UPDATED:Gracedale Drops to Provisional III License, NorCo Finally Seeking Management Consultant

At last night's NorCo Council meeting, an uncharacteristically somber Exec Tara Zrinski informed the Board that Gracedale's nursing home license has been downgraded from Provisional II to Provisional III as a result of deficiencies at the home on September 10 and 24. But she also indicated that she finally gets it and will seek a management consultant to help turn things around. She added that she has also shared a draft of her strategic plan for Gracedale with Council member Dave Holland. She has asked him to keep it to himself.

According to Zrinski, a nursing home with a Provisional III license can be fined at different rates. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has fined the county $16,350 for the September 10 deficiency. This is in addition to $144,328 in fines assessed since Michelle Morton has been running the facility.

Morton is resigning as Administrator, and Zrinski now concedes that "some of [her] reactions to the surveyors may have not been in our best interests. Zrinski is alluding to a previous attitude of defensiveness. "That's not what surveyors want to her," she acknowledged. They want to hear that we identify the issue, will not dismiss it and that we will ensure that it does not happen again in the future. She conceded that past practice has been to appeal deficiencies, "to no avail."

Zrinski also prepared a distributed a handout on what happens to a nursing home with a provisional license. "I'm not emailing you this information because I kind of don't want Bernie to get it," she stated. "But I know he will."

A handout at a public meeting of Northampton County Council is certainly something to which the public is entitled. But I already know what happens when a nursing home is downgraded a provisional license, which is a temporary license that lasts six months and can only be renewed three times. 

According to the Pa Code, a nursing home with a Provisional III license can operate despite serious deficiencies. It must follow a corrective plan and timetable with the state DOH. Failure to correct can result in closure or the loss of the license. But Zrinski told Council last night that the "likelihood that Gracedale will close is very low."

On the bright side, Zrinski told County Council that Gracedale recently underwent its annual survey and did well. An email from Continuum of Care Director Tom Carson said there were five deficiencies, which he said is below the state average. 

UPDATEd 2 PM - In a news release issued late this morning, the county denies Gracedale is closing (No one has suggested it is). In addition to what she told County Council last night, Zrinski states that "[c]orrecting individual findings is not enough. We must also examine the systems that allowed additional problems to occur and intend to hire a consultant to review policies, procedures, and resident care plans, strengthen our corrective actions, and help demonstrate lasting compliance. Our priority remains the safety and well-being of every resident.”

UPDATED 2:15 PM: Pa. DOH posts September 24 Deficiency - Nurse's Aide Accidentally Broke Resident's Foot. - The September 24 deficiency flagged by the state department of health has now been posted online. It is a "G" level deficiency, meaning one that resulted in actual harm to a resident. 

According to a Nurse Aide Kardex (a concise, quick-reference worksheet that summarizes each patient’s essential care information in one place) a resident at Gracedale was non ambulatory and needed assistance of two staff members when getting in and out of a wheelchair. A nurse's aide who failed to read the Kardex and who did not even know what a Kardex moved a resident from the toilet to a wheelchair, and in the process that resident's foot was fractured. This aide was supposed to have had a shadow day with another aide, but there is no evidence that happened. The resident stated that the nurse's aide let her slide down causing her leg to get twisted. She further stated that more than one staff usually assisted her; but at that time, only one staff member assisted with the transfer.

According to DOH, the facility's negligence resulted in a serious injury to a resident. 

Joe Welsh Tells NorCo Council He is Willing to Serve Jeff Warren's Unexpired Term

Yesterday, I recklessly speculated on just who might be interested in serving Jeff Warren's unexpired term as a District III Council member. Joe Welsh, a Tara Zrinski cheerleader who speaks at every meeting, is one of the names I mentioned. Joe decided to address my gossip at last night's meeting of NorCo Council and had a few choice words for his critics as well. 

"I might consider that position with the understanding that I would never run for it, and I would simply be interested in being, um, I think, as a caretaker for lack of a better word ... ."

After mentioning Joe as a possibility, several of my readers chimed in with some unflattering remarks. Joe addressed them as well.

"I did want to respond to some of the comments that were made, because it basically bled out a lot of the snakes named anonymous from under their rocks.

