 |
| Lori Vargo Heffner |
On June 15, Council decided by a 6-3 vote to allow voters to decide whether County Council members and the Executive should be term-limited. By a 6-2 vote, with one abstention, they also agreed to ask voters whether the Controller should be term-limited.
Under the proposal, which will be put to voters in November, the following term limits would apply: Executive and Controller - no more than two successive terms; and County Council - no more than three successive terms.
The legislation would permit elected officials to return to office after taking a break. For example, after serving two consecutive terms, an Executive or Controller could return to the office once held, but would have to sit out one term.
If adopted by voters, these term limits would go into effect for the terms starting in January 2024 (County Council and Controller) and January 2025 (Executive).
Voting for the measure were sponsors Lori Vargo-Heffner, John Goffredo, John Brown, Tom Giovanni and Kerry Myers. All but Vargo-Heffner are Republicans.
Voting No to term limits for the Executive and County Council were Democrats Kevin Lott, Tara Zrinski and Ron Heckman. Voting No on term limits for the Controller were Kevin Lott and Ron Heckman. Zrinski abstained because she is running for Controller and felt conflicted, even though Council Solicitor Chris Spadoni advised her there is no conflict as a matter of law.
On June 23, McClure vetoed this plan. He argued that Council had stressed a need to be consistent, but used inconsistent language in the enabling ordinances. He took no stand, however, on the merits of the proposal and decided against addressing his veto in his report to Council last night
The override was supported by the same six Council members who voted to allow voters to decide whether these offices should be term limited. The veto was supported by the same three Council members who oppose term limits for county elected officials, although Council member Tara Zrinski abstained from the vote for Controller because she's running for that office.
 |
| Tara Zrinski |
Hmmm. Election interference? Where have I heard that before?
"I do not see the sea of people that we normally get for something that is urgent," she continued.
Council member Kevin Lott agreed with Zrinski. He questioned Council's motive, noting that he's heard no one complain about a need for term limits among county elected officials. He added there was no study and no experts, but Council instead rushed. "I think something this important should have had a lot more thought," he observed. He also made the argument that local government usually has a problem attracting candidates, and this just pushes them away. "I think it's downright a bad idea to have term limits on local government."
 |
| John Goffredo |
Zrinski called Goffredo "naive" and continued her argument that the referendum on term limits would be a "tool to drive out voters."
Zrinski: "This is not something that our constituents want ..."
Goffredo: " - because we voted for it ... "
Zrinksi: "I'm not done yet. Thank you so much."
Goffredo: "Don't yell."
Zrinski: "Please let me finish. ... No one has stated why this is happening right now in such an immediate way within two months and what I think that I want to say is that none of us here sitting on Council are Strom Thurmond, None of us sitting on Council today are decrepit. We all have our faculties.
(Council members start to laugh).
Zrinski: "Why would you laugh at that? We all have our faculties and if we wanted to step down, we could. ... ."
Goffredo: "It's coming up now because we voted on it and it passed democratically. It's going on a referendum democratically. If people say they want it, they will then vote for it. I don't understand why I'm being lectured on how the democratic process works when we're following it right here and now. If you don't like it, vote No. If you like it, vote Yes."
Council member Ron Heckman supports term limits for state and federal officials but thinks they are unnecessary on a local level. He dismissed Zrinski's argument that this referendum should wait for a Presidential. "I actually prefer the people who vote in local elections. They really take this stuff seriously. And if it's 25 or 30 per cent, that's who votes." He also rejected the conspiracy theory being urged by Zrinski and Lott. "I don't want us to get caught up in the whole nonsense that brought about the other side on January 6. Let's not pretend that couldn't happen to us if we start having litmus tests."
