Transparency, Fed Ed Style

Roger MacLean shows a Fed Ed response to a City Council RTK

Allentown Mayor Edwin "Fed Ed" Pawlowski has taken transparency to a new level. City Council asked him for a copy of his five-year plan, something the City's Home Rule Charter (Sec. 811) requires him to produce with his Budget every year. He played games so Council members filed a Right-to-Know request. What MacLean is showing is Fed Ed's response, clear as mud. Maybe there's a few fire trucks in there.

It's astonishing that a person who is so secretive and whose indictment is imminent according to his own attorney, can arrogantly thumb his nose at at the public's right to know and the people's elected representatives.  

NorCo Gov't Finally Demonstrates Transparency in Packer Case

I've been highly critical of the way that Executive John Brown and NorCo Council have responded to Sara Packer, the ex-adoption supervisor accused in the rape, murder and dismemberment of her own adopted daughter. Packer at one time worked for a placement agency called the Impact Project, and had also fostered at least 30 children. How many had she abused? What role, if any, did Children Youth and Families (CYF) play? Could this be part of a bigger problem? Did she use her connections in what appears to be a foster child industry to prey upon innocents? Instead of addressing these issues, Northampton County buried its head in the sand. It ignored calls from NBC-10 reporter Deanna Durante, and even actively misled her. HR Director Amy Trapp temporarily cut off Controller Steve Barron's access to computer records because he was the only one willing to speak publicly. Council refused to bring CYF to a Council meeting and answer at least some questions that would both reassure the public and give CYF an opportunity to explain that what happened is an anomaly. Things came to a head when Durante came to a Council meeting and confronted both them and Brown.

It was an amazing display of bad government. Fortunately, there has since been an equally amazingly display of good government. It's what can happen when government actually listens to someone like Durante instead of hiding from her.

Durante has continued digging into this story, speaking to foster children placed with Sarah Packer. She spoke to a foster child who now is herself a caseworker. When she was a child, she had been placed with the Packers, courtesy of the Impact Project. This child,like another child,reported abuse at the Packer household to the Impact Project, and claims she was ignored.

Barron was aware that NorCo is one of several counties using the Impact Project.He knew that the County had just mailed the Impact Project $37,147.92. Here's part of Barron's email to CYF and Brown.

It is important to note that this was Sara Packer's place of employment prior to coming to work for Northampton County, and there is a possibility she continued to moonlight with them after she began working with us. She clearly received foster children from the agency on an ongoing basis until her husband was accused of abuse which led to Ms. Packer's termination from Northampton County.

This information is troubling and makes me question whether or not it is a good idea to continue to engage with the Impact Project until the investigation is over. We now have two people who have come forward about abuse that was not follow up on or reported by the Impact Project. While these children were not Northampton County Children, can we continue to roll the dice. I believe that Pinebrook and other agencies provide this service (which is part of a project I am looking at for a larger audit in the future) so I don't think suspending the use of Impact would hurt the county and prevent services from being provided. I just don't think we can take a chance on this agency knowing what we have heard about in news reports.It is important to note that this was Sara Packer's place of employment prior to coming to work for Northampton County, and there is a possibility she continued to moonlight with them after she began working with us. She clearly received foster children from the agency on an ongoing basis until her husband was accused of abuse which led to Ms. Packer's termination from Northampton County.

Instead of cutting off Barron's access again, the County actually listened. Human Services Director Allison Frantz issued a news release. (She failed to send me a copy, but it's the thought that counts). In this news release, Frantz says,

A procedure is in place to investigate allegations of abuse. When foster parents are involved, the Pennsylvania Office of Children, Youth and Families, specifically the Regional Division, is in charge of investigating those allegations.

Northampton County continues to engage in the proper investigatory procedures. The county is taking all necessary steps to ensure that the children placed through Northampton County, including those placed through The Impact Project, are not subject to abuse. Northampton County has used the Impact Project as a foster care provider. However, referrals to The Impact Project have been suspended.

Since that time, several other counties have followed suit.Better safe than sorry.

That's how government should work.It's called transparency. Is that so hard?

No Back Up Documents on NorCo Council Agenda

Earlier this year, Northampton County Council agreed informally to start adding back-up documents to its meeting agendas in an online format. This has been the practice in Bethlehem and Allentown for years, and was recently started in Bethlehem Township. This enables the people to see more clearly what their elected public servants are doing  It makes government more transparent. But in the agenda for today's Council meeting, no back-up documents are included.

Today's agenda includes the millage rate ordinance for next year, which should contain no surprise. But Council is also supposed to consider a resolution concerning the Director of Emergency Services.

Has Executive John Brown finally appointed someone to a position that has been vacant since May 2015? Or is Council calling on him to hire someone before the county blows away when the next hurricane hits?

I'm unable to tell you because the Council Clerk failed to add these simple back-up documents. I understand we are all too human and that office might be understaffed at the moment. I am hoping this is an anomaly, as opposed to a step backwards into darkness.

Easton City Council's New Meeting Room Should Have Recorder

Sal Panto tries to decide whether he's roverfan73 or tom18017 while checking his computer.   