"The suggestion was made by multiple people that your meetings would be 12 hours long, if I were on this council. Now, as far as I know, I never got gonged by Mr. Kraft and this five minute timer. [Actually, he did, on the evening he spoke about ICE despite being concussed earlier that day]. So if I can coherently present issues to you in less than five minutes, I don't think that means that translates in any way, your meeting's been 12 minutes or 12 hours long.

"Another person suggested that I was a liberal joke, and one of them said that I would be even worse than Commissioner Warrant. If that was possible. So there you have it. I make friends wherever I go. But there used to be a saying that, I don't care what you say about me, just spell my name correctly. Unfortunately, a lot of these anonymous posters couldn't get a five letter last name right. And I think, you know, if you got a 20% error rate in spelling somebody's name, you always see because he signs his posts on that blog."

"Glad you're not trying to balance a budget."

Joe, if you think they treat you poorly, you should read what they say about me, lol, except I get it from everyone. Of course it's usually justified in my case. 

I personally would prefer someone younger, like Jerry Seyfried. 

YouTube Video of NorCo Budget Hearing Concerning 43% Tax Hike Fails to Post Online

Yesterday, NorCo Council conducted its third budget hearing concerning a 43% tax hike requested by Exec Tara Zrinski for next year. Though the meeting lasted well over two hours, the video failed to load. Instead, an error message appears. These videos are being brought to you by NorCo's outside IT department, which has demonstrated yet again why this outfit should be canned. It also follows the elections' office refusal to post campaign finance reports to the county webpage. 

Since Executive Tara Zrinski claims transparency, she will hopefully address this matter. The public should be able to watch these budget discussions.  

UPDATED: Who Will Replace Jeff Warren on NorCo Council?

Now that he's been elected to the state house, Jeff Warren will need to resign his seat on NorCo Council. He takes office in early December, so my guess is that he will resign before Exec Tara Zrinski's budget comes up for a vote. That way he can avoid being tagged with a tax hike.  My question is who will replace him?

Warren is a District, as opposed to an at-large, Council member. His District, District 3, consists of the Townships of Bethlehem Tp, Lower Nazareth, Hanover, East Allen, Allen and the Boroughs of Northampton, N Catty, Freemansburg and Nazareth. It pays $10,000 a year. Anyone appointed to replace him in his final two years would have to be a resident of that district. NorCo's Home Rule Charter imposes no requirement that the appointee be a member of the same party as the resignee, but I seriously doubt that the eight remaining Democrats on County Council would appoint a Republican.

Possible replacements include former Exec Lamont McClure, former Exec Jerry Seyfried, former Council member Jeff Corpora and Joe Welsh, who has been attending lots of meetings in recent weeks. 

I doubt very much that Lamont could get more than three votes. Jerry Seyfried would be an excellent choice, but I'm unsure he'd want it. Jeff Corpora has experience, having served two years as a court appointee. Joe Welsh is knowledgeable and amiable, but his frequent soliloquies to County Council might have hurt him if he is interested. 

I am sure there are several people already making inquiry. 

UPDATED 8:24: In the original report, I neglected to include Freemansburg as part of District 3. 

Looks Like a Blue Tsunami, Not a Blue Wave

At the time I wrote this story, unofficial results show what appears to be much larger than a blue wave. It's a blue tsunami! President Donald Trump asked voters to act as though he were on the ballot, and the votes tallied show an overwhelming rejection both of him and the direction in which he has taken the country. Republicans have refused to stand up to him and they are paying the price.

In Northampton County, all 155 precincts had reported in by 11 pm in a remarkably smooth election with a 53.1% turnout. I heard of remarkably few problems at the polls or with voters receiving the wrong ballots. The only unforced error was the poorly considered decision to close the elections office to the public on pre-election Friday. Other than that, things went quite well.

Lehigh County is reporting a 53.2% turnout, but that number is subject to change as more reports come in from their 158 precincts. In that county, there was a problem with scanning devices in one precinct, but I'm unaware of any widespread issues. 

It was more than a good night for Democrats. It was very nearly a clean sweep. With the exception of Zach Mako and Ann Flood, Lehigh and NorCo tallies show Democrats have won all state house races. Incumbents Joe Emrick, Milou Mackenzie, Gary Day are losing. In the Senatorial races, Lisa Boscola and Nick Miller are clear winners, and Jarrett Coleman is losing.  

