Gracedale's Oversight Committee Will Finally Meet Today

Northampton County Council voted on July 2 to establish a Gracedale Oversight Committee. Over three months later, and after a critical Grand Jury Report, it will finally have its inaugural meeting today at 3:45 pm. It was scheduled during a non-meeting week and in the middle of the afternoon in what appears to be an attempt to discourage some Council members from attending.

The Committee is chaired by Council member Kelly Keegan, who voted against its formation. Council President Ken Kraft, who also voted against establishing this committee, is also a member. The other two members are Council members Dave Holland, who proposed this review panel, as well as Theresa Fadem. 

The Committee will first review a 2023 operational assessment that was ordered by a previous County Council over the objections of then Exec Lamont McClure. When Gracedale Administrator Michelle Morton appeared before County Council on November 6, she admitted that she had never read the report and appeared to be unaware of it. When she testified before an Investigating Grand Jury on 12/30/25, she still had failed to read it. 

The Committee is slated to receive a report from Tom Carson, the newly appointed Director of the newly established Continuum of Care. He has no experience in nursing home administration or nursing but said he would bring leadership and would speak to every employee at Gracedale. I'd like to know if he has. 

There will then be a discussion of "public image," which obviously is suffering as a result of both a critical Grand Jury Report as well as the numerous and serious deficiencies at the home since Michelle Morton became Administrator. Keegan likes to say she wants to hear about all the good things at the home. I'll be happy to report on objective findings like an upgrade in the Provisional II license or the removal of the abuse tag and a drop in the number of deficiencies. Unfortunately, the scuttlebutt is that the home has been cited with three new deficiencies within the past three weeks.  

Morton is slated to make her own presentation. I'd like her to explain how she is entitled to a one-step increase in salary when the home has been cited repeatedly since she's been there, and as recently as three weeks ago if the rumors are true.

I'd like to know why the DON, ADONs and assistant administrator are getting two-step raises in a home that is seriously challenged, especially when other career service workers are overlooked. This hardly restores morale. 

I'd like to know if a protocol has been established on handling 911 calls. I find it astonishing that, as of the date of the Grand Jury Report's publication, there still was no understanding on such an important public safety issue. Over 15 months have ensued since numerous 911 calls were made before Upper Nazareth police responded to a mentally ill nurse who was performing an exorcism. On at least two occasions, nurses said nothing was going on. Has a protocol been established? What is it? 

Recently, at Executive Tra Zrinski's request, County Council voted to establish significant payraises for 26 nursing supervisors ($52 an hour). Zrinski claimed that some agency nurses told her they would become county employees if this happened. How many agency nurses have become county employees? How many nursing supervisors have been hired since this increase? 

Gracedale needs $12 million from the county coffers in 2027. Previously, Administrator Michelle Morton and Human Services Director Sue Wandalowski assured Council that Gracedale would be only slightly over budget. What happened?  Before proposing a continuum of care, did Zrinski do a long-range plan about finances as well as the trend for seniors to age in place rather than be packed like sardines in a warehouse to await their deaths? 

How much should taxpayers have to spend to keep Gracedale operational? Sure, there's a moral obligation to care for the elderly, but that should include seniors on fixed incomes who are struggling to pay taxes. 

Congressional Candidate Bob Brooks Actually Received $30k in COVID Relief Funds and Falsely Denied Existence of Wiley Judgment

Late last week, I told you that The Free Beacon, an admittedly conservative website, posted a story suggesting that Bob Brooks, the Democratic nominee for the Pa. 07 Congressional seat held by Ryan Mackenzie, lied on his application for a $15,000 COVID relief grant. This was funded by the federal funds and administered by Northampton County as part of its attempt to help small businesses during the pandemic. 

Some of you downplayed the matter. "Where's the actual application?" asked one reader. "Produce the application or it's not true. Civil judgments did not preclude applicants from receiving COVID funds. There's no evidence of wrongdoing here."

Yesterday, NorCo GOP party chair Glenn Geissinger conducted a news conference outside the courthouse and brought the receipts. Due to a prior commitment, I was unable to attend. But Kevin Danyi, a prominent Bethlehem attorney, brought all the documents. 

Geissinger is asking both Northampton County DA Steve Baratta and US Attorney David Metcalf (Eastern District Pa.) to open investigations.

From Geissinger's letter, I have learned the following: 

1) Brooks actually sought and obtained two COVID relief grants for $15,000 in November 2020 and September 2021. He received $30,000 from a fund administered by Northampton County. 

2) Instructions included with both applications warned that false statements could result in criminal prosecution under federal law. Pennsylvania law also makes it a crime to make false statements to authorities. 

3) In the September 2021 application, Brooks was specifically asked, " Did you or anyone with an ownership interest in the business have any judgments against you?" Brooks answered "No."