I arrived fashionably late for Easton's City Council meeting on Wednesday night at their new, splendidly appointed headquarters. Though there was no bidet in the men's room, the meeting room itself is a wonder of technology. Lighting and acoustics are very good, and computers are set up behind the dais so that Mayor Sal Panto and other members of Council can check out the Internet while pretending to listen to the people. There's a huge screen for power points, too, in case they want to bore someone to death. Funny how a City meeting room with all these technological advances would lack basic recording equipment. Forget video. They don't even have a $5 recorder.

If Easton City Council is really interested in transparency, this needs to change. If tiny West Easton can videotape its meetings, its big brother can at least record them.

Sal Panto pretends to be an advocate of transparency, but set up fake names to bully people on the Internet and needs to be more accountable to his bosses - the people.

Darth Voter Spent $13.5K in Campaign Funds on Himself in 2015

I now call State Representative and Fed Ed lackey Mike Schlossberg is our very own Darth Voter for his recent decision to cast at least one vote for an absent fellow Democrat in a crucial budget matter, in complete violation of state house rules. In typical Fed Ed style, Darth Voter tried to blame his own moral lapse on "tea party extremists."

They're probably responsible for the annual report his campaign just filed concerning his campaign finances. He raised $55,800 in an off-election year, thanks to the Lehigh Valley urban growth regime and the trade unions they employ to build the Flats at Oh So So Do So Pa. His contributors are a Who's Who of the FBI Subpoena list, from Ramzi Haddad ($1,000) to Matthew McTish ($1,000).

That's no surprise. But what I find disgusting is the $13,500 he managed to spend on himself in a City in which the average per capita income is just $17,000. So disgusting that I have sent an email complaining about it to the State and Lehigh County Elections Bureau. My email is below.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The purpose of this email is to make you aware of reporting violations in the 2015 annual report just filed by Friends of Mike Schlossberg at Filer ID No. 20120115. This report was filed with both the Bureau of Commissions, Elections and Legislation as well as the Lehigh County elections office, as candidate Schlossberg is a resident of Lehigh.

Pennsylvania has a campaign finance reporting law that enables the public to determine who is financing elections and how candidates are spending the money donated to their campaigns. In essence, this enables the public to follow the money. But that becomes impossible when the candidate fails to explain how the money is spent.

Pennsylvania's Campaign Finance Law specifically provides, at 25 P.S. § 3246 (b), that each campaign finance report "shall" contain the following information: "Each and every expenditure, the date made, the full name and address of the person to whom made and the purpose for which such expenditure was made."

The 2015 annual report just filed by Friends of Mike Schlossberg fails to provide that information. Instead, it is replete with numerous instances in which Schlossberg periodically reimburses himself for expenditures, without any reference to the expenditure, date made, name and address of the person to whom the expenditure is made or its purpose.

To be specific, Friends of Mike Schlossberg list the following "reimbursements" to candidate Mike Schlossberg: $520.86 on 2/6/15; $372.27 on 3/2/15: $1,867.00 on 3/31/15; $144.98 on 4/2/15; $1,402.05 on 5/5/15: $658.50 on 5/7/15; $23.00 on 5/21/15; $635.40 on 6/1/15; $4,517.80 on 7/2/15 (fundraiser mentioned); $787.88 on 8/29/15; $735.74 on 9/27/15: $94.88 on 9/30/15 (mileage); $606.82 on 10/25/15; $97.75 on 11/3/15 (mileage); $735.00 on 11/28/15; and $396.09 on 12/30/15.

During 2015, Schlossberg has managed to use campaign funds to pay himself $13,596.02 with absolutely no explanation of what the money was used for, who was paid or when. This totally defeats the purpose of the Campaign Finance Reporting Law, and I am requesting that you exercise your supervisory authority and direct Friends of Mike Schlossberg to amend this report and indicate precisely the nature of the expenses for which Schlossberg seeks reimbursement.

In addition to being illegal, this report is unconscionable. Schlossberg has managed to stick $13,596.02 in campaign funds into his own pocket in a city in which the per capita income is just $17,000.

Thank you for your kind attention to this matter. I can be reached at the above email address or 610-xxx-xxxx.

Freeman Wants More Transparency in Legislature and Politics

State Rep. Bob Freeman, D-Northampton, has introduced two modest bills designed to offer greater transparency regarding how money is spent by the General Assembly and who's donating to its candidates.

Legislative Audit

His first bill (H.B. 1744) would require the state auditor general to audit the General Assembly and its legislative service agencies, rather than hiring a certified public accountant.

"The auditor general is the chief watchdog of how state funds are spent," Freeman said. "His office audits the various agencies of state government on a regular basis. Having the auditor general do the legislative audits will make it a more public and transparent process and has the added benefit of saving money since the need for hiring an outside firm would no longer be required."

Freeman's bill would require the auditor general to audit all financial accounts of the General Assembly annually, and to provide for special audits if necessary. Copies of the audits would be submitted to House and Senate leaders and be made available to the public.

It;s unclear whether this audit would include the party caucuses.