WFMZ has projected Bob Brooks as the winner in the Pa.07 Congressional race with a 57% lead that exceeds polling expectations. Ryan Mackenzie will go down as a one-term wonder.

According to The New York Times, Democrats took control of the Senate and are on pace to win a large majority in the House. The President said he would accept the results. Trump campaigned on the economy and appears to have received a stinging rebuke. Voters went to the polls on a day with the highest ever gasoline prices on an election day. 

What's It Like at the Polls?

Please feel free to share your experience at the polls. Is turnout heavy or light? Are there any problems or are things running smoothly? 

Here's the opening paragraph of what the county posted on election day: "The work County doesn’t seem to ever stop, not even because of an election. The garage is being demolished as we speak and the county is business as usual in every other way, but we know that elections are a core function of the County and, in Election Day, the priority is the election. That is why we working at all hours, as many as humanly possible, to stay on top of everything."

The post goes on to state that there was a watermain break last night that could have affected five polling locations in South Bethlehem, but that was resolved. It adds that one election judge overselrpt. 

NorCo Retirees - Expect No COLA in 2027

At a retiree luncheon in May, NorCo Exec Tara Zrinski argued it would be ridiculous to deny them a COLA when inflation is out of control. But at the Retirement Board meeting last week, no action was taken. So if you are a NorCo retiree and was hoping to see one, you'll have to wait 'till next year or perhaps as long as three years before the matter is even discussed.

According to the county's pension manager, the retirement fund was valued at $585.7 million as of October 27. It was 92% funded at the beginning of the year. If a COLA were granted this year, it would be 4.2%. But it would cost the county $14 million. The county is still paying off three previous COLAs to the tune of $21 million. 

Council President Ken Kraft said that, as a retiree, he'd love to have a COLA. "But I just don't see how the county can afford to do this," he added. Council member Lori Vargo Heffner suggested a smaller COLA but was told it has to be 4.2% or nothing. She said it's unfair to vote on this matter without knowing what the Council will do with Zrinski's proposed budget. 

A suggestion was made that COLAS be granted to retirees with relatively modest pensions, but the Board was told it must be for all or none. 

Retiree rep Pat Strunk said that pensioners would appreciate a COLA, "but I can understand under this environment that it may not be possible."

Earlier in the meeting, former Exec Gerald E "Jerry" Seyfried argued at length for a COLA, noting that the failure to award them in previous years has diminished the pensions of retirees by 20%. 

2026 Election - Make Your Last-Minute Pitches

As many readers of this blog are aware, I am notoriously inaccurate when I make election picks. It's considered the kiss of death, and some candidates have actively lobbied me to endorse their opponent. In this race, I've endorsed no one. If "none of the above," were a ballot option, I really believe it would win hands down. 

Here are my predictions. 

Governor - Shapiro wins easily. (I cast no vote).

LV Congress (Pa. 07) - Brooks. (I voted for Lou Shupe)

Pa. Senate (18th Senatorial District) - Boscola in a landslide. She's been in office far too long, but Janney had neither the right amount of money or the right message. 

Pa. Senate (16th Senatorial district) - Coleman wins a close one against a political opportunist. 

Pa. State House (137th legislative) - In the only race I consider competitive in NorCo, I believe Emrick will win a close one. I've seen lots of yard signs for Emrick at people's homes in Nazareth and Palmer. I also see lots of Warren signs, but not in people's yards. 

Feel free to make your pitches. 

NorCo Administrator Mark Aurand Insults County Council For Seeking Info Regarding 43.5% Tax Hike Request

We all do it. From time to time, we all send emails or text messages to the wrong person. But sometimes, we might accidentally send an email meant for someone else that actually trashes the people who get it. That's what NorCo Administrator Mark Aurand did following last week's budget hearing. Unfortunately for him and his boss, the people he trashes are Northampton County Council members. They received an email from him that he had intended for others.  I'm beginning to understand why one of my readers recently called Aurand an "arrogant fop."

Northampton County Executive Tara Zrinski proposed budget next year calls for a very unpopular 43.5% tax hike. During two budget hearings, Council members have asked tough questions as they attempt to cut expenses. And following the latest budget hearing, Council member Jason Boulette questioned how many county employees are issued cell phones. how much they cost and whether they are needed. 

