Cross-filed Nazareth School Board Candidates Seek Judicial Relief Over Machine Ballot in NorCo

Last week, I told you that the machine ballot in the Nazareth Area School Board race is flawed because it actually penalizes a cross-filed candidate who has the nomination of both parties. I have since learned that this problem exists in multiple school board elections. On Friday, Linda Stubits and Wendy Whiteash, who crossfiled as Republicans and Democrats and secured the nomination of both parties, have sought changes to Northampton County's ballot by appearing in Motions Court before President Judge Craig Dally. They are listed on the Democratic side of the ballot but not on the Republican side. Both acted without lawyers, but the court conducted a two-hour hearing after making sure the county was present. When he rules on this matter, I hope to let you know.

To explain this county-wide situation a bit more clearly, let me stick for now with the three candidates in Nazareth. You can vote for two. Christine Stofko is running as a Democrat. Kathryn Roberts is running as a Republican. Linda Stubits cross-filed and is running as both a Democrat and Republican. 

This is what appears on the sample ballot. 

Stubits is listed on the Democratic side of the ballot, as she should be. But the county has refused to list her on the Republican side of the ballot, where she also belongs.

Let's say you're a hard-core Republican and will only vote for someone you know is a Republican. If you look at that ballot, you're only going to cast one vote, and it will be for Roberts. Stubits, who is also a Republican nominee, will miss out because she is listed on the Democratic side.

The county contends it is simply following the Election Code. It cites this provision: "Whenever any candidate shall receive more than one nomination for the same office, his name shall be printed once, and the names of each political party so nominating him shall be printed opposite the name of such candidate, arranged in the same order as candidates names are required to be arranged." (25 P.S. 2963d). 

Not that the statute provides that "the name shall be printed one," not "only once." Moreover, this provision needs to be read in conjunction with other provisions of the Election Code. It assumes that the ballot is in substantially the same form as mandated by the Election Code, which requires that the ballot should be organized by race, not party. (25 P.S. 2963a). In fact, it even provides an example of what the official ballot should look like. 

 

Northampton County's Mail-in Ballot (MIB) is arranged this way, The names of the political parties appear under the candidate, and are not opposite the name of the candidate, as required by the Code. The order in which the parties appear (Democratic/Republican) assumes that all the candidates are listed under the race together. There is no danger of voting twice for the same candidate. 

NorCo's machine ballot is completely different. For reasons that elude me, the machine ballot is arranged by party, not the specific race. Moreover, the machine ballot was never made available online for public inspection until weeks after the MIBs had been sent. Even more importantly, it was never sent for review and vote by the Elections Commission, which happens in Lehigh. This is yet another  mistake. Elections boards do find errors that can be corrected. My evil Republican brother, who serves on Lehigh's Board, tells me that members were sent copies of the proposed ballot, did find two errors, and then voted in public on approval of the corrected ballot. 

The assertion that the county has "always" arranged ballots under party is incorrect. One reader has sent me a copy of the 2017 machine ballot when he first ran for school board. He was listed under both the Democratic and Republican sides of the ballot. I would provide this example but am keeping his identity confidential.

This provision actually is one of the changes made under Act 77, adopted in 2019. I believe it has been misinterpreted by the county.    

County officials complain that if a cross-filed candidate like Stubits is listed on both sides of the ballot, she could get two votes. That is nonsense. The program underlying the sample ballot can be coded in a way that you can only vote once for the same candidate even if that candidate appears under both parties. 

I have reviewed the sample ballots for six counties. All of them appear precisely like NorCo's MIB. I have seen none prepared the way the county contends is correct, although I'm told the county did represent at the hearing that some counties follow the same practice as NorCo. 

Here's an example from Bucks. 

And another from Lackawanna. 

They arrange the ballot by race, not party. The ballot, as it appears on NorCo's voting machines, is simply wrong. 

Assuming that Stubits has standing and can show harm, she and other similarly situated candidates are entitled to relief. The Election Code specifically provides, "When it is shown by affidavit that mistake or omission has occurred in the printing of official ballots or ballot labels for any primary or election, the court of common pleas of the proper county, or any judge thereof, may, upon the application of any qualified elector of the county, require the county board of elections to correct the mistake or omission, or to show cause why they should not do so."

The way the ballot has been prepared is actually contrary to the dictates of the Election Code. Moreover, it violates a provision in the Pa Constitution stating they must be "free and equal." The ballot being used in NorCo actually penalizes a candidate for having the nomination of both parties.

