Morning Call Backs Ron Angle, the Great Dissenter

Nobody on Northampton County Council agrees with Ron Angle. No surprise there. But yesterday, The Express Times did, and published a gutsy editorial that criticized the actions of one of its bigger advertisers, St. Luke's . Today, even The Morning Call follows suit, although in more tepid terms.

Should St. Luke's Hospital, a nonprofit, be permitted to float tax exempt bonds to develop land for non-hospital purposes? Angle suggested we wait until we know the answer to that question, but the rest of county council was in such a hurry to do the bidding of the big money people they even convened a "special meeting," something they would never do for you or me.

In its typical equivocal fashion, The Morning Call claims the St. Luke's bond is either "a mistake" or "a wise investment in a public purpose." Let me be a little more clear. It's a mistake by Northampton County Council. Thanks to them, a non-profit hospital has a leg up over any private developer. Whether St. Luke's actually exercises that advantage is purely academic.

Express Times Backs Ron Angle, the Great Dissenter

Last week, I made more than a few of you gag when I called Ron Angle Northampton County's Great Dissenter. He was the sole legislator to vote against a $175 million bond financing plan that will enable St. Luke's Hospital to sell tax exempt bonds to purchase and "improve" 500 acres of Bethlehem Township's fertile farmland. Only 300 acres is needed for health care services expansion. The remaining land might become a village, or it might just be held and flipped at some later date when the real estate market heats up. Using tax exempt bonds for property speculation or to develop a "towne centre" gives nonprofits like St. Luke's an unfair advantage over the private sector.

One of you huffed, "[T]he true shame of Bernie O'Hare and Lehigh Valley Ramblings is that it continues to give credence to demogogues while dissing the elected leaders who are truly making a difference -- or, at least, trying, to make [a] difference in their communities."

I guess you better add The Express Times to that list. Today, it agreed with Angle. "What St. Luke's does with that land should be St. Luke's business but county taxpayers shouldn't be asked to support development plans that are undefined and thus have no provable connection to public interest. Angle is correct in saying the council should have balked at public financing for the additional land -- particularly a parcel at one of the choicest locations in the Valley."

Considering all the advertising revenue that St. Luke's contributes to local papers, this was a gutsy editorial.