What follows is a firestorm ignited by an email that Administrator Mark Aurand trashing Council. He thought he was sending it internally, but accidentally sent it to County Council

1) Aurand insults County Council for requesting information as they review proposed budget. 

Oh geez: “As soon as possible”. We get to it when we get to it. 

And should we decide to respond, we’ll need to find a way to account for the intangibles: more time w family; better morale; which leads to higher productivity; retention; etc. 

They are enjoying the power rush this whole process is giving them way too much. We may need to pick a spot to say no just to reel this in a bit.  

2) Aurand realizes he screwed up after the horse has left the barn but complains he has other things to do. 

Hey everyone. Please accept my apology for the below that I inadvertently sent to you all. It was intended for internal circulation only. 

This does show the frustration that we are feeling in the Administration. But I did not intend to share it or to be disrespectful. 

I do believe you all are exercising your prerogative but I do think you all need to recognize that we have other responsibilities- like running Gracedale and elections, which we all want to go well. Also, a valid point is buried in here which is that much of the detail you are demanding relates to decisions within the discretion of the County Executive (like who gets a cell phone for example). 

It would be helpful if we could discuss this respectfully understanding that we all have good intentions. It has not felt that way from the Administration’s perspective.

I know the budget has been a challenge for all of us. I do believe we can work together to get through this in a way that serves the best interest of the County. 

I wish you all good weekend. Respectfully , Mark

3) Boulette believes asking questions and digging into budget is his job. 

Mark,

I would dispute that any of us are enjoying a power trip. Speaking for myself, I don't enjoy any aspect of this budget process. It's difficult and frustrating but necessary. I've spent hundreds of hours going through every line in the budget. It's not fun. I believe that asking questions and digging into the budget is responsible governance and that's what we were elected to do. 

On the cell phone comment, since that ties back to an inquiry I made. The question I sent was: 

"The county spent $293,000 on cell phones in 2025 and is projected to have spent $271,000 in cell phones in 2026. I would like a report listing every cell phone in the county, the employee it is attached to, the department it is attached to, an indicator of whether the phone is strictly necessary for job performance, the number of minutes used in 2026, the number of texts sent in 2026, and the amount of data used in 2026. If it's easier to send this broken down by month, that's fine."

I believe the information I'm asking for is legitimate. Is every cell phone we're paying for being used? Do we still have cell lines attached to employees that no longer work at the county? I think these were appropriate things to ask. 

If you disagree with my questions, I would have been open to a conversation with you about it. Yes, you're correct that it's the Executive's decision which employees get cell phones out of the cell phone budget. But it's Council's job to approve the budget and to ensure we're allocating money appropriately. I asked the questions I asked to try to ensure we're making cuts responsibly, rather than just submitting amendments to cut every department's cell phone budget by 50-75% and letting you figure out how to work with that.

The 300,000 is not a huge amount when weighed against the 540+ million budget. But it adds up. And every dollar matters.

I'm sorry you folks are frustrated. I recognize that I in particular am asking a lot of questions. This is my first budget and I want to have a better understanding to help me in doing my job of amending it. Given the size of the increase being asked for, I think it would be irresponsible of us not to ask questions.

 4) Zrinski chimes in with a nonapology that insults a Council member and complains about being tasked with answering questions from the county's governing body. 

I am writing in the hope that we can reset the tone of our budget discussions and establish a more constructive working relationship between Council and the administration. We share a responsibility to the residents of Northampton County to manage public resources carefully, preserve essential services, and approach difficult decisions with professionalism and mutual respect.

I want to begin by apologizing for Mark’s lapse in discretion and tone. Although his comments were not intended for Council, they became public, and I understand the concern they caused. They also reflected frustrations within the administration that I believe deserve to be addressed directly and respectfully.

I remember the frustration surrounding the newspaper’s criticism of Kelly Keegan’s Facebook posts and how that experience affected her, and I would hope she could have more compassion for Mark’s obvious reply all mistake. 

While the circumstances are not identical, this experience is an opportunity to call for a reset and for us to re-approach one another with empathy when our words become the subject of public criticism. We all make mistakes, and sometimes our words have consequences we did not intend. That does not relieve us of the responsibility to acknowledge their impact, apologize when appropriate, and learn from what happened. I offer that context not to excuse Mark’s tone, but to ask that we extend one another the same understanding while holding ourselves accountable.