This bill has 17 sponsors, including Freeman. Surprisingly, Republican Justin Simmons has agreed to co-sponsor, along with LV democrats Steve Samuelson, Pete Schweyer and Danny McNeill.  I don't see Schlossberg's name. He's probably busy renting the limo to drive Fed Ed to the Pa Society at the Waldorf.

Additional Report From Legislative Candidates  

Freeman's second bill (H.B. 1745) would require candidates for the General Assembly to follow the same expense report requirements as candidates for statewide office. Currently, both General Assembly and statewide office candidates are required to file a report on the second Friday before an election, but only candidates for statewide office are required to report on or before the sixth Tuesday before the election.

"This change would provide earlier disclosure and greater transparency on who is contributing to candidates for the General Assembly," Freeman said. "This is information voters should have access to earlier in a campaign than they currently do."

The currently required second-Friday expense report is filed just 10 days before the election. Freeman said that filing comes so close to the election that the information about where candidates are getting their contributions tends to get lost in the last week of campaign literature and other information.

The lack of newspaper coverage makes things even worse.

"This would put everything on the table and allow voters to see who is backing which candidates and what they stand for, or more importantly, who they stand with," Freeman said. "It also offers candidates the benefit of saving time and effort when filing their second Friday report because they would have already reported finance information just over a month earlier."

Both measures are expected to be referred to the House State Government Committee for review.

As weak a reform as this is, Freeman only has 13 sponsors, including himself. Locally, only Danny McNeill has joined him.

I contacted Freeman to discuss this legislation with him, but fortunately, he is stuck  in Harrisburg and is actually working on resolving the state budget impasse at this moment.

I consider both bills extremely weak. A 6th Tuesday report means very little because most money is not collected until much closer to the election. But when a report is filed, wouldn't it be nice to see it online? Shouldn't state candidates be required to efile their reports so they can be viewed immediately? Shouldn't all report, for every office, be available online in the County where the candidate is running?

Updated: NorCo Gov't By Consultant Behind Closed Doors

Northampton County Executive John Brown likes to operate behind closed doors and without transparency. Last year, he personally blocked Council member Bob Werner from attending a meaningless news conference. At another, he actually posted armed deputy sheriffs to keep unwanted Council members from attending. This year, Deputy Administrator Cathy Allen refused to answer questions about her broken promise to have some departments at a Council meeting. DCED Director Diane Donaher unsuccessfully tried to suspend hotel tax grants that Council awards every year. She wanted to give herself sole power over $500,000 for tourism. What's next? How about a super secret meeting?

Brown and Donaher are the architects of a private meeting scheduled today at 10:30 am in Conference Room #3 of the Human Services Building. From what I can put together, and I obviously don't have all the details, it appears to be an attempt to bring in another consultant.

I plan to be there though someone has already been told it is a "private" meeting..

The ostensible purpose of this mega meeting is to determine how the County's various authorities and boards can streamline their functions and operate more efficiently. Of course, this involves hiring yet another consultant, National Development Council.

Because there will be quorums of different authorities and deliberations concerning the official action of hiring a consultant, this may very well be a violation of Pennsylvania's Sunshine Act.

Also present at this meeting will be representatives of Norris McLaughlin and Marcus from the land of NIZ. That firm is already featured quite prominently in Allentown's pay-to-play investigation. I'm sure one way to streamline things in Northampton County is to make sure someone from that firm represents every County authority.

As Judge Damon Keith has so eloquently stated, "Democracy dies behind closed doors."

Updated 10:10 AM: Secret Meeting Canceled! - I've just been informed that the super secret meeting of all those authorities, along with the NIZ law firm, has been canceled. Here's the message I received. "Meeting at Human Services cancelled after question sent to Econ Dev office regarding advertised properly and how many council members would attend....clearly cancelled due to violation of sunshine act and council concerns on subject matter...FYI."

(Story originally published at midnight.)

Allentown City Council Votes For More Oversight Over City Contracts

Allentown City Council has unanimously approved legislation that will give it final say over professional services contracts in excess of $40,000. The Morning Call's Paul Muschick has what I would agree is a "thorough" and "fair" account of the meeting. Because I was with my grandson, I missed the meeting. But good government activist Robert Trotner also has a running account of the standing-room only meeting, which I will excerpt below.

Joe Hilliard suggested we investigate a paranoid freakazoid out- of-control mayor. ...

Lou Hershman said he wanted an investigation of how much money city is spending on Pawlowski's defence because the city can't afford it. He also wants a city council investigation of the mayor's pay to play. ... He also said from his experience the city had spent at least $600 on no bid, probable illegal contracts and that the council should hire a forensic analyst to discover all the fraud. ...

One person praised the mayor and said there was no proof yet that he was guilty. ...

Kristian Andersen spoke about how the case of Mr. Ochse and how if the police just practiced a little love everything would be better. ...

Rich Fegley stated the need for investigation because of the disgrace that has happened in our city and no one on council speaks up fir ethics. ...