4) At the time of this application, Brooks was a judgment debtor. In Wiley v. Brooks (2018-2005), a $130,386.36 judgment was entered against Brooks on November 19, 2020. That judgment was open of record, i.e. unpaid, at the time of his application. 

5) On both applications, Brooks was specifically asked, "Are you or anyone with an ownership interest in default on any loans or leases?" Brooks answered, "No."

6) In fact, two prior judgments were still open of record. One of these, Midland Funding v. Brooks (2012-8088) was originally entered for $4,005.26 and is open to this day. The other, FIA Card Services v. Brooks (2012-7769) was entered for $7,872.59 and was open until 2024. 

Facially, it appears that Brooks lied on both applications and deprived some worthy small business of funds it may have needed to survive. I say facially because the Midland Funding judgment may have been satisfied but is just open of record. But there is no question that Brooks lied when he denied the existence of the Wiley judgment.

In addition to seeking a criminal investigation for possible false statements. Geissinger wants federal and state authorities to look into the matters surrounding a possible fraudulent conveyance to avoid paying off the Wiley judgment. That matter, however, has since settled. 

Zrinski is Asking for More Than She Needs in Her 2027 Budget

On Friday morning, Northampton County Executive was late to her own news conference announcing her first proposed budget for next year. That was no inconvenience for me. Since the budget itself was yet to be posted online (that would only happen later in the day), I decided to skip it and just watch what she had to say during a rather disappointing Facebook Live, in which a jocular attitude, stray tangents and inappropriate laughter betrayed the gravity of the heavy burden she hopes to impose on property owners. She denied she was really late, saying, "Nothing happens without me." She proposed what amounts to a roughly 43.5% increase in property taxes, increasing the millage rate from 10.5 to about 15.6 mills.

A tax hike is more than overdue, if only to make working for the county a little more attractive for employees. Moreover, Zrinski knows that what she seeks will never be approved by County Council. I believe she intentionally inflated her demand so that County Council can claim victory when it trims her proposal to a more realistic tax hike of about 1.5- 2 mills. That may have been a smart play with County Council, but not with the public. I've seen calls to action on social media, calling on people to attend budget hearings and complain. 

Zrinski has attempted to justify what she calls an "honest budget" on her Substack page.  It is far from honest. She first tries to minimize it, noting it's only $24.19 a month for the average taxpayer. For some. already burdened by high school taxes, this could be the final nail. She then plays the woman card for some reason that should be completely irrelevant to this discussion. She also plays the blame game, accusing "past administrations" (former Exec. Lamont McClure) for putting her in this position. This may to some extent be accurate, but she was a willing participant as a member of County Council. She finally admits that it's only a "recommendation," meaning that it's more of a wish list than a truly honest budget.

Shortly after the budget became available, so did a very thorough, but anonymous, online analysis called WhoBuiltThisShit. Some think this came from the Zrinski administration in an attempt to throw McClure under the bus. I think the analysis actually makes both McClure and Zrinski look pretty bad, so I doubt it came from any of her supporters. It is possible that someone in Fiscal Affairs prepared this analysis, and we'll eventually learn who because the shelf life of a secret in NorCo is about 15 minutes. 

Zrinski is proposing a $44.5 million increase in property tax revenue, but more than half of this is to cover items that McClure left out of his final budget. A review of Zrinski’s proposed budget, her public statements, her County of Northampton Facebook Live presentation, her Substack writing, public reactions on social media and the independent analysis published at Who Built This Shit? suggests a more complicated picture. The county faces genuine financial pressures involving pensions, Gracedale, employee costs, overtime and its reliance on reserves. But the minimum amount necessary to address those problems should be far lower than what Zrinski seeks.

SPENDING INCREASES ABOUT 4%, BUT PROPERTY-TAX COLLECTIONS RISE MUCH MORE

The proposed 2027 budget totals approximately $566.9 million, compared with about $546.8 million in the 2026 amended budget. That represents an increase of approximately $20.1 million, or 4%. Property-tax collections, however, would increase by approximately $44.5 million, from roughly $99.5 million to $144 million. The difference is important.

It would be misleading to characterize the proposal as simply a $44.5 million spending increase. Some additional revenue would replace reserves and restore funding for obligations that were underfunded or deferred in the 2026 budget. But it would be just as misleading to focus exclusively on the $20.1 million increase in spending. Taxpayers are being asked to provide approximately $44.5 million in additional recurring property-tax revenue.

ZRINSKI HAS A LEGITIMATE ARGUMENT ABOUT THE 2026 BUDGET

One of Zrinski’s strongest arguments is that the 2026 budget did not fully reflect several expenses the county would ultimately have to confront. The independent Who Built This Shit? analysis found that the 2026 budget contained approximately $1.3 million for pensions, compared with approximately $8.2 million actually spent in 2025. The proposed 2027 budget contains approximately $12.2 million for pensions. The 2026 budget also contained no budgeted subsidy for Gracedale, even though the nursing home was expected to require approximately $3.9 million. The 2027 proposal includes approximately $12 million for Gracedale.The proposed budget also reduces reliance on fund balance by approximately $19.2 million. These figures support Zrinski’s contention that the county’s financial position cannot be evaluated simply by comparing the proposed 2027 budget with the 2026 budget.

