Latest news with #GovernmentStudyCommission
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Luzerne County study commission plans more power for election board
May 16—Under a scenario that took shape Thursday, Luzerne County's Government Study Commission would recommend keeping a five-citizen election board but mandating that it has more power, including authority to hire the election director and prepare the annual budget request to county council. Currently, the county manager handles these duties but must consult with the board. The potential change would be similar to the structure of the county controller's or district attorney's offices, with the election board-selected director overseeing staff and reporting to the board instead of to the county manager or council. The commission is drafting a revised charter that will come before voters for possible adoption in November. Commission members will not formally vote on the election board recommendations until proposed wording is presented at an upcoming meeting. The movement to mandate more board power was largely in response to a legal overview Thursday from commission solicitor Joseph J. Khan, of Curtin & Heefner LLP. Khan said home rule counties have discretion over how election boards are structured but must comply with the Pennsylvania Election Code, or Title 25, in setting forth the duties of the board. The county's current charter was clear about the selection of election board members but did not spell out the board's duties, creating the potential for conflicting interpretations and future legal challenges, Khan told the commission. Khan said Title 25 is clear that election boards have employee appointment authority and other responsibilities. This very issue arose soon after the charter's January 2012 implementation when the county's election director was terminated by the manager, Khan said. He was referring to Leonard Piazza, who oversaw the election bureau from April 2004 until his termination in April 2012. Among other issues, Piazza's litigation argued then-county Manager Robert Lawton did not have authority to terminate him because that power is held by the election board. There was no final court decision because a council majority approved a $56,000 settlement in March 2018 to end Piazza's litigation. Under the current charter, county council appoints four of the five citizens — two Democrats and two Republicans. Those four council-appointed members then select someone of any affiliation, or no affiliation, to fill the fifth seat and also serve as chair. Prior to home rule, the county's three elected commissioners served as the election board, with the court appointing substitutes during periods when sitting commissioners appeared on the ballot. During Thursday's two-hour discussion on the matter, commission member Stephen J. Urban said he has long argued that the election board was not exercising its lawful powers, which he said include the authority to select the county's voting system. Commission members discussed different scenarios of adding council members and/or the county manager to the board as voting or non-voting members, but the majority consensus appeared to be for keeping five citizens. Regarding the fifth election board seat filled by election board members, commission Chairman Ted Ritsick said he does not believe that person should be required to fill the chairmanship seat. Ritsick said he believes more citizens would apply for the fifth seat if they did not have to serve in the leadership post. He advocated for allowing board members to select anyone to serve as chair during annual reorganization meetings. Several others voiced support for Ritsick's suggested change. Commission members Mark Shaffer, Vice Chairman Vito Malacari and Treasurer Cindy Malkemes strongly opposed the addition of council members or the county manager to the election board as voting or non-voting members. Reach Jennifer Learn-Andes at 570-991-6388 or on Twitter @TLJenLearnAndes.