[Jeanette] Eichenwald says we have the right to call ethics committee against the mayor as well as an investigation into his corruption. She will talk to the solicitor this week to discuss options. The crowd erupted in applause. ...

Despite Federal Prosecution, Allentown's Contract Review Bill to Collect Dust

Jeanette Eichenwald and Julio Guridy want more
oversight over city contracts. 

The spirit is willing, but the body is weak. Even when I am fit, I suffer from sciatica now and then, and this has been a bad week. So I missed out on Glenn Geissinger's Congressional kickoff on Tuesday at Big Daddy's, one of my favorite restaurants. And last night, I bailed on an Allentown City Council Committee that was supposed to look at a reform bill proposed by Allentown's very own Iron Lady, Jeanette Eichenwald. It would give Council more oversight over contracts. I wanted to be there, especially in the wake of a federal guilty plea yesterday afternoon that ties Allentown Mayor Edwin "Fed Ed" Pawlowski to a scheme to deprive the citizens of Allentown of their right to honest services. That should be a wake-up call to City Council. But amazingly, the City Council Committee is sending it forward with "no recommendation."

I like Robert Trotner's running Facebook account. It appears to be surprisingly objective, while maintaining the spontaneity of a person who was in the mix of things. The Morning Call's Emily Opilio has a report as well, and I'd recommend both.

Trotner's running account is as follows:

Joe Davis says he has a problem in that city council has to approve the contract rather than review it. He doesn't like that. Julio Guridy responds that one public hearing is all that would be needed unless there are outstanding issues. It is agreed that council will use as its criteria the 14 point procedure already in effect that Pawlowski was supposed to be following. Eichenwald says Parts E and F cover the point. Glazier says this procedure only covers purchase orders and Eichenwald says "purchase orders" is another term for contracts. Glazier agrees but says the bill only covers notice of purchase orders. He wants to clarify, but wants to dilute the scope of the bill with the suggested language. He also says he wants to amend the bill to say all purchase orders/contracts should be given automatically to council. Davis says we should be clear that negotiations before a contract should be private.

Glazier and Davis are concerned that if council rejects a contract everything has to be started from scratch and then we would miss a deadline and then penalty provisions would somehow apply. Eichenwald points out that if council denies a contract there would have to a sound reason. Also if the administration knows they will be reviewed they will make a better effort than previously done and that in Bethlehem they say that because of this council has never had to reject a contract. Julio Guridy points out that in Easton, Mayor Salvatore J. Panto Jr. also says they have never had to reject a contract either. Glazier and Davis contend that this bill just adds an extra layer of unnecessary bureaucracy when it's clear the mayor follows all the rules already.

I think Guridy, Eichenwald and possibly O'Connell are for this but the other three are against it so far.

O'Connell speaks approvingly of parts of the measure. He thinks the threshold of $40,000 is too high but he's willing to accept it. Eichenwald says she wanted a lower figure too but wanted to make this acceptable to more of council.

Glazier asks Clerk how many contracts would be over $40,000. Clerk says this would cover about 3/4 of all contracts.

Guridy asks if there a women enterprise or small business enterprise special provisions now affecting contracts. Clerk says there is a point reward system now. Guridy wants the statute to give points for that. Glazier thinks we should stick to the text and not go too far afield (even though he wants to amend just about everything else).

Jeff Glazier just said this pay to play legislation does not negatively implicate the administration because he says the administration never abused the privilege. Jeanette Eichenwald vigorously objected and pointed to today's DOJ indictment. She asked Glazier how he could say that. Glazier answers by saying the law makes it easier to decide time sensitive decisions. Julio Guridy says there is a recognized procedure in the statute to prevent that.

Glazier ... says we need to hear from solicitor ... . He's trying to wait for solicitor's opinion to delay after its already been vetted by Bethlehem solicitor and we're the only third class city that doesn't have that.

Tom Hahn questions whether this hits pay to play. Eichenwald says bill 58 to be discussed next is the pay to play bill. Hahn asks, who didn't do their job that this became a problem. He's talking about the controller. Glazier says we just never did it for some unknown reason and that was before his time He says we have to wait fir investigation of the mayor to be done to know what to do. Eichenwald says the Incinerator consulting fee would never have been paid ($1 million).

Glazier says state law (I assume for state grants) requires that the time line between entering into a contract and starting work has to be within a certain time and requiring council approval might result in monetary fines by the state. I'm not sure but I think that's what this is all about.

Kristian Andersen says based on his work with a large forensic accounting firm shows that you need a third party consultant to tell the city how much you should pay before the contract is let. That saves time and money. Glazier and Eichenwald listened intently .

Rich Fegley is here, I just noticed, and will probably speak. Lou Hershman says the contract should come before the council as a resolution and Glazier says that's the way it works. He says since the administration wants the contract to be approved there may be an important negative element that may be hidden. Glazier says no more discussion. Davis recommends the bill be sent to council with no recommendation. This seems to be what Glazier anticipated before the meeting, this was his plan. He wants a full solicitor review and since there are Jewish holidays there will be a substantial delay in a solicitor review. Motion to advance with no recommendation passed unanimously by Davis, Guridy, and Glazier. The bill will be on next Wednesday's council meeting agenda. Eichenwald says she is upset by the delays and will give them one more chance but her patience is wearing thin. My question is why the bill was assigned to Glazier's finance committee and what this has to do with budget and finance.