Zrinski made similar arguments before becoming executive. During the debate over the 2026 budget, she criticized the practice of balancing a budget by failing to adequately fund programs and obligations. In that respect, her current proposal is consistent with warnings she made before she assumed office.

BUT THE NUMBERS DO NOT ESTABLISH THAT 15.5 MILLS IS THE ONLY ANSWER

The more difficult question is whether addressing those obligations requires the full proposed 4.7-mill increase. That seems doubtful. The independent analysis found that approximately $302.5 million of roughly $400.6 million in non-payroll expenditures—about 76%—is contained in broad or pooled categories These pooled categories make it difficult for taxpayers and County Council to determine whether savings are available. Tus is why I consider the budget dishonest or at least nontransparent.

Before approving any tax increase, Council should demand greater detail showing what is contained in the largest pooled accounts, who receives the money, whether expenditures are mandated and how much was actually spent in previous years. For major expenditures, the county should disclose vendors, contracts, purposes, prior-year spending, proposed spending and explanations for significant increases.

LIKE IT OR NOT, GRACEDALE REMAINS THE BIGGEST FINANCIAL AND POLICY QUESTION

Gracedale is at the center of the budget debate. In her Substack writing, Zrinski describes the county-owned nursing home as a public asset that provides accountability and a safety net for vulnerable residents. She has argued that the county should improve and preserve the facility rather than treat it simply as another expense. The proposed budget includes approximately $12 million for Gracedale. The independent analysis identifies that subsidy as an area requiring particular scrutiny. There are those who feel the cost of this facility, which is poorly managed, is simply too much.

Both positions can be valid. The fact that Gracedale requires taxpayer support is no justification, by itself, for selling the facility. But there still needs to be financial accountability. Zrinski has vowed to make Gracedale self-sustaining. When? How long will the county taxpayers be forced to support the facility, and at amounts that increase each year? When will the $12 million subsidy begin to decline, and when is it expected to reach zero? The administration should provide a five-year financial plan showing projected resident census, staffing costs, agency nursing costs, overtime, reimbursement rates, Medicare and Medicaid revenue, private-pay revenue and taxpayer subsidies. Without measurable benchmarks, self-sufficiency remains an objective rather than a demonstrated financial plan. I have long argued that the county needs to plan for this, especially as more and more seniors stay away from nursing homes.

OVERTIME DESERVES CLOSER EXAMINATION

The independent analysis found that the proposed countywide overtime budget is approximately $6.2 million, compared with actual overtime spending of approximately $8.3 million in 2025 and projected spending of approximately $8.9 million in 2026. At the county jail, approximately $2 million is budgeted for overtime despite spending of approximately $3.8 million. These figures raise a management question: Would hiring additional full-time employees cost less than continuing to pay large amounts of overtime? That question cannot be answered simply by claiming the county has too many or too few employees. A department like Corrections or Gracedale can have numerous authorized positions but substantial vacancies, forcing existing employees to work overtime. The county should publish authorized positions, filled positions, vacancies and overtime costs by department.

The same issue applies to salaries. The independent analysis found that 2026 salary expenditures were budgeted at approximately $99.9 million, while projected actual spending was approximately $96.4 million. This reflects vacant positions, meaning the county has a recruitment and retention problem.

WHAT THE INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS GETS RIGHT

The Who Built This Shit? analysis is valuable because it identifies questions the county should answer. Its strongest point is that the budget fails to provide enough detail for taxpayers to determine whether the proposed 15.5-mill rate is the minimum necessary. A $12 million Gracedale appropriation may be justified. A large overtime account may be justified. Major infrastructure projects and professional-services contracts may also be justified. But taxpayers should be able to determine why expenditures are necessary and whether less expensive alternatives exist.

WHAT COUNTY COUNCIL SHOULD DEMAND

Before adopting the budget, Council should require a detailed breakdown of the additional property-tax revenue, including: Pension obligations and required contributions; Gracedale’s operating subsidy and five-year financial outlook; Employee compensation and staffing costs; Jail and corrections expenses, including overtime; Infrastructure and capital projects; Professional-services contracts and other major vendors; transfers between funds and the amount needed to replace reserves; and New initiatives and other discretionary spending; Potential savings from filling vacancies, reducing overtime and renegotiating contracts.

