Commonwealth Ct Affirms Finding that UMBT Supervisor Is Unethical

Pennsylvania's Commonwealth Court, in a ruling handed down on November 8, has affirmed a state ethics commission finding that Upper Mount Bethel Tp Supervisor David Friedman is unethical. Specifically, the Court found that Friedman acted unethically when he voted twice against seeking legal fees in an unsuccessful lawsuit against the township in which he was one of the suing plaintiffs. He voted twice in a matter in which he himself had a direct and personal financial interest.  The Court was also highly critical of "myriad and substantively significant" defects in Friedman's brief on appeal, which was filed by Bethlehem lawyer Chris Spadoni.

Spadoni's brief was so bad that Judge Fizzano Cannon, writing for the Court, stated "that this Court, like the Commission, is uncertain what arguments Friedman is asserting, how he believes the record supports those arguments, and on what legal principles and authorities he is relying as support.

Frankly, anyone who is in public office should know that it is unethical to vote in a matter in which you have a financial interest. Yet that's precisely what Friedman did when he twice voted against a motion that would have authorized UMBT to collect over $9,000 in legal fees incurred in defending a lawsuit in which he himself was one of the unsuccessful litigants. 

It is even more appalling to read of a "flagrant disregard" of the rules of appellate procedure, especially after they were brought to the attention of Friedman's attorney. 

That lawyer, Chris Spadoni, is also the Solicitor of NorCo Council, and has been giving them advice on potential conflicts of interest. 

Keen and His Teaching Gigs

CPT David Collins, who works for NorCo Corrections, has been suspended (with pay) for making "unfounded allegations" about Corrections Director Dan Keen. He first followed his chain of command, going to a Deputy Warden. He was told that Keen would speak with him, but was ignored. So he went to Human Resources Director Amy Trapp. Her response was to suspend him in an attempt to silence a whistleblower exercising his First Amendment rights.

I'm unable to say whether CPT Collins is right about everything, but know he is acting in good faith. I also know his complaints about Keen's outside employment are very well founded.

Let me share what I know with you. In addition to being the Corrections Director, Keen is also a paid instructor with Penn State's Justice and Safety Institute.(JASI).

In September 2015, he was paid $240 to assist JASI with a service presentation. Since I do not have the date of this presentation, I am unable to say whether he was being paid by the County at the same time.

From January 18-20, 2016, Keen taught a First Line Supervision course in Hudson County, NJ. He was paid $600 by JASI as a stipend, and also claimed $660.88 in expenses. January 18 was MLK Day, a holiday in Northampton County. But January 19th and 20th were regular work days and Keen's time card report shows him at work during days when he was actually in New Jersey. He received $402.88 per day from Northampton County for the 19th and 20th while getting paid $200 per day by JASI to teach a course for corrections officers.

This facially appears to be some form of double dipping.

From May 1-5, 2017, Keen was paid $600 by JASI to teach a leadership and command course in the slate belt. This was just two weeks after Controller Steve Barron issued a report recommending that there be stronger controls over outside travel. Keen decided to take one personal day. The remaining days are reported as regular work days.

On June 12-14, 2017, Keen was paid another $600 by JASI to teach first line supervision. He took one personal day, but his time card report shows him at the courthouse and on duty on those other days. This is the course that Keen insisted his lieutenants attend. He took either four or five of them, even though that left CPT Collins short-handed at the jail. These officers had to go to Penn State for a course that Keen could have taught here. The County spent $1800 just for the course, to say nothing of the travel expenses.

It appears that Keen used the authority of his office to recruit these lieutenants and beef up his class size. He benefited financially. In this situation, the prudent practice would be for Keen to use his stipend to reduce the cost of this class to his lieutenants and continue to receive his county pay. That way, no one could accuse him of packing the course so he could get paid. In fact, this practice is followed in other counties

Can anyone say state Ethics Act?

Amazingly, Collins is the one who has been suspended.

In the interest of fairness, I presented Director Keen with this story and asked him to set me straight about any factual error I may have made. He has declined to respond.

My experience with him is that he has a deep sense of personal integrity, but I am troubled by these gigs.

NorCo's EMS is Code Red

Just before Christmas, I told you that Executive John Brown had named Todd Weaver to the EMS Director slot that had been vacant for 18 months. Because this is a career service position, no Council approval was needed. But Brown wanted to give him a Christmas present, and needed Council, to approve a wage hike from 76,351.81 to $91,051 per year. That way, at the beginning of this year, Weaver's wages would shoot up another two per cent to shoot up another three percent to nearly $93.000. Council granted Brown's wish, and Weaver saw a 22% raise in just two weeks.

At that salary, the County probably could have held onto Bob Mateff, the person whom it allowed to get away.

The Weaver selection comes at a time when the county is considering a merger for 911 with Bethlehem and is no reason for joy in the Christmas City

Weaver, incidentally, was a member of a selection committee that found everyone else unqualified. Weaver ostensibly had no interest in the position but conveniently allowed himself to be persuaded to accept it. Among those rejected was a highly recommended person from this area who actually had a master's degree in the field, and did emergency emergency management in the private sector. Another applicant was a high-ranking public sector emergency management employee within this area.

Brown's first choice for this job flew into town, took one look at whatever had been set up from him by Weaver, turned around and flew home. Thanks, but no thanks.

Then the selection committee refused to consider any of the qualified people who had previously applied.

Another member of this selection committee, incidentally, is Cathy Allen. She and Weaver have known each other for years.

as I told you in December, Weaver was engaged in what clearly appears to be a conflict of interest under the state ethics act. Cathy Allen apparently told him it's OK, though she's hardly an expert,has numerous tax liens and has a home in foreclosure. He was approving payments to the nonprofit fire school in Washington Tp for training. His father is an instructor there. His daughter is the Secretary. his wife runs the concession stand.

Not only does Weaver get to make these payments, but he gets to decide which outfits will not be used. Clearly he won't select a vendor that might compete with his fire school,whose reputation is such that many of the fire companies in the slate belt prefer to go to Monroe for training.

Though Hayden Phillips was troubled by these ethical problems, which were raised by Controller Steve Barron, the vote to give Weaver a 22% raise was still unanimous.

This department was supposed to expand and had the money for that purpose, but the bid came up a little short. Instead of finding the Money, Brown gutted the planned expansion and plowed the money back into the general fund.

Bethlehem's taking a closer look at ethics these days. Bob Donchez announced a gift ban. Olga Negron-DiPini and Michael Colon have proposed a local ethics commission. Willie Reynolds will unveil his own ethics proposal on Tuesday. As much as they need to merge with somebody, that somebody is not going to be NorCo if ethical shenanigans continue.

Ethics Forum or Municipal Race Kickoff?

