Angle Appeals Franciosa Decision to Court of Final Error

Not wasting any time, Northampton County Council Prez Ron Angle on Monday appealed Senior Judge Franciosa's ruling that the Bulldog is barred from sitting simultaneously on Bangor's School Board and Northampton County Council. Although DA John Morganelli outwardly claims to be interested only in determining the law, watch how fast he tries to claim that the appeal is moot because Angle has already resigned from the school board.

Easton Attorney Brian Monahan represents Angle. He's the very lawyer who, when he ran for District Judge in 2007, was victimized by a series of vicious anonymous mailers. It was later determined they were sent by political consultant Thomas "Scissorhands" Severson, who eventually pleaded guilty to deceptive campaign practices. Those charges were filed by the state AG because Morganelli refused to lift a finger. You see, Severson was also Morganelli's campaign consultant. They are also big pals, and Morganelli always made sure his annual druig forfeiture mailer was printed and mailed by Scissorhands.

Monahan lists the following issues for review by the state supremes:

1) Whether the Trial Court improperly denied Defendant's Motion Seeking Disqualification Recusal of the Judges of the Third Judicial District [Northampton County]?

2) Whether the Elected Office of Northampton County Council Member and School Director of the Bangor Area School District are compatible?

3) Whether the Trial Court improperly granted [DA Morganelli's] Motion for
Judgment on the Pleadings and finding that Defendant is prohibited from simultaneously holding the elected countywide position of Northampton County Council Member and School Director of the Bangor Area School District pursuant to Sections 104 and 107 of the Northampton County Home Rule Charter?

4) Whether the Trial Court's reliance on Northampton County Home Rule Charter at Sections 104 and 107 [348 Pa.Code §1.1-104-107] for the forfeiture and ouster of the Honorable Ronald L. Angle from the Office of County Councilman violates Article IX, Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution which allows a Home Rule Charter to exercise any power or perform any function not denied by this Constitution?

5) Whether the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County's jurisdiction in the within matter is completely abrogated by Article VI, Section 2 of the Pennsylvania Constitution? Fox v. Swing, 409 Pa. 241, 186A.2d 124 (1962); Commonwealth v. Lucas, 632 A.2d 868, 534 Pa. 293 (1993).

6) Whether the District Attorney of Northampton County lacks authority, standing, and capacity to bring the within action pursuant to Article VI, Section 7 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, which provides the exclusive method for removing elected civil officials from office? See: South Newton Township Electors v. South Newton Township Supervisors, 838 A.2d 643 (2003) and In Re: Petition to Recall Reiss, 665 A.2d 1162 (1995).

7) Whether the Trial Court's Orders of Court of June 4, 2010 and June 10, 2010 requiring your Defendant to forfeit his position as a Member of Northampton County Council, prohibiting your Defendant from simultaneously holding positions as a Member of Northampton County Council and School Director of the Bangor Area School District, and prohibiting your Defendant from participating in official Northampton County Council Proceedings as a representative from District 4 violates Article VI, Section 7 of the Pennsylvania Constitution which is the exclusive method for removing elected civil officers from office? See South Newton Township Electors v. South Newton Township Supervisors, 838 A.2d 643 (2003) and In Re: Petition to Recall Reiss. 665 A.2d 1162 (1995).

8) Whether the Trial Court's Orders of June 4, 2010 and June 10, 2010 requiring your Defendant to forfeit his position as a Member of Northampton County Council, prohibiting your Defendant from simultaneously holding positions as a Member of Northampton County Council and School Director of the Bangor Area School District, and prohibiting your Defendant from participating in official Northampton County Council Proceedings as a representative from District 4 violates Article I, Section 5 of the Pennsylvania Constitution by disenfranchising the votes of those that duly elected your Defendant, the Honorable Ronald L. Angle, to the position of County Council Member and School Director in violation of Article I, Section 5 of the Pennsylvania Constitution?

9) Whether the Trial Court's Orders of June 4, 2010 and June 10, 2010 disenfranchise the votes of electors who cast ballots for the Honorable Ronald L. Angle for Northampton County Council Member and School Director of the Bangor Area School District without due process of law?

