Local Government TV

Friday, December 03, 2010

Gracedale: Union Seeks Last Minute Talks, Council Lacks Authority to Seek Voter Input

Peg Ferraro announced at Northampton County Council's December 2 meeting that union agent Justus James and the John Stoffa administration will make one last-ditch effort to keep Gracedale, the County-owned nursing home, in public hands. There have been no formal negotiations between County officials and the union since April, when union agent Justus James walked out of talks just as a giant inflatable rat suddenly appeared at the Courthouse.

"Basically, the death knell has been sounded for Gracedale," said Ferraro, but she is hopeful that "something can come together." If not, she warned, "I'll be 100% in favor of selling."

In the meantime, a referendum movement is under way. Elections office records reveal that Gracedale proponents have gathered and submitted 10,774 of the 19,630 signatures needed to have the nursing home's sale decided by voters. But they only have until January 17, 2011 to complete that daunting task. Spokesperson Mario Martinez claims, "My Lord and Savior Jesus Christ does not approve of the sale of Gracedale." He adds they are "now withholding the petitions" in the hope that County Council sees the lights and agrees on their own to allow voters to decide. But he adds, "We The People will demonstrate our resolve in May...You will see just what true resolve is Mr. Angle, and so will the rest of council. Again, make no mistake about it...we do not bluff, we act according to our inalienable rights."

At County Council's November 18 meeting, Ann McHale - well aware that a majority of Council wants to sell Gracedale - argued they should let the voters decide and put the question to the voters themselves. "I'll direct our Solicitor to prepare an Ordinance to have a question put on the ballot. ... Prepare an Ordinance for us and we will take a position on that."

But Solicitor Phil Lauer prepared no Ordinance, and explained that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in a 2009 decision, has ruled that County Council has no authority to allow voters to decide these matters. The Court noted that, unlike California, referenda are relatively rare in Pennsylvania. "[W]e hold strong to the ideals of representative democracy and have no general constitutional provision for voter initiative or referenda." The High Court adds, "[I]t is at the ballot box that a voter may express his disapproval of the legislative programs of his elected officials."

20 comments:

  1. It will in fact be on the ballot, regardless of what Angle and Stoffa do. No brag, just fact!

    ReplyDelete
  2. It appears less and less likely. First, I doubt you can get the signatures. Second, County Council lacks the authority to place the matter on the ballot. Third, that Supreme Court opinion should scare the hell out of you. It also rejected a referendum question that had the requisite signatures on the basis that the question being decided could not bind Council, and that's a hurdle you may have to overcome.

    There is a judicial disdain for mob rule, and that came through loud and clear. Also, in that case, the Elections Board was disqualified as biased, and the same thing may happen here. I saw one of the members at the Gracedale rally. The chairman is a union agent. I will read that decision more closely over the weekend.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The union is f'd up. They should have done this long ago. I hope they get the boot either way. Although I am in favor of keeping it in county hands.

    ReplyDelete
  4. No Brag , Just Fact !!!
    it's been many years since I heard that phrase !!!
    I can't remember the origin
    Help a brotha
    where does it come from

    ReplyDelete
  5. Would be interested in your take on the nurses union guy.Jerry Green's..statement in the Morning Call story today about AFSCME meeting with the County at this late date. I'm not sure what he is getting at with his thoughts. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Bernie,

    Was this quote really that accurate?

    "Spokesperson Mario Martinez claims, "My Lord and Savior Jesus Christ does not approve of the sale of Gracedale."

    That is quite disturbing if Mr. Martinez is receiving "private" revelations from our Lord.

    Jesus Christ's life and handing over of the Church was done in public. It is called Apostolic Sucession. Not to pass judgment, but to point out revelations in The Bible; anyone that claims to be a representative of the Lord and speak of private revelations on the Lord's behalf - stay far away from them.

    But then again, maybe I am missing the bigger picture. I sincerely hope, that the quote was taken out of context. Any professed Christian would NOT directly invoke the Lord's name in such a way. I will pray for this conversion.

    Peace, ~~~alex+

    ReplyDelete
  7. Unfortunately, te quote is accurate and similar statements have been made several times.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dave, I don't know what Jerry Greene is getting at either.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Isn't true that the petition is getting little to no support by the union workers at gracedale? 800 employees there but only a few hundred petitions being circulated?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I can't be sure, but have heard that.

    ReplyDelete
  11. It is true the majority of lazy, uneducated, let someone else do it, I'm too busy, where's my free Obama money, typical "AMERICAN" Gracedale workers are letting others carry the water for them. I am not affiliated with Gracedale however, I am collecting signatures. This for COAF, NOT the workers. The ones that are not engaged deserve what they "don't get". It is too bad for the ones who are out collecting.

    BTW

    Those idiots are the same ones who would vote to have that a-hole union back in if the place is sold.

    ReplyDelete
  12. So the Union workers aren't working for the referendum?

    This sounds like the majority are in-favor of the change. No wonder why they never pressured their leadership into real negations.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  14. If you want to attack one of my commenters anonymously, you're going to have to clearly identify yourself so we know where to have the libel complaint served. Also if you want to call people uneducated, your own grammar and spelling should be a bit better.

    ReplyDelete
  15. In Pa., you do not need to show financial loss to prove libel. A private person could and should sue the trolls who anonymously slam them. And I will not only cooperate, but will preserve as much tracking information as I can for the use of anyone who wants to take on cowards like you.

    And Mario Martinez IS a fake preacher. He went to no seminary and is affiliated with no church. In case you haven't heard this before, truth is a defense.

    ReplyDelete
  16. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Last post in here for me
    As a Vietnam vet I feel I have been libeled by you
    you called me a coward
    I volunteered in 1971
    spent 1 tour
    and although I was called a murderer
    I was never called a coward
    the accusation has caused me emotional distress
    loss of appetite
    loss sexual intimicy with my wife
    loss of sleep
    loss of wages
    excessive doctor bills
    please keep this post
    who do you think the courts would side with
    a former attorney
    or a former active duty serviceman
    who needs to be made whole

    ReplyDelete
  19. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Why is Jerry Greene even relevant? Unions, respectable and useful in their infancy have become nothing more than corrupt political machines that have ruined business and industry in this country.

    ReplyDelete

You own views are appreciated, especially if they differ from mine. But remember, commenting is a privilege, not a right. I will delete personal attacks or off-topic remarks at my discretion. Comments that play into the tribalism that has consumed this nation will be declined. So will comments alleging voter fraud unless backed up by concrete evidence. If you attack someone personally, I expect you to identify yourself. I will delete criticisms of my comment policy, vulgarities, cut-and-paste jobs from other sources and any suggestion of violence towards anyone. I will also delete sweeping generalizations about mainstream parties or ideologies, i.e. identity politics. My decisions on these matters are made on a case by case basis, and may be affected by my mood that day, my access to the blog at the time the comment was made or other information that isn’t readily apparent.