The League of Women Voters of Northampton County and the Lehigh University Southside Initiative, aka the Birkenstocks, are co-sponsoring a “Community Discussion on Ethics” Town Hall with emphasis on an ethics ordinance for Bethlehem on Thursday, November 17th, 2016 from 7:00 to about 8:30 pm at Bethlehem's Town Hall. My concern is whether this will be a real discussion about ethics in government or a thinly disguised effort to set the stage for next year's Mayoral and City Council races.

Without question, the League of Women Voters is at the forefront of many reform efforts, especially those aimed at the gerrymander. But I question this panel.

Dr. John Kincaid, Director of the Meyner Center for the Study of State & Local Government at the Lafayette University, is supposed to present an introduction on ethics in government. That's mighty nice of him, but I'd like someone to do an introduction on ethics at the Meyner Center. That outfit sells itself as an expert on everything to municipal governments, and they use Meyner to select Township managers, conduct meaningless studies that are ignored, etc. Kincaid is certainly no expert on ethics in municipal government, but he looks very dignified.

Two panelists are from the land of midnight payraises, i.e. with state government, and that hardly sends chills up and down my spine. I have no idea what Julio Guridy is doing on this panel. He's a nice guy, but has often been an apologist for all the corruption that went on under Fed Ed. Two panel members, from Philly's Ethics Commission, probably can share some insights.

Last year, the Martin Tower rezoning led to all kinds of suspicions and accusations about the pernicious influence of money in politics. But while something is better than nothing, meaningful reform has to come from the state.

I'd love to see every Bethlehem candidate pledge that he will accept no more than $250 from any person or PAC. That means each person running can rely on grassroots support, but not on developers who almost certainly while have their hands out later.

Ce-Ce's NIZ Degree

On Friday, I told you that, for Allentown School Director Ce-Ce Gerlach, it's all about Me-Me. While holding herself out publicly as a vocal critic of Allentown's Neighborhood Improvement  Zone (NIZ), she's managed to get a DeSales scholarship. It's funded, at least in part, by NIZ developer City Center Investment Corp (J.B. Reilly). Coincidence? I think not. Sell-out is the operative term. I have since learned that there's more to the story. Gerlach engaged in a conflict of interest last week in violation of the state Ethics Act. What is more, she participated in a Sunshine Act violation.

Allentown Mayor Edwin "Fed Ed" Pawlowski would be very proud.

Before I get into that, let me tell you a little about her scholarship to DeSales University. It is part of the ACCESS program, designed for people who are already in the workforce. Classes are held only one night per work, with the rest of the course work being done online. NIZ developer City Center Investment Corporation (J.B. Reilly) is footing part of the bill with table crumbs from at least $54 million in state taxes that has gone into its coffers. In fact, Me-Me is probably a lot cheaper than community organizer Alan Jennings, who relies on contributions from City Center for CACLV.

Alan admits he's a prostitute, but he's more expensive and has an ulterior motive. He's actually interested in the poor instead of himself.

There's another big difference, too. Unlike Me-Me, Jennings has no conflict of interest.

Under our state Ethics Act, a public official like Gerlach has a conflict of interest when she votes in a matter in which she has a private pecuniary interest.

This brings us to Allentown School District's lawsuit against the NIZ Board, challenging the tax exempt status of properties owned by the NIZ, but under which City Center [J.B. Reilly] runs a risk of being held liable if loans are not repaid. According to a Morning Call story by Matt Assad, the Allentown School Board had a back-room meeting last week in which it decided against appealing Judge Doug Reichley's opinion dismissing the lawsuit. School Board Solicitor John Freund, whose law firm represents the NIZ Authority, is obviously unable to file a suit on behalf of the school district. He is conflicted, so an outside gunslinger was hired. But amazingly, he conveniently advised the Board that it's time to fold and forget about an appeal in the very matter in which he is conflicted.

Having suddenly developed amnesia about his own conflict of interest, it's no surprise that Me-Me participated in the back room discussion and was all for dropping the appeal instead of recusing herself in a matter in which she has a pecuniary interest.

It gets better. This meeting in the back room is a Sunshine Act violation. A vote on ending the case needs to be made in an open meeting, not behind closed doors. A school board can certainly discuss litigation out of the public eye, but the votes need to be public.

So she got a scholarship. What's the big deal?

Ask State Senator Larry Farnese. He's just been indicted for offering scholarships to a political rival's daughter.

The feds call this bribery.

NorCo's Open Space Chair Faces Conflict Allegations

Ron Angle unswayed by Judy Henckel

Judith Henckel is a well-known environmental activist who currently serves as the Chair of Northampton County's Open Space Advisory Board. Before that, she led a "save or pave" drive supporting a 2007 referendum in which Upper mt Bethel taxpayers agreed to a 0.25 tax hike dedicated to preserving open space. That year, she also won a six-year seat on the Board of Supervisors, where she pursued an environmental agenda that included the 2008 purchase of  a 300-acre quarry owned by Eastern Industries, financed with a $2 million bond. That purchase was criticized by Ron Angle, who charged that the Township was buying "barren land" that could never be developed. But Henckel countered that the move was essential to protect the "Mount Bethel Fens."

And bog turtles.

But is it really about the fens and bog turtles? Or is the green pursued by open space activists the kind they can take to the bank?

Based on a tip from Ron Angle, Upper Mount Bethel Supervisors have spent the past month looking at records of payments made to Urban Research and Development, a well-respected Bethlehem-based firm that employs prominent landscape architect Leonard Policelli. Supervisor Anthony DeFranco revealed at last night's meeting that Urban Research has been paid $360,000 in that time period for different projects, including the development of a community park spearheaded by Policelli.

According to the Pennsylvania Ethics Act, a conflict or conflict of interest exists when a public official uses the authority of her office or any confidential information received through that office for the private pecuniary benefit of herself, a member of her immediate family or a business with which she or a member of her immediate family is associated.

"If in fact her son was getting a pecuniary benefit, there could be a conflict," said Solicitor Ron Karasek. "In all due respect, I was not aware that Mr. Policelli was Judy's son."

This relationship was also a surprise to Angle until last month. "Nobody in this audience has attended more meetings than me over the past ten years," he said. "Never once was this ever brought up by her or by him [her son] that 'By the way, there could be a potential conflict and we just wanted to let you know.' They just kept doing the same-o same-o."

Angle told Supervisors that Henckel should be barred from participating in any boards that decide on grants for her projects. He added that, when she was a Supervisor, she steered the Board away from farmland preservation, in which conservation easements are purchased. "Now I figured out why she never wanted farmland preservation," said Angle. "There's no money to be paid to the guy who does the farmland preservation. You just write a check."

Chairman John Bermingham, himself an open space advocate who was elected with Henckel's help, attempted to minimize the problem. "We live in a small town," he said. "It's gonna' happen here and there." He did agree that there "could" be a conflict, but that he and DeFranco have only been on the Board since January.