This is our administration’s first budget, too. Our staff have spent months reviewing expenditures, evaluating needs, and making difficult choices while continuing the daily work of county government. Budget preparation does not replace those responsibilities; it happens simultaneously. I recognize the considerable time Council members have devoted to reviewing the budget, and I appreciate that commitment. I ask that the administration’s work and operational experience receive the same consideration.

Councilman Boulette, your detailed requests concerning cell phone and copier usage raise an important question about the distinction between legislative oversight and executive administration. Council should ask questions about spending, and the administration should provide meaningful answers. My concern is when those requests move beyond evaluating appropriations and into a detailed examination of individual usage and day-to-day management—work that, in scope, resembles an operational audit.

These are not matters the administration has overlooked. We already monitor county-issued cell phone usage, and Brandone receives reports identifying phones that are not being used. Employees designated to receive county phones have them because their responsibilities call for county business to be conducted on county-issued devices rather than personal phones.

We have also reduced copiers through our internal review. Further changes must account for existing contracts and their timelines. A reduction that looks straightforward on a budget page may not be immediately achievable without contractual consequences or an impact on services.

This is an important concern when you scrutinize line by line— a line item represents more than an expenditure. It supports a service, an employee’s responsibilities, a contractual obligation, or an operational need. Some arrangements reflect decisions made by this administration others were inherited. Explaining that history and those constraints takes time, but they are essential to understanding what can responsibly be changed.

We welcome questions, but what becomes frustrating is the impression that an issue has only now been identified because it has been raised during Council’s review, when staff may already have spent considerable time evaluating and addressing it. I ask that these conversations begin with recognition of that work, rather than an assumption that it has not occurred.

If Council seeks a comprehensive review of cell phone utilization or similar operational matters, I suggest working with the Controller’s Office to determine the appropriate scope and process. That would distinguish an audit request from the information needed to make budget decisions and help avoid placing an additional audit-like workload on staff during budget preparation.

Similarly, Ken’s request concerning the impact of the holiday decision on Career Service employees, overtime, and collective bargaining agreements is legitimate. I made that decision, and I accept responsibility for explaining its effects. The analysis nevertheless requires staff time and coordination. 

We also undergo an annual external audit by Maher Duessel, and the county’s annual financial report is available on the website. Those materials provide an important foundation for reviewing prior-year finances, even where additional operational questions remain.

I also want to clarify our expectation regarding budget amendments. When Council proposes to change the administration’s submitted budget, I believe Council should identify the corresponding adjustments necessary to keep it balanced. This is the way it has been in the past. The administration can explain feasibility, contractual obligations, and service impacts, but it should not be left solely responsible for finding unspecified cuts to accommodate Council’s amendments.

More broadly, I am concerned that the phrase “power of the purse” is sometimes being used in a way that blurs the distinction between fiscal oversight and directing daily operations. Both Council’s oversight role and the administration’s management role are essential. Neither is strengthened when the boundary between them becomes unclear.

Recently, someone told me they would not want my job because of how they perceived the relationship between Council and the administration. They characterized it as unsupportive. That stayed with me—not because I expect agreement or freedom from scrutiny, but because I do not want our working relationship to appear so adversarial that public service itself seems discouraging.

In my experience serving on boards and working with executive leaders, effective oversight combines thoughtful scrutiny with respect for the people responsible for implementation. We can disagree about priorities without questioning one another’s commitment. We can request accountability without creating an expectation that every operational decision must be reconstructed during the budget process.

My hope is that we can move forward with clearer expectations about information requests, reasonable timelines, responsibility for amendments, and the distinction between oversight and administration. Above all, I hope we can rebuild “trust”. Our employees and residents deserve a county government whose leaders can work through disagreements with respect and a shared commitment to getting the work done.

All the best,

Tara Zrinski

5) Keegan claims Zrinski nonapology tells County Council to "pound sand."

Dear Members of County Council,

After reading Tara’s email, I have to say that if the intention was to reset the tone and establish a more constructive working relationship, I believe it accomplished exactly the opposite.

Quite frankly, Tara might as well saved her diatribe and sent an email containing two words: Pound sand! Because that is how the message reads.