Council member Lori Vargo Heffner was the last to speak. She was recently vilified as a DINO by presumptive Council member Kelly Keegan for supporting the term limits proposal. She was even besieged by unions. This is nonsense. I periodically ask readers to weigh on on what government reforms they would like to see. Term limits are always near the top of the list, and by people of both conservative and liberal persuasion. It is neither a Democratic or Republican idea. Here's what she said: "I just want to thank my colleagues on Council for participating in the governance process. This was not just done willy-nilly. It was done over time. It was done in committee. It was done with a lot of thought and everybody who sat in those committee meetings added their thoughts, added their opinions, tweaked it and moved it. ... There's been a lot of insinuations about the why and the who and the motive and whatever, and I just think the County Council has done its job and I appreciate everybody here who participated in that process. And anybody who doesn't think it's a good idea and doesn't want to give it to the voters - that's all this is, giving it to the people to vote on. We don't determine what this is today. It goes on a referendum and they decide. And it goes in an election where Republicans, Democrats and independents get to decide. Not hidden in a primary next year. So if people can't figure out how to use this to get more voter participation, I don't know what to say to them. But I appreciate this Council's not being willing to push something down the road, not address the Home Rule Charter ... "
My takeaways:
1) When someone states she has all her faculties, she usually does not.
2) I oppose term limits for local elected officials, but am enough of a small "d" Democrat to allow the voters to decide. I expect it will pass overwhelmingly.
3) There is no conspiracy to drive turnout one way or the other. Term limits are neither a Democratic nor a Republican idea.
4) The Trumpesque vilification of Lori Vargo Heffner over this matter by future Council member Kelly Keegan was completely unwarranted.
Who's kidding who here? The voters already voted on this issue when they voted to adopt the Home Rule Charter. Such nonsense by a pathetic group of losers. Let's hope the voters not only reject the "term limit" proposal, but also reject the Councilmembers/commissioners who supported the proposal. They can't do anything constructive so they attempt to destroy the work of others. The Home Rule Charter was the best thing ever happened to Northampton County and the voters already approved it. Now these bunch of losers are set on destroying it.
ReplyDelete12:20, what the Hell are you CROONING about? The US constitution was painstakingly done by men who knew exactly what a democratic government should look like since they experienced an unrepresentative parliament and a King. Yet in their wisdom they allowed for amendments to their original work. They were smart enough to know they were no gods, just men.
ReplyDeleteYou talk as if a local document drafted over 50 years ago by a committee of local people is so perfect it is beyond reproach and should never be reviewed or changed.
I am glad we have "these bunch of losers" in charge and not arrogant idiots like you.
Based on your logic, if it can even be called logic, the Home Rule Charter should never be amended. This is notwithstanding specific provision in the Charter itself (Section 1206) stating that it can be amended. Your argument also ignores the reality that at least 18 or 19 times that the Charter has already been amended by the voters. This proposal does not destroy the work of others. It does precisely what the Charter itself says can be done. If you construe the Charter to mean it can never be amended, then it is you who is destroying it.
ReplyDeleteZrinski and Lott both implied that there was some hidden agenda. Zrinski went so far as to claim that a term limits referendum would drive R turnout and influence an election in which she is a candidate. What will drive turnout in this race is a contested DA, Controller and judge race along with a contested Bethlehem City Council race. Republicans will vote because they always do. They will crawl over broken glass to vote. I suspect many voters will come out to say No to Zrinski. She claims she has all her faculties, but I know many Democrats who disagree. The referendum will have no effect on turnout. It will be supported by members of both parties as well as independents.
I personally think they are unnecessary, but would not deprive voters of the right to weigh in on this issue simply bc you think it might hurt Dems. It is not a complicated matter. If it were a question of finance or involved a budgetary consideration, I'd agree that direct democracy would be a mistake. But direct democracy works on issues like these, and it is precisely why the Charter you claim to champion specifically provides for it.
You ought to read it sometime.
Zirinski giving a lecture on government? The world has gone mad!
ReplyDelete"Zrinski opposed asking voters to make this call in a municipal election because voter turnout is lower than in a Presidential or midterm election. She added that voting on term limits in this election, in which she's incidentally a candidate, would drive turnout by one party over the other, "and that can be seen as influencing a race.""