There is definitely room to cut. I particularly dislike the $500,000 grants to New Bethany and Skyline Investments. While New Bethany might be able to justify a grant, Northampton County Council voted 6-3 against giving Skyline a tax break for luxury apartments in Wilson Borough. It appears that Zrinski is seeking to funnel some dough to this for-profit venture through the back door, and at a time when the county needs every penny it can get. 

LV Congressional Candidate Bob Brooks Allegely Lied on COVID Grant Application

Bob Brooks is the Democratic nominee for the Pa. 07 Congressional seat held by Republican Ryan Mackenzie. He likes to portray himself as an Everyman although he's a bit closer to a con man. Although he's finally paid off his mother-in-law's $130,000 judgment, it now appears that he outright lied when he applied for a COVID grant through Northampton County in 2021.

During COVID, Northampton County was given $30 million in American Recovery Plan federal funds to spend on relief efforts. Then Executive Lamont McClure set up a find for small businesses hurt by the pandemic, enabling them to apply for up to $15,000. 

Brooks, who maintained a lawn care business, applied. The application form made clear that "knowingly making a false statement to obtain a grant" would violate federal criminal law and could result in a five-year sentence as well as a fine of up to $250,000.  

According to The Free Beacon, a conservative news outlet, Brooks lied on his application. To be specific, he denied having any judgments against him despite that $130,000 judgment. In addition, there were another two open judgments from credit card companies at the time he applied for this grant. 

Not only was Brooks awarded a COVID grant, but it was for the full $15,000.

Since the judgment from his mother-in-law was appealed to the Superior Court, it would be hard for him to plead ignorance.

Over 3,500 people have been prosecuted for COVID fraud nationwide. But Brooks thinks he should be elected to Congress

that matter was very much open when he applied for a COVID grant threough Northampton County

UPDATED: How Did LV Delegation Vote on House Bill Opening Up Primary Elections

The Pa/ State House voted on Tuesday to allow unaffiliated voters to vote in primary elections for candidates for public office. They would still be barred from voting for internal state party offices like committee members. The bill passed 115-88 and goes on to the state senate. 

How did members of the Lehigh Valley delegation vote?

Voting Yes were Bob Freeman (D - Pa. 136), Steve Samuelson (D - Pa. 135), Mike Schlossberg (D - Pa. 132), Pete Schweyer (D. Pa. 134), Ana Tiburcio (D - Pa. 22), and Joe Emrick (R - Pa.137)

Voting No were Ann Flood (R- Pa. 138), Milou Mackenzie (R - Pa. 131) and Zach Mako (R- Pa. 183) and Gary Day (R- Pa. 187)

Opening primaries is one way to assure that everyone has a say. Currently, 44% of voters nationwide consider themselves independents. It will also result in more moderate party nominees. 

Currently, 20 states have open primaries in which members of one party can choose to vote in another party's primary. Pennsylvania's proposed law would only allow unaffiliated voters to choose to vote as a Democrat or Republican. 

UPDATED 11:12 AM - In the original version, I had Gary Day as a Yes and was mistaken. 

Zrinski to Unveil NorCo's 2027 Budget on Friday

According to a news release, Executive Tara Zrinski plans to unveil her 2027 Budget from Northampton County on Friday, 10:30 am, at the Human Services Building, located at 2801 Emrick Blvd in Bethlehem Tp. It will be her first budget as county executive. A tax hike is all but guaranteed. 

Her proposed budget will go into effect even if it is rejected by County Council. They have the power to amend the budget but have no authority to interfere with revenue projections. 

The budget must be balanced.

Will she pay into the county's pension funds this year? Will she begin addressing the wage disparity that exists? Will she fund open space? 

Stay tuned. 

UPDATED: Mackenzie's Comms Director Edited Website With Racist Tropes

I've seen some of Arnaud Armstrong's comments as Communications Director for Congressman Ryan Mackenzie, who is facing a tough battle against blue headwinds that just may blow Democratic challenger Bob Brooks into office. Some have been downright bizarre, like his explanation when Mackenzie was accused of embellishing his career in the private sector. Rather than dismissing this DCCC story as clearly false, which it was, Armstrong gave it weight by saying that these were "passing mentions, mostly from third parties." But now a much uglier story has surfaced. During his days at UPitt, Armstrong was the "editor" of an online conservative leaning website called Polis Media that decided it would be fun 

Members of that website shared memes including jokes about statutory rape, the Holocaust, a young African-American boy looking at a piece of cotton candy and saying, 'You mean I don’t have to pick it and I can eat it?!'"

Armstrong gave the incredible explanation that they "were shared with facetious intent and certainly not reflective of the beliefs of those who shared them.” They were joking, so it's OK, right? He also called it an experiment to see "what the worst of the internet could produce."

He may find out soon when his boss loses a close election because of his (at-best) juvenile antics.

UPDATED 10:15 PM: The original version of this story indicated that Armstrong himself posted these tropes. That is inaccurate. He was part of the group chat and was the editor of this site.