She speaks at length about mutual respect, empathy, accountability, and rebuilding trust, yet the substance of her email is largely a defense of the administration, a criticism of Council's oversight, and an explanation of why Council's questions and requests are frustrating to her. There is very little acknowledgment that Council has a responsibility to ask those questions, demand answers, and ensure that taxpayer dollars are being spent appropriately.

Furthermore, let's also address something I find particularly inappropriate: the reference to my Facebook post and the Charlie Kirk situation.

How dare Tara bring my personal Facebook post into this discussion as some sort of comparison to Mark's email? My Facebook post was my personal expression. It was not a snarky email about Council that was inadvertently sent to the very people it was criticizing. Those are two entirely different circumstances.

Mark's email was about Council, contained comments directed at Council, and ultimately landed in Council members' inboxes. That is not the same as someone expressing a personal opinion on Facebook and subsequently facing public criticism. To suggest that I should therefore have some special obligation to extend compassion in this situation is misplaced and, frankly, insulting!

If Tara wants to talk about accountability, then let's have an honest conversation about accountability for everyone, not just when it is convenient for the administration.

Council's responsibility does not end with approving a budget. The power of the purse is a fundamental part of our role, and asking detailed questions about expenditures, cell phone usage, copier contracts, employee costs, overtime, and collective bargaining impacts is not an attempt to run county government. It is oversight. It is our job.

The fact that these questions may be inconvenient, time-consuming, or frustrating does not make them unreasonable. Nor should Council be made to feel as though asking questions somehow demonstrates a lack of respect for the administration's work.

Regarding budget amendments, Council should certainly be expected to make responsible and financially sound decisions. But the administration should not approach the budget process as though its submitted budget is beyond meaningful examination or that Council's role is simply to accept it and identify a few cuts. We are elected to represent the residents, not to rubber-stamp the administration's recommendations. 

What concerns me most about Tara's email is the contradiction between its opening and its message. She asks for empathy, but offers little toward Council. She asks for trust, but seems unwilling to accept the scrutiny that is necessary to build it. She asks for a better working relationship, yet repeatedly characterizes legitimate questions as burdensome and frustrating.

And then there is the reference to someone supposedly saying they would not want her job because of the relationship with Council. That is unfortunate, but it is not Council's responsibility to shield the administration from the realities of public accountability. Disagreement is not hostility. Questions are not disrespect. Oversight is not interference.

If we are truly going to have a reset, it cannot be one-sided. Council cannot be expected to extend understanding, soften its questions, limit its oversight, and accept explanations without meaningful discussion while the administration simply asks to be trusted.

Trust is earned through transparency, accountability, responsiveness, and mutual respect. It is not something that can be demanded in a lengthy email while simultaneously criticizing the very people from whom it is being requested.

I would have welcomed an email that genuinely acknowledged the frustration caused by Mark's comments, recognized Council's legitimate role, and offered a sincere commitment to improving communication. Instead, we received a lengthy explanation of why the administration is frustrated with Council and why our questions are creating additional work.

There is no meaningful effort to bring the parties together in that message. Quite the opposite. If the intention was to extend an olive branch, it was difficult to find it among the criticisms and justifications.

I am perfectly willing to have difficult conversations, ask difficult questions, and work toward solutions. But I will not apologize for doing the job I was elected to do, and I will not accept the suggestion that legitimate oversight is somehow an obstacle to effective county government.

The residents of Northampton County deserve better than an administration and Council that communicate through frustration, defensiveness, and carefully worded lectures about each other's responsibilities.

A reset requires two sides willing to participate. It cannot begin with one side effectively telling the other to pound sand while wrapping the message in language about trust and mutual respect.

Respectfully,

Kelly Keegan

6) Zrinski Stands by her nonapology. 

Dear Councilwoman Keegan and Members of County Council,

My previous words were sincere. My intention was to acknowledge the frustration caused by Mark’s comments, apologize for his tone, and explain concerns that I hoped we could address together. I understand that you received the message differently, and I regret that it added to the tension rather than helping to resolve it. However, the phrase “pound sand” neither reflects my words nor my intent.

Your response was addressed to Council, but the administration remained on the email chain. That may or may not have been an oversight. I will not make any assumptions about the intent. Regardless, it conveyed a clear message to those of us included about how our concerns were received. 

