A question on whether to reconsider Luzerne County’s home rule government won’t be placed on the May 16 primary election ballot, a council majority decided Tuesday.
Councilman Stephen J. Urban had proposed the ballot question asking voters if they want to convene a seven-citizen, elected commission to assess the home rule charter and recommend whether to keep it as is, revise it, try a different structure or revert back to the prior three-commissioner system.
The current charter replaced a system in effect for more than 150 years and put 11 part-time elected council members and a council-appointed manager in charge of decisions previously made by three elected commissioners and several elected row officers.
Only three of 11 council members supported placing the study commission question on the upcoming primary ballot: Kevin Lescavage, Brian Thornton and Urban.
Voting against the question were Carl Bienias III, John Lombardo, LeeAnn McDermott, Tim McGinley, Matthew Mitchell, Chris Perry, Kendra Radle and Gregory S. Wolovich Jr.
Council members voting against the study commission argued council should have an opportunity to bring suggested home rule improvements directly to voters through ballot questions, saying that approach won’t risk a commission recommendation to return to the old structure.
Advocates of the commission had maintained an outside panel was the best way to tackle home rule deficiencies in one sweep and emphasized the commission could choose to keep home rule. Citizens interested in serving would have simultaneously run in the upcoming primary, with the top seven vote-getters taking office if the ballot question passed.
Bienias questioned the rush to place the study commission question on the upcoming primary ballot, saying council should have time to discuss possible amendments and research their legality. He and others are suggesting an amendment to reduce the size of council as part of a package of possible changes.
Bienias and several colleagues said Tuesday they would support putting the study commission question on the November general election ballot, when voter turnout will be higher, if council receives legal input indicating council cannot proceed with chosen amendments.
Urban had urged his colleagues to proceed with the primary election question, saying he does not believe council should “kick the can down the road” in seeking a study commission.
Commission members would have had up to 18 months to study the current structure and decide how they wanted to proceed, officials have said. Any study commission-recommended changes must be approved by future voters to take effect, which is what occurred before the county’s 2012 switch to home rule.
In response to calls for public involvement, Wolovich held up a copy of the 69-page charter and said he personally believes it would be better for people to digest and vote on individual questions “issue by issue” as opposed to another entirely new lengthy document.
Lescavage said something must be done because some of council’s biggest conflicts involve disagreements over whether charter provisions contradict state law. He believes the appointed manager has too much power.
Lombardo stressed voters will have the final say on any changes.
Citizen input
Public comment on the proposed study commission ordinance was accepted during a hearing preceding the voting meeting, and several citizens weighed in with different opinions on how council should proceed.
County District Attorney Sam Sanguedolce urged council to place the study commission on the ballot.
The DA said he hears a lot of comments about the charter ending corruption, but he argued that was accomplished by those elected — not the form of government.
Sanguedolce said all citizens should have a say in whether a study commission is convened, not only those sitting on council or attending meetings. He supports some of the charter amendments individually suggested by council but said he cannot believe such alterations can be legally placed on the ballot without the formation of a study commission.
The county needs to face the fact that there are major charter flaws that need to be fixed, the DA said.
Former councilman and charter drafter Rick Morelli spoke against formation of a study commission, saying the county could end up with politically motivated commission members recommending a return to the three-commissioner system.
County government obtained a credit rating and dramatically reduced debt under home rule, Morelli said. He noted the charter has an 8% cap on real estate tax increases and contains checks and balances and accountability provisions to protect the public.
Morelli asserted some are trying to campaign against home rule thinking it will help them better access contracts and jobs.
Former county commissioner and councilman Stephen A. Urban said he had agreed to place the study commission question on the ballot when he was a commissioner, and he believes council should do the same.
Urban said any citizens can run to serve on the study commission, including council members. He said the home rule charter should have kept a salary board as a check on the manager’s creation of positions. The charter also eliminated the prison board — an entity he said is warranted to oversee the county’s largest departmental budgetary expense.