"She lobbied for these things," countered Angle, "knowing that a close relative would benefit."

For her part, Henckel denied that she opposed farmland preservation, and noted that three Upper Mount Bethel farms are in the process of being preserved now. She also denied that the community park, in which her son and his firm were involved, is open space. She called it a "municipal facility" given to the Township by Reliant Energy, and before she was a Supervisor.

At that time, though, Henckel was nevertheless a public official because she served on the Township's Environmental Advisory Council. She stated that she disclosed the relationship. "A lot of people knew," she explained, though she conceded she "did not advertise it." She indicated her son had just been successful that day in getting a $20,000 grant for trees at the park.

Henckel also questioned the $360,000 figure, indicating that Urban Research had done other work for the Township aside from the community park.

In a conversation during the meeting, Henckel told me may have voted a few times for projects that would benefit her son'e company, but just never thought about it. She also indicated that she spends untold hours working for the benefit of the Township, not expecting anything.

Where things go from here is unclear. Angle believes the District Attorney or Ethics Commission should investigate, but Supervisors took no action at this point.

The open space movement appears to have created its own industry in which "land preservation boards' or "environmental advisory councils" are formed in which members vote to preserve each other's properties at taxpayer expense.

Much more oversight is needed than currently exists. That's why watchdogs like Ron Angle in Upper Mount Bethel and Vince Foglia in Williams Township are essential.

Schlossberg Caught Ghost Voting For Missing State Rep

State Rep. Mike Schlossberg, whose mentor Fed Ed taught him everything he knows about honesty in government, has been caught red-handed casting a vote for a missing House member in yesterday's very tight 100-99 vote on the still unresolved state budget. State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe is calling for a House Ethics Committee investigation, according to The Patriot News.

This is a clear violation of a state House rule that provides, "No member shall be permitted to vote and have his or her vote recorded on the roll unless present in the hall of the House during the roll call vote."

The member for whom Schlossberg voted, Pete Daley, said he gave no authority to anyone else to vote on his behalf.

Schlossberg publishes a blog that chronicles political gaffes, usually by Republicans. Time for him to include himself.

Donchez Imposes Gift Ban in Bethlehem

(Bethlehem, PA August 21, 2015) – Bethlehem Mayor Robert J. Donchez announced today a policy restricting all employees of the administration, including the Mayor, from accepting free tickets, gifts, invitations, gratuities from businesses, including any agency under within the administration where it can reasonably appear to be an attempt or intended effort to influence the employee in the discharge of that employees duties.

“As Mayor, I have been a strong advocate of transparency and openness. I believe that this policy will continue my belief that transparency in government is the best practice.”

This is similar to a gift ban imposed by Governor Wolf.

His policy, in its entirety, is below:

City of Bethlehem Administrative Gift Policy       

I)         LEGAL BACKGROUND

A.    The Public Official and Employee Ethics Act

The Pennsylvania Ethics Act prohibits “conflict[s] of interest” which are defined as:

Use by a public official or public employee of the authority of his office or employment or any confidential information received through his holding public office or employment for the private pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate family or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated.

Excluded from this definition is conduct that has a “de minimis economic impact” which is an economic consequence of an insignificant effect.

The term also does not include an action that:

affects to the same degree a class consisting of the general public or a subclass consisting of an industry, occupation or other group which includes the public official or public employee, a member of his immediate family or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated.

The Ethics Act applies to elected and appointed officials, as well employees

who [are] responsible for taking or recommending official action of a nonministerial nature with regard to:

(1) contracting or procurement;

(2) administering or monitoring grants or subsidies;

(3) planning or zoning;

(4) inspecting, licensing, regulating or auditing any person; or

(5) any other activity where the official action has an economic impact of greater than a de minimis nature or the interests of any person.”

B.     City of Bethlehem Code of Conduct

City Council adopted Resolution No. 11,471 on June 18, 1991 which established a Code of Ethics for all City of Bethlehem Employees. Among other things, the Code requires all employees and officials of the City to:

Maintain a course of conduct at all times which will bring credit to [the employee or official] and the City of Bethlehem.

Avoid conflict of interest.

Avoid actions which create the appearance of impropriety.

Not ever use [the employee’s or official’s] position with the City of Bethlehem for personal gain.

Insist that all business transactions of the City of Bethlehem be on an ethical, open and above-board basis.

II)        General Background

Every City official and employee is a public servant.  Public servants must treat members of the public fairly and equitably.  Receipt of money, favors, gifts, gratuities invitations, food, drink, loans, promises or other benefits (collectively and subsequently referred to in this section as “gifts”) offered to a public servant because of that person’s position, may create the appearance of a conflict interest, if not an actual conflict of interest.  Similarly, solicitation of gifts by a public servant in that person’s capacity as a public servant, for that person’s own benefit, likely establishes a conflict of interest.

Public servants, in performing their duties, must work for the benefit of the community as a whole, giving equal consideration to each member of the public, and doing so without giving special regard because of finances, political affiliations, gender, orientation, creed, or other categorization.

Conflicts of interest betray the trust of the public with its government and violate traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. 

           

Premised on the above, I hereby issue the following:

 

III)      EXECUTIVE ORDER 

Restriction on Acceptance of Gifts

City officials and employees are prohibited from soliciting or accepting money, favors, gifts, gratuities, invitations, food, drink, loans, promises or other benefits (collectively and subsequently referred to as “gifts”) from businesses, individuals, any agency or organization under circumstances indicating the donor has an actual or implied hope or expectation of receiving more favorable treatment than accorded the public generally or in legal, legislative, policy or transactional matters affecting the business or individual.  Noncompliance is subject to discipline. 

City officials and employees are prohibited from receiving gifts, under circumstances where it can reasonably appear to be an attempted or intended effort to influence the employee in the discharge of that employee’s duties.  Noncompliance is subject to discipline.

Acceptance of Gifts and Favors

When practical, gifts shall be returned to the giver.  When it is not practical to return a gift, the gift shall be given to the Controller who shall record the gift and the giver and donate the gift in the name of the City to a charity located in the City. 

Gifts may be accepted in the following circumstances:

When a gift has a clear market value and is one that is also available for the public to purchase (e.g. concert ticket; meal), the public official or employee may accept the gift provided the public official or employee pays its face value, publicly listed price or the fair market value if there is no fixed value for the gift. 

Gifts of food (cookies, candy, etc) may be available for consumption on the premises to the public and employees when such offer may not be reasonably seen as seeking to influence the public servants or to induce more favorable treatment toward the gifter.

From family members, business acquaintances and friends who are not seeking official action or business, and whose offer of the gifts may not reasonably be seen as trying to influence the public servant so as to receive favorable treatment in the discharge of the public servant’s official duties.