ReplyDeleteEven a worthless broken solar clock made of shriveled paper straws and free trade materials is right once in a while. This is why we're still stuck with money-hemorrhaging Gracedale. I'll bet she was OK with that ballot referendum.
“Council member Kevin Lott agreed with Zrinski. He questioned Council's motive, noting that he's heard no one complain about a need for term limits among county elected officials.”
ReplyDeleteWhat kind of bubble is Lott living in? Is he that out of touch?
Since Zrinski is talking about people having all their faculties, the comment above makes me wonder about Lott.
More on Lott from the original post:
ReplyDeleteHe also made the argument that local government usually has a problem attracting candidates, and this just pushes them away. "I think it's downright a bad idea to have term limits on local government."
I always love how politicians think that nobody else would be interested in or capable of doing their jobs.
I would argue that the LACK of term limits pushes people away from running for local office.
It’s much more daunting to take on a well-known incumbent that’s been in office forever, and who also might have campaign funds left over from prior campaigns.
I personally like the term limit proposal, although I would have extended the time before one could run again to equal the time the person was in office.
So after eight years the Exec sits out for eight before they can run again. A three term council member would sit out 12 before they could run again.
But I can still support the proposal as written.
Let’s not forget how petty and vindictive Lori Vargo Hefner has shown herself to be. She’s putting a a spin on this issue in public but she’s told everyone the reason she is pushing this now; She doesn’t personally like the county executive, She feels slighted by him. She is so incensed by this issue she actually yelled at another council member to “shut the F—k up” in a public meeting. There is no need presented for term limits in local government. It will in fact take voters choice away. Very sad what one person with a public personal grudge can do.
ReplyDeleteLori Vargo should forget about term limits and worry about her credit card limits.
ReplyDeleteGive Lori Vargo Heffner credit. She has forged a strong connection with John Brown. Together they have worked to gain the majority for Republicans on County Council. Now Lori can work on a bipartisan basis to help Republicans achieve many of their wish list items like Term Limits.
ReplyDeleteWord On The Street is that Brown has promised Lori that she’ll be his Human Services person in his next Administration.
ReplyDeleteFargo-Heffner and Brownstain’s next trick will be to kill the employees hospital.
ReplyDeleteLori Vargo Heffner should be given great credit for standing up for the people against Democrats McClure, Zarinski, Lot and Heckman !
ReplyDeleteCouncil Candidate Keegan is intolerant of anyone or any opinion contrary to her fanciful beliefs. She has no business in public office; especially when she conducts official business (and her campaign) from the nurse's office at Easton High School. Apparently, her profession as a nurse serving students isn't a priority whens she's on the clock. This is not a trait that makes one worthy of public office.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, if voters where intelligent and paid attention, the concept of term limits wouldn't be needed. They'd vote bums out when bums needed to be voted out.
Bernie you’re onto something. The Keegan/Vargo battles next year will be epic. With Kraft stirring the pot and Brown masterminding it all behind the scenes it will be Must See TV.
ReplyDelete"Word On The Street is that Brown has promised Lori that she’ll be his Human Services person in his next Administration."
ReplyDeleteComments that start with "word on the street" are always horseshit. Your comment is intended to demean Vargo Heffner simply because she followed her own conscience instead of bowing to McClure's desire. It's hard to believe that a matter like term limits would be the basis for this kind of vilification. Enough already! I get being angry over her opposition to the employee health center. But this? It strikes me that the real basis for all this animosity is simply that Vargo Heffner refuses to follow McClure, She does not serve him. Dhe serves the people who elected her. I cannot believe that she has been subjected to pressure by other Democrats like Keegan, Zrinski and even the unions over what is very much a a nonpartisan matter.
Kelly Keegan was just telling the truth about Lori from her perspective. There’s nothing Trumpian about that.
ReplyDeleteLori should quit now. Kraft and Keegan will explicitly call her out on her bullfeathers where Tara is too timid and Kevin is too much a gentleman.
ReplyDeleteCorrections re: 9:06,
ReplyDelete"when" not "whens" and "were" not "where"
Apparently I'm not paying attention, either.
