Local Government TV

▼

Tuesday, March 21, 2017

Reibman Ruling Helps Challenged Easton City Council Candidate

Judge Reibman at Ramadan in 2015
Bucks County Attorney Lawrence Otter called Allentown Police officer Luiz Garcia a "knucklehead" a few days ago when he challenged the Allentown police officer's right to run for public office. Now that he's been tossed out of court by Judge Ed Reibman, the true "knucklehead" has been identified. Otter argued that Garcia's candidacy violated Allentown's Home Rule Charter and its administrative code, both of which ban political activity by city employees  But Reibman lacked jurisdiction. The only thing he can decide in a nomination petition challenge is whether the petition violates the Elections Code or state ethics act. That same reasoning could result in a dismissal of the challenge to Taiba Sultana's candidacy as an Easton City Council candidate.

Without question, Sultana fails to meet the one-year residency requirement in Easton's Home Rule Charter. It states that "[o]nly those who are and have been for at least one (1) year registered voters of the City shall be eligible to hold the office of Council Member or Mayor."  Since Sultana only registered to vote on February 23 of this year, she's ineligible.

But as I pointed out a few days ago, any objection to her nomination petition must be based on the Elections Code or the State Ethics Act. Easton's Home Rule Charter is irrelevant,just as Allentown's Home Rule Charter and administrative code were irrelevant to Judge Reibman.

She may be unable to hold the office until February 23, 2018, but she sure as hell can run.

This has happened before. In 1934, Rush Holt was elected to the US Senate at age 29, and had to wait six months until he was 30 and could take the oath of office. Sultana would have to wait about two months, assuming that she wins.

Today we'll learn what Judge Craig Dally thinks.    
at

12 comments:

  1. Bucks BarristaMarch 21, 2017 at 12:18 AM

    This pseudojournalistic drivel is more vile than a vial of otter spraint, time for a new hobby. Sad.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousMarch 21, 2017 at 6:24 AM

    Let Sultana run. I'd like the opportunity to vote against her on the basis of the frightening fringe positions she hold.

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousMarch 21, 2017 at 9:11 AM

    "But as I pointed out a few days ago, any objection to her nomination petition must be based on the Elections Code or the State Ethics Act. Easton's Home Rule Charter is irrelevant, just as Allentown's Home Rule Charter and administrative code were irrelevant to Judge Reibman."


    Actually, I think the distinction is that the Allentown issue doesn't involve the charter. That was agreed to by both sides.

    In Easton, the issue in question is in the charter, which puts the violation in play for county court.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousMarch 21, 2017 at 9:48 AM

    On another note, who would have believed there was an Ethics Board in Allentown?

    Have they been in a coma for the last decade?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Bernie O'HareMarch 21, 2017 at 11:23 AM

    9:11, You are completely wrong. The Allentown issue directly involved the Charter and admin code. Otter tried to disqualify Garcia for violating both, but the court only can do so for violations of the Elections Code and state Ethics Act. In NorCo, the disqualification attempt is based on a violation of the HRC over which it would be premature for the court to rule.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Bryan TukMarch 21, 2017 at 12:54 PM

    The Petition to Set Aside that was filed against my client was an allegation of a section of the Allentown Code of Ethics, over which the Board of Ethics has sole authority. It was couched as an allegation of the "election laws", which is how the CCP hearing took place. That was the reason that Judge Reibman correctly decided that the Court of Common Pleas lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the petition. In essence, it was a stealth Board of Ethics Complaint, which is groundless, because Mr. Garcia's candidacy was vetted with Allentown PD prior to announcement.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Bernie O'HareMarch 21, 2017 at 1:42 PM

    Bryan, I understand . The court has jurisdiction to consider violations of the Election Code or State Ethics Act, which are read in pai materia in this context. It has no jurisdiction over a nomination petition challenge based on Allentown's code of ethics, which is a creature of its home rule Charter and admin code. If you have an opinion, please send to me at bihare5948@aol.com

    ReplyDelete
  8. Bernie O'HareMarch 21, 2017 at 1:43 PM

    Bohare5948@aol.com

    ReplyDelete
  9. AnonymousMarch 21, 2017 at 3:58 PM

    Bernie O'Hare said...

    9:11, You are completely wrong.


    No, you're completely wrong. As an example, if a charter contains term limits, who enforces that? Does it go to the Ethics Board? Of course not, it goes to county court. This is no different.

    The judge in the Allentown case had it wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  10. AnonymousMarch 21, 2017 at 4:03 PM

    Bryan Tuk said...

    "In essence, it was a stealth Board of Ethics Complaint, which is groundless, because Mr. Garcia's candidacy was vetted with Allentown PD prior to announcement."


    Vetted with the Allentown PD? If the courts don't have jurisdiction, certainly the Allentown PD doesn't either.

    Garcia could have gotten a determination from the Ethics Board, but chose not to. Probably because he knew what the decision would be.

    Not a good start for a candidate who wants to take over an already ethically-challenged City Hall.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Bernie O'HareMarch 21, 2017 at 5:34 PM

    "The judge in the Allentown case had it wrong."

    Says an anonymous expert.

    ReplyDelete
  12. AnonymousMarch 21, 2017 at 9:17 PM

    There is no way anyone associated with The City if Allentown would object to Mr. Garcia running for Mayor !

    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.