Promotional offers or discounts on goods or services when offered to all employees may be accepted when such offer may not reasonably be seen as trying to induce the public servants to provide better treatment to the offeror than is accorded the general public or as trying to influence the public servants’ discharge of official duties. 

Nominal, de minimis tokens of appreciation at public appearances may be accepted.

Food or drink of nominal value supplied at business or informational meetings or at social events where it is available to all attendees (meaning nominal offerings commonly provided in the spirit of convenience or hospitality) may be accepted when such offer may not reasonably be seen as an attempt to induce the public servant to give favorable treatment to the host, sponsor or supplier in the public servant’s discharge of official duties. 

Offering of Gifts

The Mayor reserves discretion to debar a contractor, vendor, professional or other party deemed in the Mayor’s judgment to have either attempted to influence or in fact influenced an employee in the discharge of that employee’s duties by providing gifts.

Meetings with Individuals or Businesses

Department Heads or individuals representing department heads, at meetings with individuals, groups, or businesses reasonably likely or possibly having legal, legislative, transactional, or policy related business with the City, or in the City, shall have an additional department employee attend the meeting except where reasonably impracticable.  At least one of the City participants shall take, prepare and retain notes that identify the participants and summarize the content of the meeting. 

Review Committee

A Committee will be created to address questions regarding the application of these rules in particular situations.  The Committee will consist of the Chief of Staff, the Director of Human Resources and a representative of the Law Bureau.

Disciplinary Complaint Against Corriere Paints Dark Picture

A 51-page complaint filed by the Disciplinary Board [you can read it here] paints a dark picture of Bethlehem Attorney Donald Corriere. If true, it reveals a former District Attorney and County Commissioner who preyed upon innocent and unsophisticated people, instead of helping them. Unfortunately, several people are listed as the victims of a web of deceit.  If nothing else, this disciplinary action demonstrates that a lawyer who acts unethically can really hurt his client.

Before I go on, I need to point out three things. First, I am a former lawyer who did damage clients. I disgraced myself, my family and my profession. Second,.there's been no finding that Corriere has done anything wrong. Though the Disciplinary Complaint does recount admissions of wrongdoing made by Corriere, there has been no formal finding. Finally, I am well aware of the common perception that all lawyers are crooks. But it's a myth made possible by a few unethical lawyers like me. Most lawyers I know are very honest, even if what they say will hurt them. This complaint is highly unusual. But the public has more than a right; it has a need to know.

The Case of Randi Ratushny  

This all starts with Randi Ratushny, a woman who suffered from addiction issues and depression. Not the kind of person you take seriously. Precisely the kind of person you can use. But a person with a sister who loved her. That love, in the end, may have have stopped Corriere.

When Randi's mother died, Corriere was appointed Executor of the Estate. She had another daughter, Robin Thomas, and the mother had already provided for her by setting up numerous bank accounts that were owned jointly, with the right of survivorship. (This means that when the mother died, the daughter automatically became the owner of these accounts)   Corriere suggested that Robin surrender those funds to him, and he'd use them to care for Randi. Robin agreed, liquidated all accounts, and gave him a check for $88,356.94. Using other monies from the mother's estate, Corriere was able to pool $142,277.86, supposedly for the care and maintenance of Randi.

Unfortunately, much of that money instead went to the care and maintenance of Don Corriere. Instead of depositing that money into a separate escrow account, Corriere deposited it in his IOLTA account, and then even withdrew a large portion of it to transfer into a separate savings account. He used the money to pay credit card bills, personal and law firm expenses. According to the Disciplinary Complaint, he converted and spent at least $50,622.73 of Ratushny's money.

He has never repaid this money despite promises to Disciplinary Counsel that he would do so.

In addition, he charged excessive fees. For example, he charged Randi Ratushny's sister, Robin Thomas, $2,500 from the mother's estate for legal fees, even though he never represented her. He charged $2,500 to set up a "custodial account" that never existed. He claimed nearly $9,000 in attorney fees to probate the mother's estate, and charged another $16,000 in fees while supposedly managing Ratushny's money.  

These fees appear to be in addition to what was outright stolen.

Eventually, the well started going dry. In February 2011, someone in Corriere's office told Ratushny that only $5,000 was left in her nonexistent custodial account. After what must have been a minor explosion, Corriere reported that he had found some additional funds and sent her a check for $13,000. He told Ratushny that since this money originally came from her sister, it would be unethical for him to meet and discuss it with her.

Randi Ratushny's Suicide

Ratushny, who suffered from mental illness, was unable to cope with what was happening to her. She found her relief in a bottle of pills in 2012.

Suicide, says the death certificate.

Multiple drug intoxication, says the death certificate.

But where did she get the pills to do herself in? She didn't drive, not after being caught behind the wheel drunk or drugged up, on several occasions. Believe it or not, the person who most likely drove her to pick up those pills - James Emlen - is the person who benefited from her death.

Originally, Ratushny left everything to her sister. Remember her? She's the one who without hesitation entrusted Corriere with $88,000 to provide for her sister. She's the person who paid the funeral bill for her sister. But guess wha?. A new Will was prepared, cutting out the sister and naming instead a man with problems of his own.

This would prevent the sister from asking all kinds of uncomfortable questions about just what happened to her own money.

Though the sister challenged the new will, the Courts accepted it, especially when Corriere's son testified this is what Ratushny wanted. The courts were never told that the firm had already stolen a great deal of Ratushny's money. On appeal, a disinterested Superior Court paid so little attention to details that it mistakenly called James Emlen, the new Executor and heir, Ratushny's brother..

He was not her brother. He may very well be the person who supplied her with the pills she abused to kill herself. Under the Slayer's Act, a person who assists another in committing suicide is barred from financially benefiting in that person's estate.

Had Ratushny's sister been appointed Executor, she would have pursued vigorously the alleged theft of her sister's money by Corriere. But with her out of the way and Emlen in, Corriere thought he was on easy street.

Until the Disciplinary Board began sniffing around.

Because of that, Corriere decided to steer Emlen to a new attorney, Chris Spadoni. Corriere misrepresented the claim against him as just $37,000.

Unfortunately, what happened to Randi Ratushny also happened to other clients.

Playing Games With Asbestos Money  - As the attorney for both the Martin and Virginia Jandris estates, Corriere was provided with substantial sums of money from the Peter Angelos law firm for asbestos claims they had pursued on behalf of the Jandris '. He eventually distributed over $25,000 to their beneficiaries, but only after complaints to the Disciplinary Board. He has failed to distribute about $15,000, and charged an amazing $12,000 in fees for work in which his sole job was to martial assets.