Senior Judge Franciosa Was Chief Bagman For Local Dems

Last Spring, Northampton County's Bar Association evaluated judicial candidates for the first time in over forty years. The reason for this unusual timidity by lawyers can be summed up in two words - Michael Franciosa.

It was 1966 when then Bethlehem Attorney Al Williams, Jr, ran for judge. In those days, there were only two other county judges, and it really meant something to be elevated to the bench. Williams' opponent was Easton Attorney Michael Franciosa.

During the election, Williams received a higher bar association rating than Franciosa. This led to sour grapes - charges of anti-Italian and anti-Easton bias were hurled back and forth. Things were so acrimonious that the bar association really hesitated before evaluating judicial candidates again, and even now, it remains controversial among lawyers.

Franciosa had to wait until 1970 before his Ascension into the judicial heavens. What his official biography fails to tell you is that, to increase his visibility, Franciosa was elected "treasurer" of the Northampton County Democratic Committee. That's when real political bosses like Justin Jirolanio ruled the realm. Lots of money, in paper bags, went to the polls on election day. Completely legal, too.

One of the runners who grew up in that machine atmosphere, on Bethlehem's south side, is DA John Morganelli.

That's just another reason why it's hard to accept Franciosa's denial of bias in the politically-motivated quo warranto proceedings against Northampton County Council Prez Ron Angle.

Senior Judge Franciosa Takes Judicial Notice of a Lie

Below is Senior Judge Michael V. Franciosa's bizarre five-page Order, filed late Thursday afternoon. You can read it yourself and reach your own conclusions. I'll make the following observations:

1) Franciosa sure pats himself on the back. He uses words like "painstaking," "comprehensive," and "searching" to describe a decision that ejects someone from office without even a passing reference to something called the people's will, except for the 1977 vote to enact the Charter.

2) Franciosa does incredibly argue that the people's will would be thwarted if he were to allow Ron Angle to continue participating on Council because they voted for the Home Rule Charter. Of course, that argument is a fallacy, relying on the assumption that everyone interprets the Charter exactly like him.

3) Franciosa again concedes it is a "ambiguous statutory provision," but refuses to give the benefit of the doubt to the person against whom the Charter is being enforced.

4) Franciosa's reference to a "cumbersome reinstatement process" for Angle, in the event of a reversal, is nonsense. If the State Supremes reversed Franciosa, there is no mechanism providing for Angle's subsequent reinstatement.

5) Franciosa's refusal to allow Council to fill an Angle vacancy is a violation of the Home Rule Charter, the very instrument he pretends to be enforcing. Section 105 requires Council to appoint a person to fill a vacancy created by an elected official's removal from office. After noting that the voters approved the Home Rule Charter by referendum and stressing the danger of frustrating the will of the voters, he completely negates a provision, failing to provide Council itself with notice or opportunity to be heard.

6) By insisting that Angle's office - a district seat - remain in limbo during the appeal, Franciosa thumbs his nose at the right of Slate Belt voters to elect their own representatives. That's not just a basic right of the Home Rule Charter, but the right to vote is embodied in five different amendments to the US. Constitution. Are Slate Belt residents now second class citizens? Isn't this just as arrogant and prejudicial as the poll taxes once imposed in the deep South to suppress the black vote?

7) Francisoa takes "judicial notice", without a request from either party, that "County Council has in the past operated for a considerable period with an unfilled vacancy." That is simply untrue. At no time since the inception of Home Rule has a Council vacancy gone unfilled for more than thirty days. Although a judge is permitted to take "judicial notice" of facts susceptible to "accurate and ready determination," Franciosa took judicial notice of a lie.

Under the Pennsylvania Code, "A party is entitled upon timely request to an opportunity to be heard as to the propriety of taking judicial notice and the tenor of the matter noticed. In the absence of prior notification, the request may be made after judicial notice has been taken."

Since Franciosa's Order has essentially interfered with the workings of Council and the people they represent, and since he has done so on the basis of a falsehood, I suspect Council may intervene in this matter and ask Franciosa to reconsider an Order that appears to be tainted by bias.
Franciosa Stay Denial

Update (9:30 AM): I must have forgotten to spellcheck this post and have just corrected a number of typos. My apologies.