Protest Planned Over Eichenwald Reform Delay

Robert Trotner is an attorney, Internet radio host and good government activist who was advocating campaign finance reform long before the feds visited Allentown. Upset by the news that City Council intends to delay a Jeanette Eichenwald bill to provide for more oversight over Allentown contracts, he has scheduled a protest outside City Hall on Wednesday, between 5 and 6 pm, ending just before a city council committee is scheduled to meet. "They had agreed to consider Bill 39 to stop the Pawlowski administration from continuing to hand out illegal crony contracts tonight but are now reneging. Council needs to be accountable as the People's Bulwark against Pawlowski corruption."

Behind the Curtain, Allentown Burying Eichenwald Reform Measure

Robert Glazier, below the egg timer

Jeanette Eichenwald, who I like to call Allentown's very own Iron Lady, has opted against seeking a third term on City Council. But even in her last moments on Council, she is fighting hard for good government. She recently joined hands with Lehigh County Republican Vic Mazziotti to push a reform aimed at curbing pay-to-play. Prior to that, she proposed legislation that will give Council more oversight over how contracts are awarded. Though Julio Guridy has seconded the measure, Council members are trying to kill it in committee.

After its formal introduction last week, Eichenwald's reform was forwarded to Jeff Glazier's Budget and Finance Committee. But he refuses to conduct a hearing. This is completely contrary to what happens after a bill is introduced and seconded. Here's the run down, as it appears in an email chain that is public record.

Eichenwald to Clerk Mike Hanlon: "Did you forget to include in the Budget and Finance Agenda a discussion of the legislation to amend the manner in which service contracts are awarded introduced by Jeanette Eichenwald and Julio Guridy?"

Hanlon to Eichenwald: "Jeff did not want it on this agenda."

Allentown's Iron Lady

Eichenwald To President Ray O'Connell and Council: "Ray, The fact that Jeff Glazier has unilaterally decided that the contract bill is not on the Budget and Finance Committee agenda is absolutely disgusting and a disservice to the citizens of Allentown. It is customary procedure that once a legislation is seconded and assigned to committee, that legislation is placed on the committee agenda for the next meeting which in this case is August 26th. Jeff certainly has the right to vote against this legislation, but he does not have the right to stifle discussion on it. If Jeff does not want this legislation to be on the agenda of his committee, then Ray, as the president of the city council, has the right to assign it to a different committee.

Ray, as president of city council I expect you to enforce the customary procedure and avoid the need of my going to the public.

O'Connell to Eichenwald: "Jeff is the chairperson of Budget and Finance and has asked that it be not on this agenda due to the fact that he wants to form an ad hoc committee made up of council members and community members to do research on the topic and look at how other places handle this topic. With that being stated I support his decision and it will get on the council agenda in the VERY near future. I would respectfully ask that you support this endeavor.This is very important legislation going forth. Thank you.

Eichenwald to O'Connell and Council: "Here we go again. The plan that you and Jeff put forward is a delay tactic. The motion will be delayed again and again with the excuse that the Budget and Finance Committee is too busy reviewing next year's budget. Nothing that you have proposed obviates the fact that the legislation should be included in this month's agenda. You either want city council to have greater input in the awarding of contracts or you wish to continue the procedure that has led to an FBI investigation placing a dark cloud over the city. I and the citizens of Allentown will not be silenced by this disgusting ploy. There is absolutely no reason not to begin the discussion on this important issue NOW!! You can vote against the motion; you can create myriad ad hoc committees to discuss and research the motion; you can even hire consultants to study the motion, but it must be introduced NOW!!

Updated 1:10 pm: O'Connell denies desire to let bill die. His exact words: "There is no way shape or form that I want to kill this bill. This bill is certainly needed in Allentown.Jeff Glazier is the chair of Budget and Finance and asked me and others on the committee that he wants to form an ad hoc committee made up of council members and community members to get more insight and input concerning the bill. He would be looking at other cities,municipalities to gain the best practices available.

"I support that decision. I will not let this drag on for a long time. I would surely like to see something introduced and
voted on no later than the end of September. This is too important of legislation to rush it.

"Thank you for listening.'

Pat Breslin, Mr. Transparency?

Township officials usually aren't heard on talk radio, especially wingnut radio like WAEB. But Pat Breslin shared a cup of tea with fellow conservative Bobby Gunther Walsh recently. He was on the air to complain that Commissioners meet secretly behind closed doors. He claims to be all about transparency, but that's nonsense. He's raising his visibility because he wants to take on Matt Cartwright in the next Congressional race.

Breslin started by  claiming he had won his election for Township Commissioner with a 70% mandate. The truth? He received 365 votes of 907 cast in that race. The others went to Democrat Ray Russin (203) and write-in Paul Weiss (339). That gave Breslin a plurality of just 40.24%, far from the 70% he falsely asserted.