Once again you have misrepresented Tara, either that or you are losing your facilities. Which one Bernie? Because it was very clear that she meant it for some politicians who are very old, who have been in an elected office for a VERY long time, and are so old that they aren’t as sharp as they once were.
ReplyDelete9:38, I quoted her precisely. What she said was so silly that other Council members started laughing, and this made her even more angry.
ReplyDeleteLori has told me and many other Democrats that Lamont needs to be held accountable. She’s doing that on a bipartisan basis. She should be given credit form standing up to the Democratic County Administrator and yes people like Kevin and Tara and not cursed at for working with John Brown.
ReplyDelete"Kelly Keegan was just telling the truth about Lori from her perspective. There’s nothing Trumpian about that." I did not see her rant on some Dem page because Munsey took it down. But it was read to me. It was a vicious attack at Lori Vargo Heffner over, of all things, term limits. It was Trumpesque and is Trumpesque to see conspiracies in everything, which is precisely what both Zrinski and Keegan are doing and what Heckman warned them against doing.
ReplyDelete"Lori should quit now. Kraft and Keegan will explicitly call her out on her bullfeathers where Tara is too timid and Kevin is too much a gentleman."
I see. So what you are telling voters in the Council District where Kraft has a GOP opponent is that Kraft will be nothing more than a rubber stamp for McClure. Got it. Thanks.
9:46, Brown is no force on Council. He mostly just sits there. LVH is guilty of a lot of things. She micromanages. She can be snide. Her opposition to an employee health center, which seems to be going away, bordered on the ridiculous. While I disagree with her position on term limits for local officials, it's far from a politically charged issue. The notion that this will bring Rs to the polls is absurd. What will bring them to the polls is an opportunistic Dem Controller candidate who wants a perch from which to launch her next campaign.
ReplyDelete@Bernie- You call Keegan’s post a “vicious attack”?? You are losing your facilities. It was far from vicious. Add Keegan to your list for misrepresenting.
ReplyDelete@9:46- “LVH told you Lamont needs to be held accountable”. She acts as if he is a rogue politician who is hurting our county. Lamont has DECREASED our taxes, is a strong advocate for open space and farmland preservation (look in the news for all his recent good doings), is fiscally responsible (Integrity Healthcare-which will save taxpayers 1.5-2 million a year in taxes-which she voted against), has kept Gracedale from being sold (which some on the CC can’t wait to do), the list goes on and on. ALL GREAT THINGS, but yet she keeps harping on her soapbox of “keeping him accountable”. She is actually just roadblocking his efforts and I just can’t think of one reason why that isn’t disparaging.
Sell that white elephant and get the real estate back on the tax rolls!
DeleteSo according to some, the HRC cannot be amended in the primary. Then it also can’t be amended in off-year elections where, incidentally, our county elected officials are chosen.
ReplyDeleteThat means there are really only two acceptable elections (out of eight) in a four-year period where the HRC can be amended?
That makes no sense.
If that’s the way some people want it, let them propose their own HRC amendment. But of course they can only do that in the 2024 or 2026 General Elections
10:35, Lamont has been an excellent Executive, and yes, Lori has thrown up roadblocks over many matters, from ARPA funds for Gracedale to the health center. She eventually takes those roadblocks away after being satisfied that McClure is right. While this is annoying to McClure, it's the way government is supposed to work. The HRC actually is intended to make County Council, and not the Exec, the most powerful office. It holds all residual powers and controls the purse strings. What she provides is the healthy tension that should exist between these two branches.
ReplyDeleteIs she guilty of micromanaging at times? Absolutely. She is not full-time and has neither the time nor the resources to study county issues the way McClure does. Her role should be oversight, not administrative.
At the same time, Lamont is guilty of being a control freak. He wants total control of everything, from courts to Council to Controller to even outside agencies like LVPC. He suffers from executivitis, a common disease that infects nearly every NorCo Exec at one time or another. What I find lamentable is the savage way he goes after those who refuse to bend the knee.