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Luzerne County study commission tackling election board next
May 15—Luzerne County's Government Study Commission is set to start addressing the election board at its Thursday meeting. The commission is drafting a revised charter that will come before voters for possible adoption in November. The election board provides general supervision over elections, certifies results and oversees post-election adjudication. Commission Chairman Ted Ritsick said Wednesday that no firm recommendations have been weighed to date because the panel is still gathering information needed to assess the board structure and duties. Citizens and officials have raised differing views on whether the board's composition should be altered or untouched and what powers should be handled by the board, as opposed to the administration. "Now we're in a position where the commission is becoming fully informed, and we'll have those conversations and figure it out," Ritsick said. "I can't emphasize enough that we are really trying to get all the information needed," he added. "Our goal is to fix the election board, and at the end of the day, that will require us to have due diligence presented to us that we'll see over the next couple of meetings." Ritsick said commission solicitor Joseph J. Khan, of Curtin & Heefner LLP, will present a legal overview on the subject on Thursday. Prior to home rule's January 2012 implementation, the county's three elected commissioners served as the election board, with the court appointing substitutes during periods when sitting commissioners appeared on the ballot. The charter created an election board of five citizens. County council appoints four of the five — two Democrats and two Republicans. Those four council-appointed members then select someone of any affiliation, or no affiliation, to fill the fifth seat and also serve as chair. Beth Gilbert, of In This Together NEPA, issued a release Wednesday stating its recent survey revealed "overwhelming support for preserving the independence and bipartisan structure of the county's Board of Elections." Describing the five-citizen structure as a critical safeguard, the release said 90.2% of the 1,282 survey respondents said it is very important the election board remains independent and bipartisan. "Any attempt to place control of elections back into the hands of partisan political actors is a step backwards. The independent Board of Elections was created to prevent precisely that — to ensure that no political party or elected body could interfere in the administration or certification of our elections," it said. The organization urged the commission to "listen to the will of Luzerne County voters and leave the independent, bipartisan Election Board intact in the proposed charter." "Our democracy works best when it is protected from political influence. Our voters have made it clear they expect nothing less," it said. Thursday's commission meeting starts at 6 p.m. in the county courthouse on River Street in Wilkes-Barre. A link to attend the meeting remotely will be posted under council's online meeting section (scroll down) at Reach Jennifer Learn-Andes at 570-991-6388 or on Twitter @TLJenLearnAndes.
Yahoo
01-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Luzerne County Government Study Commission assesses creation of prison, public defender's boards
Apr. 30—Luzerne County's Government Study Commission recently reached a decision on the possible creation of a county jail oversight board and public defender advisory board. The commission is drafting a revised county home rule charter for voters to consider in the November general election. Initially, the commission considered a mandate for council to create both boards along with specifications on the board membership. After lengthy debate, the seven citizen commission members unanimously agreed to give council the option to create them as it sees fit through this added clause: "To promote the fair and equal administration of justice and to protect the county against potential litigation and liability, County Council may establish a County Jail Oversight Board and a Public Defender Advisory Board in accordance with state law." To ensure council seriously contemplates the matter, commission members said wording also will be added in a not-yet-completed transitional section setting a timeline for council to initiate a study of both. Prison board Before home rule took effect in 2012, decisions about prison staffing and operations were made by a prison board comprised of the three county commissioners, district attorney, county controller, sheriff and a judge or judicial representative. Under the current structure, the county manager oversees prison operations and selects a correctional services division head who must be confirmed by county council. Study commission member Stephen J. Urban expressed support for a prison board when County Manager Romilda Crocamo appeared before the commission in December. Urban, a prior county councilman, maintained that a prison board could "offer some advice" and possibly help reduce prison litigation. Crocamo told Urban that a prison board could appear to be a good thing in theory, but the facility had "become a political dumping ground" in the past. Crocamo said two county branches — correctional services and Children, Youth and Families — have more liability exposure due to the nature of their work, but the county has worked to implement positive changes, such as a medication-assisted treatment program for inmates suffering from opioid withdrawal upon arrival. Crocamo also retained Dauphin County-based Sweeney Corrections Consulting to examine prison operations and said this week a public report on its recommendations and findings will be released soon. The study commission initially considered requiring a board to oversee the county prison system operation and maintenance and ensure the health and safekeeping of inmates. It would have included seven to nine members, including at least three citizens appointed by the county manager subject to council confirmation. Public defender The commission's consideration of a public defender advisory board evolved from a suggestion by past county chief public defender Al Flora. The public defender's office must provide legal representation for qualifying indigent applicants. In a written communication earlier this year, Flora told the commission "the current organizational