After falsely taking credit for a 70% mandate he never had, Breslin went on to claim that Bethlehem Township is the largest government in the County. This will be news to Northampton County and Bethlehem.

Although his real reason for being on Gunther is to start the kindling on a Congressional candidacy, the hot button issue he chose was transparency. "If you can't have transparency at the lowest form of government, you've got problems," he told Gunther. He complained that Bethlehem Township had 12 executive session in 2014, compared to an average of  five at twelve municipalities he surveyed.

For those of you who don't know, Pennsylvania's Sunshine Act requires that all meetings be held publicly, with limited exceptions for "executive sessions" on these specific matters: personnel, labor contracts, the purchase or lease of real estate; litigation or the possibility of litigation based on a readily identifiable complaint; and to discuss agency business that would lead to disclosure of confidential information including investigations of possible violations of law and quasi-judicial deliberation.

Breslin went on to claim that in Bethlehem Township's last three executive sessions, the Sunshine Act was skirted when Commissioners sought quotes from architects for work at the Community Center.

"People are really furious and upset," he told Gunther. "Any time a government entity gets behind closed doors, it's not a good thing."

I sue no hue and outcry on Monday night. But Jack Glagola brought it up. Breslin never said a word. He sat there, stone-faced, as Solicitor Jim Broughal explained Commissioners can meet in executive session with prospective architects. This is because doing so publicly would lead to the disclosure of confidential information and give others a leg up when it is their turn for an interview. Though I would prefer to see something like this done by the Request for Proposal Route (RFP) route, Broughal's legal reasoning seems sound.

As for Breslin's other point about there being too many executive sessions in Bethlehem Township compared to other municipalities, he's way off. I know this because I did my own survey last October, when the number in Bethlehem Township stood at eight. That compared pretty favorably to the 14 sessions in Palmer Township. Nazareth has at least 14 executive sessions in one meeting. Hanover only had five closed door sessions at that time last year. The one township that really surprised me was Lower Nazareth, which only had one meeting at that time last year.

Basically, there is nothing unusual about the number of executive sessions conducted in Bethlehem Township. This only becomes noticeable when Commissioners start their regular meeting late because they are delayed in the back room. If nothing else, this is extremely rude to the members of the public who are there.

But the Township stopped that practice late last year. It now manages to finish executive sessions promptly.

In fact, at Monday night's meeting, resident Karen Berry publicly thanked Manager Melissa Shafer for getting all the resolutions and ordinances to be considered at a meeting and posting them online for public inspection before the meeting.

So the Township is a bit like Chief Inspector Charles Dreyfus in those Pink Panther movies. "Every day and in every way, I am getting better, and better."

But like Dreyfus, the Township had a setback when it voted on officially recognizing the Bulldogs as one of their sports organization without letting Barry Roth tell them, for the gazillionth time, that they're full of shit. Roth should have been allowed to speak, and may have had something to say that could have impacted the vote.

Breslin, who was all too willing to complain about transparency on talk radio, also condemned those executive sessions in a letter to the editor, although he changed his facts. But when Roth was muzzled and Glagola asked questions, Mr. Transparency just sat there.

If Breslin really believes in transparency, he could start by telling us all where he really lives and what he really does. Does he really live in the place he rents?

Bethlehem Tp Comm'rs to Let the Public Speak

At their April 20 meeting, Bethlehem Township Commissioners unanimously decided against enacting a public comment policy that would have limited the right to speak to a five-minute time limit. It would also have restricted the public soapbox, called courtesy of the floor, to the beginning of a meeting or during a public hearing.

The public right to speak during municipal meetings is guaranteed by Pennsylvania's Sunshine Act, which is designed to make local government more transparent. That law specifically provides that open meetings are "vital to the enhancement and proper functioning of the democratic process." As stated by Judge Damon Keith, "Democracy dies behind closed doors."

Though the public has the right to speak, numerous boards throughout the Lehigh Valley impose time limits on speakers in order to keep meetings moving. Bethlehem Township Commissioners tabled a discussion on this limitation in September, but resurrected the issue recently after two meetings in which PennEast Pipeline opponents, most of them nonresidents, made lengthy and redundant presentations.

After a meeting in which ten residents spoke, Commissioners again decided to table the adoption of any public comment policy. It is a topic that was recently brought up at a debate.

"This is where we get our frustration out on you!" joked Martin Comer, himself a former Commissioner and a regular at every meeting. His thoughts were echoed by Bill Berry, another former Commissioner. "There's an issue of transparency in the Township," he warned. He added that, as a regular at meetings, he's seen no reason for a formal policy.

Micahel Hudak, a proponent of the policy, agreed with other Commissioners to table the matter, especially with an election less than a month away. But he defended the policy as a "fire extinguisher" that the President of the Board would invoke only when needed.

"Nobody's trying to stifle anybody," he assured everyone.

Tom Nolan, who previously spoke out against a formal public comment policy, stated it would "have more than a negative impact on our meetings."