He used Tara Zrinski, Kevin Lott and Kelly Keegan to go after LVH. The notion that this is some Republican plot to drive turnout in their favor is worthy of QAnon. The vilification of LVH over term limits is sad and is really based on her refusal to be a rubber stamp.
What Keegan has actually done is she has given Rs an issue. If they have access to her Facebook posts, they can use them to claim that Dems oppose term limits, which is far from the truth. I'm sure Brian Panella, the DA candidates and Bethlehem Dems will just love being tagged as opposed to term limits. It was really stupid for her to do this. Way to go!
Yes, council members should have all of their questions answered and only vote with the executive when they believe it’s the best for the county. The problem is Lori is openly hostile to Lamont and votes against him because she deeply dislikes him, as she has openly stated. She asks to have her questions answered over and over again and refuses to accept any iinformation she’s been given by the executive, his staff or any expert. She try’s to obstruct.
DeleteTara looks stunning In that photo, likely birthed by Gaia sired by Pan a modern diety for the cause of ELF and DGR who frankly haven't done enough to further her political ambitions.
ReplyDeleteBLU BADGER
"Council member Kevin Lott agreed with Zrinski. He questioned Council's motive, noting that he's heard no one complain about a need for term limits among county elected officials."
ReplyDeleteKevin must not get out a lot. I don't think I know anyone who doesn't strongly support term limits for the likes of him. Polls consistently show 75-80% approve of term limits. Is he hard of hearing, or has he a political tin ear? I don't think he likes to hear what voters have to say. They're about to make it very clear to him.
Firstly, do you really think any R is a friend of hers on FaceBook? LOL
ReplyDeleteSecondly, there are over 300K in the county and you actually think Keegan is going to sway the outcome with her opinion? LOL!
"1) When someone states she has all her faculties, she usually does not."
ReplyDeleteFACT CHECK: 100% TRUE
Also, how many stickers and/or magnets are on her vehicle? Seasoned cops seem to agree that any number higher than two means the driver is batshit.
I'm just here for the Gaia and Pan references. I can't believe I get this quality for free.
ReplyDeleteFive of six Americans support term limits for Congress with bipartisan support. https://publicconsultation.org/united-states/congressional-term-limits/
ReplyDeleteI believe most voters would fail to see that federal, state and local officials are different animals and expect this term limits proposal to pass overwhelmingly. Kelly Keegan makes a big mistake to suggest that that "[t]erm limits are bad" followed by "CALLING ALL NORTHAMPTON DEMOCRATS" and claiming it will hurt Dems. Keegan has herself hurt Democrats far more than any term limits amendment by attempting to make a bi-partisan issue a partisan one.
BO'H at 1:23,
ReplyDeleteCouncil Candidate Keegan seeks office only to advance her personal progressive narrative. In her mind, everything is political and partisan and anyone who doesn't agree with her is wrong, stupid, and unimportant. She cares nothing for the people she seeks to represent unless they are lock-step with her views; which also makes her delusional because her views are not the majority, even in county with more Democrats than Republicans. We have many common-sense, respectable Democrats in this county and she is far from one of them. Hopefully, the common-sense and and respectable Democrats tune her out.
I didn't care one way or the other on term limits, but the discussion at the meeting swayed me to being in favor for them. Tara Zrinksi didn't tell us why they were bad -- she just claimed that the referendums would be used as a campaign tactic. Lott didn't agree with this issue being on the agenda, claiming that no one had ever brought up the subject of term limits to him, but so what? Council members have the right to advance any issue they chose through the process. Ron Heckman's speech can be best described as 'wide-ranging.' It covered a lot of ground yet traveled no distance.
ReplyDeleteIn short, the democratic process worked as it is designed to.
If you have a strong opinion either way, make sure you vote in November.
McClure recently decided to announce - two years early - that he will run for a third term.
ReplyDeleteWas this his way of trying to get around the term limits should voters approve the measure in the fall?
It never ceases to amaze me how sleazy politicians are, and if that’s his reasoning for announcing so early, it’s reprehensible.