There is, however, a logistical problem. There is no way that the county can fix this error and perform the necessary logic and accuracy testing on the machines before election day. So I doubt this can be addressed until after the election.  I would hope that happens, and the sooner the better. There is no doubt in my mind that a cross-filed candidate who appears only under one of the political parties is going to suffer.

Following the Money - NorCo Council GOP Candidates Campo and Martinez Raise $23,485

Of the five Republicans seeking seats on NorCo Council, Dan Campo and Juan Martinez are immigrants who would bring diversity to the county's governing body. Campo is a commercial pilot while Martinez is a successful businessman whose Don Juan Tex Mex restaurant chain is very popular. Neither has ever run for office, but both have done quite well in raising money in their bids to win. 

Campo (you can see his report here) started in June with $1,090.40, and raised $15,285.00 through October 20. This gave him a total warchest of $16,375.40. He's spent $12,223.36, leaving him with $2,607.86 for the closing days of the campaign.

Like his Republican running mate Sam Elias, Camp has a great deal of grass roots support. He received $2,860 in small contributions ($50 to $250) from 23 individual donors. 

But Campo also had three large donors. The Greater LV Ass'n of Realtors kicked in $3,500, and Flexicon's David Gill donated $2,000. But his biggest contributor was Richard Picut for $5,000. Picut 's company does industrial machinery, so he's not looking for a county handout. 

Martinez (you can see his report here) started in June with $3,877.90, and raised $8,200 through October 20. This gave him a total treasury of $12,077.09, of which he spent $9,715.52. This leas him with $2,362.38 for the closing days of the race. 

Martinez had only 8 small donors ($50-250), for they include former congressional candidate Maria Montero, Lou Pektor and Att'y Blake Marles.

His large contributors include Greater LV Ass'n of Realtors ($3,500), retired attorney Charles Baltic III ($1,000), Mathew Pezon ($1,000) who runs a home-buying business and several restauranteurs. 

He took a $400 in-kind contribution for some kind of cigar party. 

Finally, he lent his campaign $1,000. 

Both of these candidates have compelling life stories, the kind that would appeal to Democrats. But it appears that no effort was made to reach out to Democrats. 

NorCo Council Footing Bill For Centenarian Lunch?

Earlier this week, I told you that NorCo's annual lunch for centenarians has been rescheduled for November 10. That lunch had been scheduled to take place at Green Pond Country Club, but Executive Lamont McClure postponed it as a result of the state budget impasse. There's still no resolution on that front, so who's footing the bill. 

A few weeks ago, Council President Lori Vargo Heffner suggested that Council's contingency funds could be used. Next week, County Council will consider and vote on a resolution to pay the tab.  

UPDATED :Yet Another Mistake in Nazareth School Board Race

In the story above, I have told you how the county has screwed up the mail-in ballots (MIBs) in the District Two race for Easton City Council. Unfortunately, the errors continue for in-person voters in the Nazareth Area School Board races. 

In that race, the MIBs seem fine. I have one myself. But based on the sample ballot for in-person precinct voting, Linda Stubits is being hung out to dry. 

Sample ballots never appeared on the election website until after MIBs had gone out. It appears to have been an afterthought. 

In the Nazareth Area School Board race, there are three candidates in Nazareth. You can vote for two. Christine Stofko is running as a Democrat. Kathryn Roberts is running as a Republican. Linda Stubits cross-filed and is running as both a Democrat and Republican. 

Yet this is what appears on the sample ballot.

Stubits is listed on the Democratic side of the ballot, as she should be. But the county has thus far refused to list her on the Republican side of the ballot, where she also belongs.

Let's say you're a hard-core Republican and will only vote for someone you know is a Republican. If you look at that ballot, you're only going to cast one vote, and it will be for Roberts. Stubits, who is also a Republican nominee, will miss out because she is listed on the Democratic side.

This is far from the "legal, fair and accurate" election that Executive Lamont McClure promises. It essentially guarantees that Stubits, who incidentally is a Republican, will be deprived of GOP votes that would otherwise go her way. 

County officials have told me they would send an explanation for this ballot, but at the time of publication, I don't have it.  

In a comment, a reader tells me the county is merely following the law.

"It's not a mistake. That's the law in Pennsylvania. Cross filed candidates are only ever listed once on the ballot, on the left hand side, with both parties by their name. In this case it's under the Democratic side because The Governor is a Democrat. If the Governor was a Republican, they would be listed under the Republicans side even if they were a Democrat.

