In Northampton County, Phil Lauer serves as its part-time Council Solicitor, too. His position is expressly identified in the Home Rule Charter. Some object that Lauer represents Angle in a will dispute, but he sees no conflict of interest. Angle adds that, in the past, Council solicitors have represented other Council members in private matters.
Unlike Northampton County, Lehigh's Commissioners do not have a Solicitor they can call their own. They instead rely on the advice supplied by the County Solicitor. But the County Solicitor is appointed by and answers to the Executive, not them.
If you want to talk about a real conflict of interest, there it is.
16 comments:
Agreed. The legislative branch should have its own solicitor.
But cross pollinating headlines, if you are keen on headline "Did BPD give Pektor a sweet heart deal...
Why not add "Did Angle give Lauer sweetheart deal on law office....
Maybe assessed and appraised values did justify sale price, but I am sure you can confirm.
I presume you are referring to the law office that Lauer purchased from Angle several years ago. Angle is not in the business of giving sweetheart deals to anybody.
And believe me, I will determine whether the sales price for the parking deck was justified. The evidence so far suggests that it is a sweetheart deal.
I don't believe Angle sold that to Lauer.
Lehigh county cant afford another lawyer with the commissioners padding their retirements with extra pensions.
Why is it a "real" conflict of interest?
It is a real conflict bc attorneys who represent and are appointed by the Executive will be expected to construe the HRC to his benefit, and not that of the Comm'rs. There is a divided loyalty and it is unfair to ask lawyers to assume that burden.
Whatever Angle tells Bernie is "not" a real conflict of interest.
Totally off topic.
As of 10 pm this evening, the article listed as having the 2nd most comments on the Express Times website, which deals with the first baby of 2011, curiously has 0 comments, having been closed for comments earlier by ET staff.
Thanks for giving us forum where we can share our comments.
I do close them here, too, if the trolls take over. Or I do a lot of deleting.
Four of those comments still exist on Google's cache. One person suggests statutory rape bc the mother is 17. Another calls out "anchor baby." One complains that we will be stuck with the bill.
Apparently, there was considerable speculation about this baby, who didn't do anything to anyone except get born.
Perhaps the most frightening harbinger of our country's future is the death of compassion, as evidenced by the comments to that article. There was a time when a community would help out (or at leat be empathetic to) a 17 yo single mom. Those days are gone. Compassion is a casualty of insane policies, such as open borders.
Agreed.
Just because it happened in the past does not necessarily make it right? Does it? On prior postings some objected to a contractor performing work on City contracts and then performing work for a public official. I can understand why some would find this a conflict.
Generally speaking, I have run into "Long Serving" elected officials who have stated that "nothings wrong until someone calls you on it". At my place of employment, ethical business practice is the RULE, not an option. We should hold our elected officials to the same standard.
I don't really know that it did happen in the past. Angle thinks so, but he might be mistaken. But you are correct. If it happened in the past and was wrong, it is certainly wrong now.
But is it wrong for a lawyer to represent a member of a body individually on matters that have nothing to do with that body? Is the suggestion that the lawyer will give a break on price that would not happen if he did not have the County job? Is the suggestion that the attorney is getting paid more than he should be getting paid in his County job bc of his personal relationship?
I can see both of those arguments now, and frankly, did not pick up on them before. A lawyer-client relationship is far different than a contractor relationship. An attorney is bound by a code of ethics that has no application to a contractor. But you do make some good points.
I can tell you that I confronted both Angle and Lauer about this. Lauer told me that if he felt there was any kind of conflict at all, he would immediately step down from representing Angle individually. But he just does not see it.
Compassion is dead in Northampton County as is evidenced by the political decision to throw the County's sick and elderly under the bus by selling Gracedale. For their pieces of silver the county politicians will throw the seniors to the whims of corporate profiteers.
I agree compassion is dead, especially in Northampton County today.
It is a real conflict bc attorneys who represent and are appointed by the Executive will be expected to construe the HRC to his benefit, and not that of the Comm'rs. There is a divided loyalty and it is unfair to ask lawyers to assume that burden.
Yes, in the real world that's how it works, but idealistically, the solicitor is there to represent Lehigh County and not the one who appointed him.
We have darn too much patronage in Lehigh County, the solicitor's office is no exception. Maybe its time the commissioners not rubber stamp each confirmation.
Post a Comment