Should the voters decide on implementing term limits, it would be nice to see elected officials take the high road and apply the will of the people even if they can get around it on a technicality.
Likely to happen? No. But I can still dream for better politicians than we currently have.
There should be term limits on all Political positions in Local, State and Country. Time to get rid of some of the Idiots and old Farts.
ReplyDelete7:31, McClure has not formally announced anything, and even if he did, that would have no bearing on the language of the ordinance.
ReplyDeleteBased on this blog and what I heard, I went and watched the video. Took a while as McClure did his self-promotion schtick. He somehow makes self-promotion look like he is praising others, including pictures for the website. After that show was over the real show began. Clearly Zirisnki and Lott were well coached by McClures team. The problem is they are flawed as Hell as messengers. Lott comes off as an angry guy at a Bar ready to fight someone and Zirinski comes off as hyped up crazy. Give McClure all the credit. His hands are clean. He played off his hatred of this law with "it's just a problem with language" claim which was never clearly explained. He realized the political damage if he said he opposed a referendum, so he got his surrogates to do it. He is smart, which I have been told by people who don't always agree with him.
ReplyDeleteThe comments were interesting. I was surprised Heckman defended council's right to do something he did not agree with, but I likeds his shooting down of the election number ploy given to Zirinski to push. The hidden agenda and conspiracy talk was great as theater. Goffredo was great, even as a young man he made Zirinski look even more foolish than she makes herself look. Hefner did good on her speech.
I think Hefner is in trouble in her party. The McClure cult has torn her to shreds on social media. They treat him like a god. It is rumored that this was probably organized by Dertinger since that is his reputation. Then you have the public union boss that is more concerned with McClure than his own members.
This was a win for McClure. He reinforced his victim status in his party. He enhanced his cult following. He attacked the term limit referendum while not uttering a word against it and having others do the talking. So, yea, I agree he is a smart guy.
Term limits will defeat the rubber stamp county government McClure is trying to create. Term limits limit the power of governing bodies. The way it should be!
ReplyDelete9:33, I have to admit you make a persuasive argument. It makes no difference whether it is one party or the other that is in control. Once they have it, they will attempt to keep it.
ReplyDeleteYou wactually changed mny mind, damn it. I now support term limits on a county level.
ReplyDeleteAnon 10:55 PM said: “McClure has not formally announced anything, and even if he did, that would have no bearing on the language of the ordinance.”
ReplyDeleteI guess you missed this:
https://www.wfmz.com/news/insideyourtown/northampton-county-executive-lamont-mcclure-announces-early-that-he-will-seek-a-third-term-in/article_984704f4-0dd4-11ee-b41b-834391950675.html
Also, let me predict now that if the proposal passes, the politicians in office will claim it’s not applicable to terms started before it was passed.
I don’t miss anything about this. He has not announced formally but it’s no secret he intends to run. And even if he did formally announce, it would make no difference.BernieOHare.
ReplyDelete7:29, You are correct, but it goes both ways. McClure is openly hostile to Lori as well. Instead of a healthy tension, there is open animosity. This leads to bad government. Both are at fault here. They both need to make an effort to work with each other.
ReplyDeleteI would have nothing to do with Myers, who publicly undermined the authority of the Sheriff and is vulgar. Yet the Democrats made this turncoat their President. Is that good government? LVH wanted to bring in the independent firm hired to do a pay study while it is in the middle of its work because she had questions? Those should have been asked when the firm was in front of council and explained its process in detail.
On the other hand, McClure is hostile to LVH bc she has gone from responsible oversight to being an obstructionist at times. The health center is a perfect example. Yes, it's good to be suspicious and question it thoroughly. I agree that an RFP was the way to go, and McClure did eventually bend on that point. But the ordinance that essentially forbade consideration was ridiculous and very likely illegal. But he fought them tooth and nail over well meaning concerns about employee pay and Gracedale's operations. That was unnecessary. So was his veto of the term limits ordinance. And he needs to stop using Zrinski and Lott to carry his message. He should do it himself. They are terrible at messaging.