structure compromises the independence of" the public defender's office and threatens its "ability to provide competent and effective representation." Among other suggestions, Flora proposed creating a five-person "select committee" to hire and fire the chief public defender and oversee office operations. In this scenario, the county Court of Common Pleas president judge would appoint two members. Three other entities — the chief judge of the county's minor judiciary, the county bar association executive committee and county council — also would each appoint a member. Like the correctional services head, the current charter made the chief public defender one of eight division heads nominated by the county manager, with council majority confirmation required for a hiring to take effect. While the commission did not advance a select committee concept, it added a requirement for the manager to obtain council confirmation to remove the chief public defender. The commission's initial proposal to create a public defender advisory board would have established a panel of seven to nine members to assist the county manager in ensuring the office "receives the independence and support necessary to fulfill its mission." This panel would have included at least three citizens appointed by council. Commission debate When discussing both boards, study commission members raised questions about their powers and whether their creation was essential to improve operations. Based on the unknowns, the commission agreed council should be empowered to perform this analysis and act accordingly. Commission Chairman Ted Ritsick said Wednesday he expects the proposed charter will give council nine to 12 months — a time has not yet been approved — to initiate a study. "We agree this is important to consider, but it's something better viewed as a legislative function of council," Ritsick said. "The commission only has a very limited amount of time and cannot give this matter the due diligence it needs." Commission Vice Chairman Vito Malacari concurred, saying the recommendation will "force council's hand" to examine both boards and publicly report its determination. "It allows them as a legislative body to do the work of the people," he said. Malacari also expressed hesitancy to "tie the hands of council" by locking in a new structure for the public defender's office in the charter. He noted there is a movement pushing the state to address funding shortages and other issues encountered by public defender's offices that may impact future decisions. The commission will meet at 6 p.m. Thursday in the county courthouse on River Street in Wilkes-Barre, with instructions for the remote attendance option posted under council's online meeting section (scroll down) at Reach Jennifer Learn-Andes at 570-991-6388 or on Twitter @TLJenLearnAndes.
Yahoo
18-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Luzerne County Government Study Commission reaches agreement on ethics recommendation
Apr. 18—After several past debates, Luzerne County's Government Study Commission reached consensus Thursday on a recommendation that will require council to keep an ethics commission and code. The seven-citizen study commission is drafting a revised county home rule charter for voters to consider in November. It had been split on a prior suggestion allowing council to determine if a commission is needed and, if so, how it would be structured. If the proposed charter is adopted by voters in November, the wording approved Thursday would require council to vote within nine months to ratify or amend the existing ethics code. Council would also be required to maintain or establish an ethics commission to receive and investigate ethics complaints. The existing commission structure would remain in effect if council does not approve a new composition. The commission is currently composed of the county district attorney, manager, controller and two council-appointed citizens (one Democrat and one Republican). Council also would be required to revisit the ethics code and commission structure every two years. Study Commission Chairman Ted Ritsick and Vice Chairman Vito Malacari said this option ensures an ethics code and commission are in place but gives council legislative authority to determine how they are structured. While the recommendation was unanimously approved, Study Commission Treasurer Cindy Malkemes said she is concerned council will not act to make improvements. Many have complained the code is problematic and ineffective, but council has not exercised its current authority to revamp it. Malacari told Malkemes citizens are free to "put pressure" on council members to make the code workable. Study Commission member Mark Shaffer said he believes the membership composition of the ethics commission should be spelled out in advance so it is kept "out of council's hands," but he supported the proposal in a spirit of compromise. Shaffer had predicted voters would reject the proposed new charter if council had discretion to eliminate an ethics commission. Boards The study commission also approved recommendations Thursday related to several boards: —Assessment Appeals Board This three-citizen panel appointed by council rules on requests for real estate assessment reductions. The commission is adding wording to ensure the members complete training that was mandated by state law enacted after the current charter took effect. It also is allowing council to appoint alternate members to fill in as needed if permanent members are absent or have a conflict hearing any appeals. —Retirement Board The five-member board oversees the employee pension fund and currently consists of the county manager, budget/finance division head, council chair, a council member and member of the retirement system. The new recommendation would replace the budget/finance division head with an additional council member and allow the manager the option to select a designee to serve in his/her place. —Joint Airport Board The county has three members — the council chair, a council member and county manager or his/her designee — on the joint board with Lackawanna County that oversees the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International Airport. Thursday's recommendation replaced the county manager with a third council member based on the argument that this board serves more of a legislative purpose. Reach Jennifer Learn-Andes at 570-991-6388 or on Twitter @TLJenLearnAndes.