No More Fireside Chats With Brown

I stopped attending what Northampton County Executive John Brown calls "media events" after he decided to post armed guards at one of them. Late yesterday afternoon, he announced that he's dropping his Thursday meetings with the press, which is likely because everyone else has stopped going, too. posting armed guards at them. Now he didn't make the announcement himself. He's too important. He used his Executive Secretary. A few minutes later, she sent an email instructing  reporters that if they wish an audience, they must go through his public relations consultant, Kim Plyler.

My response to his Executive Secretary? "If I have a question for Brown or anyone else, I intend to ask them directly. I respectfully suggest that Brown has no right to instruct me on how to pose questions. He is simply muzzling free inquiry, as he did his first year in office."

If Jeb Bush Can Release His Emails, Why Not John Brown?

Jeb Bush, widely believed to have the inside track to the GOP Presidential nomination, has recently released a treasure trove of hundreds of thousands of emails during his time as Florida Governor. Believe it or not, the released emails paint a flattering picture. So why can't Northampton County Executive John Brown do that as well?. Here's an email I sent to him.

Dear Mr. Brown, With the exception of personnel matters and legal issues, Jeb Bush has decided to release his email correspondence during his tenure as Florida Governor. I am asking you to do the same thing. In your first year, you established yourself as secretive and remote. If that perception is inaccurate, disclosure of your emails can only help you. So why not release them all? This is not a formal Right-to-Know request, but an appeal for transparent government.  

C3 Brags to Other Counties on Health Care Cost Savings in NorCo

Cost control consultant C3, which signed a confidentiality agreement with Northampton County, is nonetheless tooting its horn in emails to other counties. It has actively solicited business in Lehigh County, and in a letter to the County Commissioners Association of Pa (CCAP), has made this claim concerning the health care reductions imposed by Executive John Brown.

Principal Christopher L. Rothwell brags that "our group health benefits division was recently engaged to help Northampton County comply with the ACA and control health benefits costs. The results are a health benefits solution that meets the needs of employees, complies with the ACA and the Cadillac Tax, and most notably, another seven-figure savings to the County."

In the meantime,the County has refused to release any of its own email exchanges with C3, under which the supposed savings could be examined.

NorCo Records Denial Appealed

On Friday, at 4:58 pm, Northampton County's Open Records Officer Daniel O'Donnell denied a request for emails between the County's cost control consultant and County employees I appealed that decision today.

The C3 Group, a Scranton-area based cost consulting company, is the company that made the recommendations to reduce health care coverage. Its employees sat in in several meetings with employees to discuss these changes. In response to questions at one meeting to explain the changes, C3 employee Colin Healey told a worker, "Nobody subpoenaed you to work here."

Because it stretches credulity to suggest that no emails are discoverable, I have also asked for an in camera review.

Among the county's more goofy arguments is the claim that these emails are part of labor negotiations. That's just silly. This request concerns a reduction in the health care coverage imposed unilaterally by the Executive. Labor relations necessarily require the participation of management and labor. This never occurred. There have been no negotiations, collective bargaining or arbitration concerning these health plan reductions. This is why the health plan changes have been so unpopular. It was a decision made in a communication vacuum, with no transparency or willingness to talk with the very people being adversely affected. The public has a right to know what Brown and his consultants were saying behind closed doors, and the invocation of the labor relations exception here is pure nonsense.. The RTKL is "designed to promote access to official government information in order to prohibit secrets, scrutinize the actions of public officials and make public officials accountable for their actions.” Bowling v. Office of Open Records, 990 A.2d 813, 824 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2010), aff’d 75 A.3d 453 (Pa. 2013).

Under the County's interpretation, the Right-to-Know Law might as well be called the Right-Not-to-Know Law.

I could go on, from point to point, and I did in my legal argument. But I will spare you.

Had the county denied half or even 3/4 of the emails, I probably would walk away. But denying them all is throwing the gauntlet at transparency.

I am informed that a similar RTK request filed by the Controller has received the same short shrift.

What About That No-Bid Health Plan Consultant?

I told you in a previous story about the C3 Group, Cost Control Consultants. That's the firm that Executive John Brown hired to come up with a way to reduce health care costs. That was is by making County employees pay more out of their own pockets. Brown paid $58,000 of County money for that advice. This consultant essentially recommends that he balance the budget on the backs of the County worker. He has denied this, but that conclusion is inescapable.

On October 9, I filed a Right-to-Know request seeking the following:

1) All Contracts between Northampton County and C3 Group, LLC, from the time Executive John Brown was installed to the present.

2) All email correspondence between C3Group, LLC, representatives and andy [sic] employees of Northampton County during 2014.

The County held that request until October 15, at which time I was advised that it needed 30 additional days to respond, and that I'll get my answer by November 15, a Saturday.

This kind of delay is permitted under Pennsylvania's Right-to-Know Law. 

When I know, you'll know.

Secrecy May Help Business, But It's Bad In Government

Northampton County Executive John Brown tells everyone that he's a product of the corporate world, and that he's bringing what he learned there to County government. It's the old "Let's run government like a business" mantra. That has a lot of popular appeal because, as we all know, government is very inefficient. But instead of bringing government efficiency to Northampton County, he's brought the very worst corporate practices to government. In a word, it's secrecy.