Playing Games With Wrongful Death Money. - Corriere represented the Snyder Estates, who had a wrongful death claim being pursued by another firm. When that matter settled, Corriere refused to distribute the money until the Disciplinary Board inquired. Then he charged excessive fees. In one of the Snyder estates, a spouse had elected to take against the Will. She was represented by Chris Spadoni. Corriere misrepresented the settlement figure in that matter as half of what it really was.

Corriere has declined public comment on the charges against him.

Time to Ban Local Gov't Gifts

Everyone in the land of midnight payraises claims to be shocked, shocked that two Philadelphia state lawmakers stand accused of accepting illegal gifts. But there's no real enthusiasm to change the status quo. As Republican Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman fatalistically explains, "We can keep changing laws and keep making new laws. If they're going to break them, they're going to break them." So if you're hoping for reform from the second highest paid state legislature in the country ($84,012/year plus $157/day per diem), don't hold your breath. But local governments can follow the example set by Governor Tom Wolf.

While the state legislature looks after its own, to the exclusion of the rest of us, Governor Tom Wolf is imposing an absolute gift ban on his appointees, as well as anyone else working in the executive branch.

Under current state law, legislators can accept whatever they are given, from Super Bowl tickets to summer vacations at the Jersey Shore. The only restriction is that gifts worth more than $250 must be reported. If it's for airline tickets or a hotel room, the limit is set at $650.

You can still take the gift. You just have to report it.  Thus State Representative Mike Schlossberg, who also claims to be an author and social media consultant, took $1,389 from Planned Parenthood for transportation and lodging, but reports no other gifts.

Of course that's nonsense. Schlossberg, along with most Lehigh Valley elected officials, are regularly comped at numerous events for the pretty people, from baseball tickets to the hockey arena Musikfest.  One of my Facebook friends, himself a former Bethlehem City official, explains.

This kind of stuff goes on all of the time and it's wrong. The favor of public officials is constantly being curried with tickets, travel, meals, parties and all sorts of other 'gifts' from those with a financial or policy interest in having public officials as their 'friends.' In the City of Bethlehem top ranking officials regularly receive tickets and other benefits from city vendors. Why? It's human nature to reward kindness with kindness. One can only imagine the stakes at higher levels of government. It may be legal to accept 'gifts' up to a certain value, but it sure isn't ethical.

Former reformer and now State Rep. Russ Diamond used to condemn this legal extortion. Now that he's in office, it's just fine.

The Daily News' John Baer sums up. what is needed in Harrisburg.

Ban gifts. Stop taking annual automatic raises. Start paying more than 1 percent of salary for health-care coverage. Give up legislative slush funds. And stop taking expense money without receipts. (Who else does that?)

It's actually needed everywhere. Our state legislative leaders are better known for serving time in prison than ethical reform,. So just as Governor Wolf is doing what he can to shame the legislature, I'd suggest that it's time for local government to adopt their own ethical reforms. Nothing prevents a County or City Council from adopting an ordinance barring any elected or appointed official in that government from accepting gifts of any sort, and imposing fines and disciplinary actions for transgressions. And there is no justification  at all for the medical benefits paid for part-time members of Easton and Bethlehem City Council

I have two requests from you. One, what ethical reforms do you believe should be imposed on local government officials. Two, can you provide actual examples of elected officials being comped with sports tickets, vacations or meals?

NorCo Controller: Exec and Appointee Abused Mileage, Meal Allowance

Updated 11:10 am:

Northampton County Executive John Brown has unilaterally imposed significant reductions in the health plans offered to the County workforce. He's told them he'd like to eliminate other benefits as well. If he can get away with it, he'll keep their wages flat, too. Helping Brown is Deputy Director of Administration, Cathy Allen. He brought her with him from Bangor, and she has has taken the Brown line in union negotiations. But while demanding that employees make do with less, they're squeezing every nickel out of the county they can.

Both of them are padding their mileage and meals, according to a report that Controller Steve Barron has just released. Allen has charged taxpayers in some instances for her daily commute. She even billed taxpayers for food at two local eateries. Brown charged for his mileage from his home in Bangor to Bethlehem's Celtic Classic parade.

I first heard about this from a worker yesterday. I filed a Right-to-Know and also alerted Barron. As Controller, he has a bit more power than a bottom-feeding blogger, and does not have to wait over a month for a Right to Know Request. He has the authority to review County spending, and can review whether payments are proper.

Take a gander at Allegheny County, for example. There, the Controller recently accused the Executive  of abusing his mileage, just as being done here. The Exec dismissed the whole thing as "petty." But he returned his county car and repaid $42,700.

Barron believes that Brown and Allen combined have squandered only about $1,500 in taxpayer money. But he believes the issue is important. He told me that if the Exec and one of his appointees decide to seek travel expenses for their daily commutes, it won't be long before every employee starts to do so. Also, is it right that Allen can eat ham and eggs at Perkins at our expense, while county employees stand in line at the food bank?

Brown's expenses. - The reports obtained by Barron reveal that Brown only sought reimbursements from January through April. During this time, he charged for a 4-mile round trip to the West Easton Treatment Center. He would charge for his entire trip from Bangor by making a pit stop at a diner or Gracedale. He even charged for commutes when hew had meetings at nearby places like State Theatre or even Gracedale. He charged taxpayers for a visit with his publicist, a trip to a Pennsylvania Society event and the Bethlehem parade I mentioned.

"Clearly, waving in a parade serves no county business purpose and is more about political self-promotion," is Barron's assessment of Brown's mileage claim to attend a parade in Bethlehem. On February 28, he claimed travel expenses from Bangor to the 248 Diner, and from there to County Council. There was no Country Council meetuing that date. 

Allen's expenses. - Allen has submitted expense reports through at least September. Her gimmick is to stop at Gracedale or Human Services on her way to the courthouse, and then bill taxpayers for her entire trip. Employees are strictly forbidden from charging meals to the County unless more than 50 miles away. But she did so twice in June, and from local eateries. Most of her expense claims appear to be an abuse.

Former Executive John Stoffa stated yesterday that he never sought reimbursement for mileage, except for the annual County Commissioners' Conference. District Attorney John Morganelli, who is often pulled from his bed at 3 am to travel to homicide investigations, never charges for mileage except for the annual prosecutors' conference. He won't even allow his part-time assistants to charge mileage when they attend a preliminary hearing.

Here's Barron's report:

Please note I have requested that John Brown reimburse the county $528.64 in mileage and the Assistant Director of Administration $1,006.85 in mileage and meals.

Mr. Brown has been reimbursed $963.16 in mileage since the beginning of the year. Several of the trips are questionable. He even billed 35 miles in round trip from Bangor to Bethlehem to be in the Celtic Classic Parade. I and I'm sure the taxpayers of the county would not consider waving and marching in a parade a valid county business expense.