My intent was to share our concerns about how we carry out our respective responsibilities, how requests are communicated, how their scope and timing are managed, and how operational information is considered when decisions are made. Explaining the staff time, contractual obligations, and service implications involved in answering a question is not a refusal to answer it. Direction to request an audit is also not a refusal but a mechanism for council to seek an impartial and independent determination of what they are trying to figure out in their requests. 

To be clear, mutual respect does not mean the absence of accountability. We can acknowledge someone’s frustration without excusing their conduct. We can apologize for our words and/or missteps while still explaining the concerns behind them. Neither empathy nor an apology requires us to abandon a substantive disagreement.

I recognize Council’s responsibility to examine the budget, ask detailed questions, and hold the administration accountable for the use of public funds. I am not asking Council to apologize for that work, accept our recommendations without scrutiny, or refrain from difficult questions. The administration’s proposed budget is not beyond examination.

Likewise, acknowledging the administration’s frustration was not intended to dismiss Council’s frustration. A constructive relationship must leave room for both. Council should be able to explain when it believes information is insufficient, and the administration should be able to explain when a request presents practical challenges, without either explanation being treated as evidence of bad faith.

I agree with you that disagreement is not hostility, questions are not disrespect, and oversight is not interference. I would ask that we also agree that explaining operational constraints is not obstruction, expressing a concern is not rejecting accountability, and asking for mutual respect is not asking to be shielded from scrutiny.

I also want to address your concern about my reference to your Facebook post. I was not suggesting that the circumstances were identical, passing judgment on your personal expression, or implying that you had a special obligation to excuse Mark’s conduct. I offered it only as an example of how difficult it can be when our word choice becomes the subject of public criticism. It was intended as an appeal to empathy, not a personal criticism or an attempt to touch a sensitive subject. I recognize that the reference was unwelcome, and I am sorry that it caused hurt rather than conveying the understanding I intended.

I take responsibility for communicating my intentions more clearly. I also hope we can avoid attributing dismissive sentiments to one another that were neither stated nor intended. Describing my message as a “diatribe” or an elaborately worded dismissal makes it harder to discuss the actual concerns I raised.

My apology for Mark’s tone stands. So does my commitment to transparency, responsible budgeting, and a professional working relationship with Council. I do not expect us to agree on every issue. I do believe we can address our disagreements directly without questioning the sincerity of every effort to improve the relationship.

That was the purpose of my original message, and it remains my purpose now.

We will work on assembling the information we deem appropriate in response to your requests. 

Respectfully,

Tara 

7) Keegan is done and is hopeful Tuesday's election will be fair. 

All,

My "reply all" was very intentional. I'm done talking about this now. I'm looking forward to Tuesday's results and a fair election and then working towards the best we all can do for the budget. 

State Rep. Ann Flood Slams NorCo for Closing Elections Office on Pre-Election Friday

On Friday, I alerted you that Northampton County's elections office was closed to the public even though the election is tomorrow. Those who came in person wasted their time. Those who called heard a recording that the office was closed "for the holidays." That holiday, believe it or not, was Halloween. So far as I know, NorCo is the only government in the country to give workers a day or half day off for Halloween. And it wasn't even Halloween. However you might feel about giving staff time off to celebrate, it is simply inexcusable that the elections office would be closed to the public on  the Friday before an important midterm.

State Rep. Ann Floodis seeking re-election in a heavily Republican district. She has no reason to worry about her chances but is nevertheless calling foul on her Facebook page. 

Trick or treat? Unfortunately, it’s a trick for Northampton County Voters!

With Election Day just two business days away, County Executive Tara Zrinski decided to close the elections office yesterday, Friday, for a Halloween "holiday." Many voters have been contacting me directly, "terrified" and frustrated because they still haven’t received their mail-in ballots.

Serving the public should always come first. Administering elections is a fundamental duty of county government, and closing up shop right before Election Day is downright “scary” leadership—and pure incompetence.

Our voters deserve a free and fair election with accountability and open doors, not being disenfranchised of their right to vote because the county didn’t mail their ballot in a timely manner. This is unacceptable!

If you have not received your mail-in ballot or are facing issues with your vote, contact the County Executive’s office immediately at (610) 829-6300 and demand answers.

Every. Single. Vote. Must. Count!

**AI Generated Photo**