Luzerne County’s ethics commission received two complaints in the last three weeks, but it is powerless to unseal the envelopes and read them.
Under the council-adopted ethics code, complaints must be opened and initially reviewed by an outside enforcement attorney contracted by the commission. However, no attorneys have expressed an interest in handling this work since it accepted the resignation of its lone enforcement attorney, Qiana Murphy Lehman, in May.
The recruitment of attorneys has long been a challenge.
In 2017, a commission complaint remained unopened for months due to the lack of an attorney.
Council had added the provision requiring outside attorneys in 2014 after critics questioned the legality of the ethics code that had been adopted by council shortly after the January 2012 switch to a home rule government structure.
Under the initial code, the ethics commission handled both investigations and rulings on alleged violations.
The solution in the new version was the commission’s appointment of a panel of three attorneys who are not employed by the county and are selected through a public request for proposals. They are supposed to be assigned on a rotating basis as complaints are lodged as an added check and balance, the code states.
Assigned lawyers must handle the initial investigation and recommendation on whether complaints should be dismissed or upgraded to formal complaints heard by the commission.
Although another solicitation has been publicly posted seeking attorney applicants on the purchasing section at luzernecounty.org, commission members agreed during a Monday meeting that a temporary solution is needed to ensure timely unsealing and review of complaints when no attorneys can be secured.
It proposed an ethics code amendment permitting the commission’s solicitor to open and review complaints in this situation.
Commission Chairman Walter Griffith, the county controller, said the commission is awaiting final paperwork needed to retain Attorney William Lawrence, from West Group Law, as the new commission solicitor — another position that was vacant for an extended period.
Council Chairman John Lombardo and Councilman Harry Haas, who chairs council’s code review committee, attended Monday’s commission meeting and agreed to facilitate a council discussion and vote on the commission’s code amendment request, pending a review by the county’s law office.
According to the current county solicitation seeking ethics enforcement attorneys, the compensation is $225 per hour with an annual cap of $25,000.
Commission members are trying to figure out why recruitment remains a challenge.
Commission member and county District Attorney Sam Sanguedolce said he believes attorneys are reluctant to take on the task of investigating because the code is too vague and essentially “has no teeth.”
The commission — which also includes citizens Ben Herring and Jay Notartomaso and county Administrative Services Division Head Jim Rose as the county manager’s designee — unanimously agreed to automatically readvertise the enforcement attorney opening if no applicants surface before the July 31 submission deadline.
Commission members also plan to review other potential recommended ethics code changes at their August meeting.
A proposed home rule charter revision that will be put before voters for possible adoption in November would keep the current commission structure plus two more citizens for at least the first two years. A majority-plus-one council vote would be required if council wants to change the composition after this two-year trial period.
The proposed charter also would create an advisory committee including citizens that would make nonbinding recommendations on ethics code changes to council.