As for Ms. Allen she has been paid $2,273.60 in mileage and charged several trips from her home and back to county facilities. Mileage to and from home is not allowed under county policy or IRS regulations. Customary mileage of a commute is never allowed. I gave Ms. Allen the benefit of the doubt that she began working on those days at Gracedale or the Human Service Building and therefore allowed the remaining mileage unless she left and went home from a location which happened on several occasions as well.

Of the money already mentioned $54.91 has been added in for meals at Tic-Toc Diner and Perkins. Meals are only reimbursed if an employee is a longer distance from the courthouse. In audits I have been critical of the Sheriff's Department for meals at Lutz's so I must be here as well to remain consistent with previous audits and policies of the county.

This information was brought out by a county employee who noticed the mileage being registered to and from home. This prompted my investigation. I have acted on employee tips in the past when Human Service Staff under Ross Marcus and the Stoffa administration purchased $100.00 in art for the new Human Service Building. That money was reimbursed and I would hope this administration sets the example and reimburses the county for this misuse of taxpayers money as well.

Director of Administration Luis Campos has responded to these accusations.

"The Administration budgets for travel and expense reimbursements. At times meetings can be held at off County Office locations. The County’s policy for travel and expense reimbursement is in line with IRS and auditor’s guidelines. If there is an inadvertent error, practice is to correct the expense appropriately."

I saw Campos in an elevator this morning, and he said he'd get me whatever I needed. I told him he could start by complying with my RTK, filed yesterday, seeking the following: "This request relates to County Executive John Brown and Ass't Dir. of Administration Cathy Allen. Please provide a record of all mileage, travel, lodging and meal expenses claimed by and paid to each of these employees during calendar year 2014. The mileage log and any other records for reimbursement are requested. In addition, the payroll line item reflecting payment of these expenses in each pay period is requested."

Panto Defends Conflict of Interest

According to its City-hosted website, the Easton Redevelopment Authority (RDA) "oversees the redevelopment of the Simon Silk Mill and seeks to facilitate the rehabilitation of other blighted or vacant structures within the City limits." Developer Mark Mulligan, who is the paid construction manager at the Silk Mill redevelopment and is involved in other properties, is clearly their biggest customer. In "Mark and Mike's Excellent Adventure," Parts One and Two, I told you about the disconcerting relationship between Mulligan and RDA employee Michael Brett. There's an undeniable conflict of interest. But rather than condemning it, Easton Mayor Sal Panto has embraced it, and is dismissing all criticism.

For a Mayor who prides himself on transparency and accountability, and who has largely conducted himself this way, this is an alarming flaw. It's what happens when a City puts all its eggs in one basket, as Easton has done with Mulligan.

In Part One, I told you that Brett, who also happens to sit on the Easton Zoning Hearing Board, has a realtor license parked with Mulligan's VM Realty.

Panto asked, "Where's the beef?"

In Part Two, I revealed that Mulligan formed both a LP and LLC - 356-358 Wilkes-Barre L.P. and 356-358 Wilkes-Barre 1A, LLC - to purchase and rehab a set of row homes that had incurred fire damage. Records reveal that the LP's General partner is the LLC. Records provide no name for the owners or shareholders of the LLC.

These entities were formed to prevent the public from learning who is involved in this fire restoration project. But the addresses gave Mulligan away. They tied back to his Flemington and Easton offices.

I questioned whether Brett was the other partner, especially since his phone number is listed on the work permits, and it turns out he is. Yesterday, Easton Director of Administration Glenn Steckman acknowledged the connection.

Mike Brett is a part-owner of the Wilkes Barre property. The properties as I understand it where [sic] purchased $5,000 each plus the cost of the escrow amounts. The properties were burned and the outside secured to an acceptable condition. Deals like that are available throughout the city. VM [Mulligan} as [sic] since partnered with VM and created a limited liablity [sic] partnership. A number of landlords and other property owners do this through out the city. And I agree he should get some direction from the state ethics commission which he falls under.

Were you aware that deals like this are available throughout the City? Only insiders have this special knowledge.

Brett used his insider knowledge as a public employee to get a South Side Special. Even worse, he did it with a developer whose work at the Silk Mill is overseen by the RDA.

This is a blatant conflict of interest. Brett and Mulligan know this, which is why they formed both a LLC and LP to keep everyone from finding out.

If this were Bethlehem, Brett would already be on the outside looking in. I would expect Mayor Sal Panto to condemn this, too. Instead, he condemned me.

I am working fior [sic] the betterment of our city and have stated before that I will never again participate in this blog. Mr. O'Hare is nothing more than an agitator who stirs the pot with half-truths and inuendos [sic] from individuals that feed him what he thinks is factual.

So much for transparency. ... And spelling.

When I first raised this matter, Panto promised to give it his "personal attention". He promised to ensure that "every decision is transparent and ethically acceptable." There is nothing transparent or ethically acceptable about a public employee and a developer hitching their wagons on a sweetheart deal they actively tried to hide from the public. 

Mark and Mike's Excellent Adventure

Michael Brett is a "Community Development Specialist" at the Easton Redevelopment Authority. Among other things, the Easton Redevelopment Authority oversees the redevelopment of the Simon Silk Mill and other blighted and vacant properties.

Easton's latest redevelopment hero is Mark Mulligan's VM Development Group. He's got the Simon Silk Mill, Wolf Building, Northampton National Bank and Pomeroy Building. Mayor Sal Panto calls Mulligan an "excellent construction manager."

Brett must think Mulligan is excellent, too. He works for him. According to the Department of State, he's been a broker for VM Realty since June 6, 2014. How he works for Mulligan and works for an authority that is overseeing Mulligan's work must be very easy.

Awesome!

It gets better. Brett is also a member of Easton's Zoning Hearing Board, which has approved Mulligan's excellent zoning requests for the Silk Mill and Wolf Building.

Excellent for Brett. Excellent for Mulligan.

For those concerned about conflicts of interest, not so much.

Dolan on Thin Ice With Ethics Act

In recent posts, I've told you about Bethlehem City Council member Karen Dolan. She has used the authority of her public office, as well as confidential information received through her holding public office, to benefit a nonprofit at which she's the paid Executive Director. That, according to the state Ethics Act, is a conflict of interest. But it's an admonition she has repeatedly ignored. According to informed sources, she did precisely what the law condemns this past weekend, in an email to the Mayor. She threatened to prevent Council from reviewing a proposed lease for the Illick's Mill. One that would actually require her to pay utilities and rent. Let me tell you the story.