A Brown media event consists of reading a statement
and then walking out, with armed guards to protect him. 

Thanks to whatever Brown brought in from the business world, Northampton County is in the worst shape it has been since the inception of the Home Rule Charter. Morale is a real crisis. He refuses to listen to employees who are upset at reduced medical benefits. He instead pours salt into a gaping wound, adding that there will be no raises and that other benefits are being rolled back. Department heads have been instructed not to speak to the press, and may have been told to stay away from other elected officials as well. Some employees have been instructed to stay away from Council meetings. Consultant contracts have been piece-mealed to avoid Council scrutiny. Elected officials were barred from attending a routine news conference a few weeks ago. Then Brown posted armed guards at a subsequent media event last week, not to protect him from a credible threat, but from the people's own representatives on County Council. His latest move, according to The Express Times, is to block email blasts that Controller Steve Barron sent to County employees last week. He has even removed a link that enables employees to report suspected fraud. .

Control freaks may do quite well in corporate America. But in government, they are called totalitarians.

I have obtained copies of Barron's emails, and they are published below, in two separate posts.

The Online Fraud Link

The first email makes workers aware of a new online fraud reporting tool, Employees can remain anonymous. This protects them from repercussions against whistle blowers. These tools are common in local government, and exist in numerous Pennsylvania counties. This email and the online fraud link were entirely appropriate and well within Barron's role as Controller.

Aside from Barron's own time, no taxpayer resources were used.

Barron received this email from the County's IT person, Al Jordan, who actually works for Xerox and not the County.

Mr. Barron,

At the request of the administration the link has been removed from the web page. If you wish to discuss this matter please contact Cathy Allen or John Brown.

Thank you,

Al

To date, neither Brown nor Allen has responded to a telephone call from Barron, asking them to explain what authority they have to interfere with the business of an independently elected official.

Barron's Friday Mass Email

Barron's second email to the workforce appears to be the result of the link removal. He assures workers that the online reporting tool still works, though it was removed from his web page. Then he goes on to discuss a personnel matter. In fact, it's the same one I discussed here on Friday. That's fine on a blog, but likely has no place in a Controller's email.

Barron also repeats his argument that OT is less frequent when positions are fully staffed. This matter was the subject of an audit, and relates directly to his function as Controller.

Brown blocked this email. In fact, Barron apparently can no longer use the county email to contact anyone other than employees within his own office.

Mr. Barron,

At the request of the administration you access to send email to distribution groups outside of your office is being removed.

Sincerely,

Albert B. Jordan Jr.
Account Manager
Americas Local Government
Xerox State & Local Solutions, Inc.

Brown's actions were improper. There is no question that, in removing the fraud link, Brown interfered with the actions of an independently elected official. He actively interfered in the Controller's job duties. As for the second email , Barron did get involved in matters unrelated to his function, Nevertheless, Brown has no right to interfere with an independently elected office.

If this is countenanced, it is only a matter of time before he begins to interfere with the District Attorney and the Courts.

I won't speak for the business world, but government operates best when it's transparent. You don't have that when you block communications by independently elected officials, or post armed guards outside of what you call media events. Over the years, I have at times been highly critical of Barron. But he is the Controller, not me or Brown. He has the right to run his office as he sees fit.

Brown has abused his power. .

As our own legislature has stated, "[S]ecrecy in public affairs undermines the faith of the public in government and the public's effectiveness in fulfilling its role in a democratic society."

I have posted the link to the online fraud reporting tool on my left sidebar.

The Sunshine Act and Executive Sessions

Yesterday, I groused about Bethlehem Township's penchant for meeting behind closed doors before meetings. These secret meetings are permitted under Pennsylvania's Sunshine Act and are called "executive sessions" The public can be excluded from discussions about (1) personnel (not the appointment of a vacancy on the Board); (2) collective bargaining; (3) the lease or purchase of real estate; (4) litigation concerning identifiable complaints; and (5) confidential information such as a criminal investigation or privileged medical data.

Any votes must be taken publicly.

I compared the eight executive sessions in Bethlehem Township this year to other municipalities. I learned that Palmer Township has had 14 executive sessions so far this year, almost twice as many as Bethlehem Township. But because these sessions are always conducted at the end of the meetings, it's not as rude to the public as when they are forced to wait.  

The same is true in Hanover Township. Their five executive sessions this year were conducted at the end of meetings, with a statement alerting the public that the will re-convene in public if official action needs to be taken.  

I did not bother with Nazareth. In my limited appearances there this year, they had executive sessions before, during and after the meeting. I think they fumigated the room when I left, too.

Lower Nazareth, which has been extremely busy this year with numerous contested developments, along with its threat to leave the Colonial Regional Police Department.  There have been over twenty meetings, far more than anywhere else. But I could only find one brief executive session about a topic that arose during a meeting. It's a good record of transparency.

It appears that all the municipalities make an effort to be open,and specify why they are going in the back room. But it's best to have those meetings after all other business has concluded.