.S. military. Trump's birthright citizenship order has been blocked by lower courts The court rarely hears arguments over emergency appeals, but it took up the administration's plea to narrow orders that have prevented the citizenship changes from taking effect anywhere in the U.S. The issue before the justices is whether to limit the authority of judges to issue nationwide injunctions, which have plagued both Republican and Democratic administrations in the past 10 years. These nationwide court orders have emerged as an important check on Trump's efforts and a source of mounting frustration to the Republican president and his allies. At arguments last month, the court seemed intent on keeping a block on the citizenship restrictions while still looking for a way to scale back nationwide court orders. It was not clear what such a decision might look like, but a majority of the court expressed concerns about what would happen if the administration were allowed, even temporarily, to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally. Democratic-led states, immigrants and rights groups who sued over Trump's executive order argued that it would upset the settled understanding of birthright citizenship that has existed for more than 125 years. The court seems likely to side with Maryland parents in a religious rights case over LGBTQ storybooks in public schools Parents in the Montgomery County school system, in suburban Washington, want to be able to pull their children out of lessons that use the storybooks, which the county added to the curriculum to better reflect the district's diversity. The school system at one point allowed parents to remove their children from those lessons, but then reversed course because it found the opt-out policy to be disruptive. Sex education is the only area of instruction with an opt-out provision in the county's schools. The school district introduced the storybooks in 2022, with such titles as 'Prince and Knight' and 'Uncle Bobby's Wedding.' The case is one of several religious rights cases at the court this term. The justices have repeatedly endorsed claims of religious discrimination in recent years. The decision also comes amid increases in recent years in books being banned from public school and public libraries. A three-year battle over congressional districts in Louisiana is making its second trip to the Supreme Court Lower courts have struck down two Louisiana congressional maps since 2022 and the justices are weighing whether to send state lawmakers back to the map-drawing board for a third time. The case involves the interplay between race and politics in drawing political boundaries in front of a conservative-led court that has been skeptical of considerations of race in public life. At arguments in March, several of the court's conservative justices suggested they could vote to throw out the map and make it harder, if not impossible, to bring redistricting lawsuits under the Voting Rights Act. Before the court now is a map that created a second Black majority congressional district among Louisiana's six seats in the House of Representatives. The district elected a Black Democrat in 2024. A three-judge court found that the state relied too heavily on race in drawing the district, rejecting Louisiana's arguments that politics predominated, specifically the preservation of the seats of influential members of Congress, including Speaker Mike Johnson. The Supreme Court ordered the challenged map to be used last year while the case went on. Lawmakers only drew that map after civil rights advocates won a court ruling that a map with one Black majority district likely violated the landmark voting rights law. The justices are weighing a Texas law aimed at blocking kids from seeing online pornography Texas is among more than a dozen states with age verification laws. The states argue the laws are necessary as smartphones have made access to online porn, including hardcore obscene material, almost instantaneous. The question for the court is whether the measure infringes on the constitutional rights of adults as well. The Free Speech Coalition, an adult-entertainment industry trade group, agrees that children shouldn't be seeing pornography. But it says the Texas law is written too broadly and wrongly affects adults by requiring them to submit personal identifying information online that is vulnerable to hacking or tracking. The justices appeared open to upholding the law, though they also could return it to a lower court for additional work. Some justices worried the lower court hadn't applied a strict enough legal standard in determining whether the Texas law and others like that could run afoul of the First Amendment.