Dolan, a City Council member since 2006, is the paid Executive Director of what is known as the Gertrude B. Fox Environmental Center. That's a nonprofit known to most of us as Illick's Mill. She failed to file nonprofit tax returns (990s) for three years in a row, which ultimately resulted in the revocation of her nonprofit status with the IRS. While working to get it back, she continued accepting grants and public assistance. While her status was revoked, she gave a misleading interview to The Express Times. She touted a $170,000 budget and announced wedding receptions at the site.

Most of her old board members abandoned ship. The ones she has now were not around when the 501c3 status was pulled.

At a recent Parks Committee meeting, where she conveniently happens to be the Chair, she advocated easing up on booze restrictions in City parks, where Illick's Mill hosts wedding receptions. That's an ethical conflict, though she countered that all nonprofits in City parks would benefit.

In the meantime, questions have begun to arise. Why is there no recent record of Illick's Mill paying any utilities? Why did the City suddenly start providing her with free heating oil? Why does she pay no rent? Why was the $127,000 owed to the City just "written off", according to an independent audit of City finances.

When I met with her in February, she told me she had a valid lease and was paying utilities. That was untrue. I have learned recently that she stopped paying utilities several years ago, in 2011, or perhaps even earlier. She has told others that utilities are not being paid until there's a new lease.

As Right to Know requests have descended upon Bethlehem like a plague of locusts, the City decided it's time for a new lease at Illick's Mill. It was on the agenda for Wednesday night's City Council meeting, and you can see it yourself under "back up documents." (Sublease Agreement Illicks Mill).

This proposed lease is pretty much like the old lease, with two major exceptions. This one calls for monthly rent of $300 and requires the nonprofit to pay for utilities.

Even heating oil.

Dolan, who really should have no public role in the finances of an entity that pays her a salary, nevertheless had to weigh in.

Over the weekend, she sent several emails to the Mayor, in which she specifically stated she would prevent the lease from being considered by Council.

Quite clearly, she is in violation of the Ethics Act.

Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act states, "No public official or public employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest." The Act defines "conflict of interest" as the "[u]se by a public official or public employee of the authority of his office or employment or any confidential information received through his holding public office or employment for the private pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate family or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated."

As recently as this weekend, Dolan was using the authority of her public office and confidential information she obtained by virtue of her public office, to threaten to keep the proposed lease from Council.

Dolan is now telling The Express Times that she met with the Mayor concerning a lease earlier this year. That's a violation of the Ethics Act.  She acknowledges that she somehow talked former Mayor John Callahan into waiving utilities completely and to even start supplying heating oil. Of course, that's her third story now. She told me she was paying utilities and told someone else she was waiting for a new lease. Now it's blame Callahan time. It's also another conflict of interest by her. Maybe Callahan was getting hounded. Or maybe there's a fourth story.

One Express Times reader sums things up quite nicely:

"So, let me get this straight. The organization for which a city councilwoman is a paid employee gets a special break on rent and utilities while taxpayers and businesses have to pay their taxes, which she has no doubt voted yes to increase? Something smells about this entire situation. Maybe she personally would be willing to pay my utilities. Sounds like a fair trade to me."

What smells is a conflict of interest.

So who cares about an Ethics Act violation? The Commission will make a ruling ten years after everyone is dead right? Wrong. Whether Dolan knows it or not, that conflict of interest provision in the Ethics Act is exactly what then Attorney General Corbett used to go after state representatives who were using state employees to run their political campaign. The Court noted three elements to the offense: " (1) the defendant was a public official;  (2) the defendant knowingly or intentionally used the authority of his or her office for private pecuniary gain;  and (3) the gain was more than de minimis."

Dolan is a public official. She is knowingly and intentionally using the authority of her office to avoid rent and utilities at a nonprofit that pays her a salary. The gain is certainly more than de minimis.

The ice beneath her is cracking.

According to a Morning Call account, Board Chair Andrew Bollinger is now speaking for Fox Environmental, not Dolan. He and the Mayor have talked. No threats. The Mayor is willing to negotiate terms, but the free ride is over. Bollinger and his Board appear to be tired of the hole Dolan is digging for them.

Someone needs to relay that message to Dolan.

This nature center should continue, thanks to the hard work of many people over the years, not just Dolan. If she cared about its mission, she'd resign. In fact she needs to leave City Council as well.

Northampton County's "Full Time" Controller Plays Hooky ... At School

Barron making his way to class

Executive John Stoffa has asked District Attorney John Morganelli to investigate Northampton County Controller Steve Barron.  This request follows a report that Barron, a full-time Controller, is teaching at Northampton Community College during County business hours.

In 2006, Steve Barron was among six candidates seeking an appointment as Bethlehem's Controller. He told City Council he is "very inspiring," "very trustworthy," and would "give 110%". They were uninspired. In fact, Barron didn't receive a single vote. But a year later, he got 16,357 of them, when Northampton County voters elected him Northampton County Controller. They picked him over 12-year incumbent John Schimmel. Making the most of an embarrassing embezzlement in the Criminal Division, Barron pledged he'd be a full-time fiscal watchdog, unlike Schimmel. But Barron appears to have broken his bond with the workers. Worse, he may have violated recently enacted provisions of the Home Rule Charter, requiring him to be full time.

In 2008, the year after Barron's election, voters overwhelmingly approved a change to the Charter. This not only requires the Controller to be full time, but prohibits him from doing anything else.  "During his term of office the County Controller shall devote full time to the office, and shall not actively engage in any other business or occupation," commands this new provision, which became effective in 2012.

"I'm for it. I'm very for it. I think it's a good thing," Barron told The Express Times. At that time, he was supplementing his $39,000 salary by teaching at Northampton Community College. But the College's Right-to-Know Officer, Helene Whitaker, revealed that Barron stopped teaching in 2012, when the Controller became full time. Thanks to an ordinance approving a salary increase, Barron was also making $65,000 as the County's fiscal watchdog.

Controller's open office with financial records

Despite the clear language of the Charter and a significant raise, Barron is teaching at Northampton Community College again.

As an Adjunct Professor of Political Science, Barron teaches two classes on Monday, Wednesday and Friday. They start at Noon and go until 1:50 pm, with a half hour to meet students before and after each class. This amounts to twelve hours every week, including commuting time, away from the courthouse. Instead of evening classes, they are in the middle of the day, when most employees have access to the county's purse strings.

On Friday, October 4, Barron was confronted in a college hallway as he made his way to his Local and State Government class, dressed in shorts and T-shirt. He was asked to explain why the County's full time Controller is actively engaged in another profession.

"I'm doing this on my lunch hour," he explained.

"A four hour lunch hour?"

"I go to County Council meetings after hours."

Barron never returned to his office after class. The door was wide open, with the County's finances spread out over an unattended desk in an unlocked office. Inquiries to staffers reveal that Barron was not at his office at all on Friday.

According to The Home Rule Charter, an elected official who knowingly and willfully violates any of its provisions, has forfeited his office. That determination would have to be made in quo warranto proceedings.
\
Council President John Cusick is part of the Council which recommended the Charter change.  He authored the increase in Barron's salary. "I am disappointed to hear these allegations," stated Cusick. "If they are true, I believe that Mr. Barron would be in violation of the charter amendment. My understanding of the language and intent of the amendment when I voted to place it on the ballot and later to increase the salary was that the office holder would be a full time employee. If he is teaching during county business hours, clearly that is not the case."

Bob Werner, who was elected to Council after the Charter amendment and pay hike, has suggested that this warrants an investigation by the appropriate officials.

Executive John Stoffa said that "[i}f these allegations are true, Mr. Barron is double dipping." Calling on Barron to return any funds paid by the college, Stoffa claimed the Controller "owes the public an apology. He broke his oath of office. Amazing that the office he holds is tasked with finding people who transgress the law as apparently he has. How can the public have confidence in him?”

Was Mezzacappa Hiding Income in 2011 Report?

When Tricia Mezzacappa first ran for West Easton Borough Council two years ago, she filed a "Statement of Financial Interests". The sole source of income listed was a private nursing care provider. Yet her LinkedIn profile states she has been providing massages since 1999.

Now she's running again, this time for both West Easton Borough Council and Northampton County Council. She's filed a new "Statement of Financial Interests." This time, she lists money she is receiving from the Estate of Joseph A Mezzacappa.

Here's my problem. Joseph A Mezzacappa is her father, who passed away in 1999, about 13 years ago. If she is receiving money from his estate now, wouldn't she have been receiving it in 2011, too?

Perhaps there's an innocent explanation. Perhaps not.

Under the state Ethics Act, a knowing violation of financial disclosure requirements is a misdemeanor.

Does Easton or Any Municipality Need Its Own Ethics Commission?

This is what Easton Mayor Sal Panto says at Neighbors of Easton: "Yes, I did say 'I was recommending to the council that we get rid of it.' I stated this because we have a state ethics board and that board has no local ties that would be seen as a conflict. Fortunately in Easton we have elected officials of honesty, character and integrity. I can’t tell you the last time there was an ethics probe. In four years of asking members of council if they have any residents that would like to serve and advertising vacancies on all of our Authorities Boards and Commissions one council member just gave me three names."

Pennsylvania does have a state ethics commission whose jurisdiction includes local officials. Allentown's ethics commission, which has handled a few complaints against the Mayor, is dogged by complaints of bias.

Unpersuaded, blogger Noel Jones asks, "How would the state even know to look into the ethics of a local government?"

The answer is simple. File a complaint. That's what blogger Chris Casey did in Upper Macungie, and the entire Board of Supervisors skedaddled.

ET Awards Turkey to Senator Browne & Lobbyist Wife

Their award:

"State Sen. Pat Browne and his wife, Heather Browne, fail to see the conflict of interest their relationship and their jobs have created — and how it might work against Allentown’s Neighborhood Improvement Zone. Pat Browne was the chief architect of the NIZ legislation that allows Allentown to divert earned income taxes from other towns to pay for the city’s planned hockey arena. He’s now in the process of explaining to suburban officials how the new law will affect their tax collections. There’s nothing wrong with this type of regional revenue sharing, but Heather Browne is working as a lobbyist for two businesses whose owners are pursuing development projects in downtown Allentown — in the zone that will benefit from the tax legislation. No conflict? Look again."

Although The Morning Call no longer does editorials, columnists Paul Carpenter and Bill White have condemned this husband and wife legislator and lobbyist team as well.

This story first appeared here, in NIZ à Trois: Heather Browne, J.B. Reilly and Joe Topper.

To those who say blogs have no influence or should be ignored, think again.

But to those who say that regular papers are worthless, think again. Without them, we'd know noting. Without them, most polibloggers would have nothing to say.

NorCo DA Offers Discounts to Lawyers Using Web Designing Son

Northampton County DA John Morganelli should be proud of his son, Chris, who is in the web design biz. But should a DA be offering "discount deals" to Northampton County law firms that hire his son? That's what John has done, in an blanket email to numerous members of the bar.

"My son Chris Morganelli has become a leading web design and marketing person in the LV. His business Chris Morganelli Designs, CMd at www.cmorganellidesigns.com is now a leading company with clients in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and New York. Chris does work for St.Lukes Hospital too.

"He is now offering discount deals for Northampton County law firms to do a makeover of existing web sites and new custom designed sites. Each project is individually designed. He also will connect you with the most current social media sites in order to market your firm. Expensive yellow pages are now out. Chris will get you where you need to be at half the cost of current design companies.

"Chris has a BS degree in Computer Science. Check out his work and his clients at www.cmorganellidesigns.com . Chris can be reached at 610xxxxxxx."

Let's say you're a defense lawyer and have a plea arrangement or ARD application. The DA has a lot to say about both. Many lawyers are going to feel undue pressure to use Chris.

On the other hand, John has every right to be proud of his son and want him to do well, and I see no violation of the rules of professional responsibility.

What do you think? Good business or tacky?

More About Mann & Callahan's Super Bowl Trip

Yesterday, I told you that Bethlehem Mayor John Callahan and State Representative Jenn Mann both were able to get their hands on tickets to this year's Super Bowl. Yes, other elected officials from Pennsylvania were there, too, including Governor Corbett. But my focus is on locally elected officials. I want to update you with some additional information.

Callahan actually returned my call this morning, something that never happened before. He told me that he paid for the trip himself. I asked how much, and he demurred, telling me the amount is irrelevant. But in response to some additional questioning, he acknowledged that he only paid the face value on the ticket, not its actual market price.

Although Callahan acknowledged that he did not get this ticket as a result of some lottery or as a season ticket holder, he declined to tell me who hooked him up. He claims that's "irrelevant" but I consider this information as important as knowing the identity of a campaign donor or lobbyist.

I also spoke again to Jennifer Mann's press aide. Like Callahan, he acknowledged that she only had to pay face value.He also told me that Mann got her tickets from the Steelers, which did make some tickets available to politicians in both parties.

Asked whether she wold be reimbursing taxpayers for the day of work she missed on Super Bowl Monday, when she missed roll call, I was told she was "on leave." But apparently, she just put herself on leave, so doesn't she owe the residents of her district a day's pay for the time she spent not representing them? I was told she works weekends and nights, and made it back to Harrisburg that afternoon.

In Wisconsin, home of the Packers, Ashwaubenon Village President Mike Aubinger is one of the elected officials who turned down two $900 face value tickets that were being offered to the rest of us for $8,500 each. He did not feel comfortable receiving preferential treatment. "I don't accept anything from anyone anywhere," he said.

Callahan and Mann appear to have a different view. They exploit the status of their offices to gain special treatment.