This has always been the case and it is the case in all cross filed races in the county. See also Bangor, Pen Argyl, Forks (EASD), Saucon Valley, etc. They are all this way and this is not a mistake.

Article X of the PA voting code speaks to ballots and has this to say:

"(d) Whenever any candidate shall receive more than one nomination for the same office, his name shall be printed once, and the names of each political party so nominating him shall be printed opposite the name of such candidate, arranged in the same order as candidates names are required to be arranged."

That's not how the ballot appears. The names of the political parties appear under the candidate, and are not opposite the name of the candidate, as required by the Code. The order in which the parties appear (Democratic/Republican) assumes that all the candidates are listed under the race together, which is exactly how it appears on the MIB. The ballot itself is a mistake because of its design. It lists the cross filed candidate's name under only one of the parties. It needs to be there twice to correct the wrong impression that a candidate is running. If the ballot was designed precisely the way it was done in the MIB, there would be no problem.  

This is the exact opposite of "legal, fair and accurate."

Updated 10:10 am.

The county has responded to concerns raised by Stubits. I believe the voting machine can be configured in a way that ensures you may only cast one vote for a candidate who has cross-filed, as I have seen in other races. So I completely disagree with the county's reasoning, but wish to share what the county solicitor's office has to say:

I have received your letter regarding your ballot placement on the 2025 General Election Ballot. It is my understanding that you cross-filed during the primary election and were nominated by both the Democratic and the Republican party as a candidate for Nazareth Area School Board.

In compliance with email guidance received from the Pennsylvania Department of State and the Pennsylvania Election code, specifically 25 P.S. § 2963(d), candidates nominated for the same office by more than one party are printed on the ballot only once along with the names of each party by which the candidate was nominated. The candidates’ names are arranged in the same order as all other candidates’ names are otherwise required to be arranged.

This year, because the last gubernatorial election was won by a Democrat cross- filed candidates are listed with other Democrats in order by number of votes received in the Democratic primary. If a Republican was governor, cross-filed candidates would be listed with other Republicans in order by number of votes received in the Republican primary.

According to the Pennsylvania Department of State, “Ballot Position for Cross- Filed Candidates – Because the Democratic Party has acquired ‘ballot preference’ as a result of the 2022 gubernatorial election, a candidate who has won both political party nominations is listed on the official ballot according to the position he/she obtained at the Democratic Party primary.” According to 25 P.S. § 2963 (d), “whenever any candidate shall receive more than one nomination for the same office, his name shall be printed once, and the names of each political party so nominating him shall be printed opposite the name of such candidate, arranged in the same order as candidates’ names are required to be arranged.”

Listing the name only once is especially important in races, such as school board, that allow voters to vote for more than one candidate. If the same name appeared more than once on such a ballot, it would create the opportunity for a voter to vote more than once for a single candidate which is not allowed. If you have any further concerns, do not hesitate to reach out. If you have questions, I suggest that you consult an attorney.

UPDATED: Following the Money - Sam Elias Has More Grassroots Support than Anyone in NorCo Races

I've written about the campaign finances of the five Democrats running for NorCo Council. Five Republicans are in the hunt, too. What about their campaign finance reports? I'll start with Sam Elias, a Bethlehem police officer seeking office for the first time. His job alone makes him popular. So does his Lebanese heritage. There are only about 700 Lebanese families in the county, but they are very vocal and very persuasive.  Sam's report (you can see it here) reveals that he's raised more money, not counting in-kinds, than any of the other County Council candidates. Moreover, he's received more of the smaller ($250 or less) donations than any of the candidates running, including Tara Zrinski. Does this mean he's going to win? No, but it is a very positive sign.

According to his report, Elias started with $2432.52 in June and raised $17,775.00 through June 20, giving him a total warchest of $20,207.52. He's kept $12,164.26 for the final push, which makes sense because many Republicans and independents wait to vote until election day. 

He received $2,000 in donations of $50 or less, and $9,825 in 73 individual contributions of $250 or less. That's two more than Tara Zrinski, who's leading the charge for county Dems as the Exec candidate. 

Elias was the top vote getter in the Republican primary, and I think it is highly likely he wins a seat on Council.  

Updated 9:35 am: In my original version, I reported some large contributions that actually went to another candidate, not Elias. He actually rejected a contribution from the realtors because of their affiliation with and endorsement of Josh Siegel, whose anti-police rhetoric was a staple of his agenda as a member of Allentown City Council. 

NorCo Screws Up Third Election Since 2019

ther

On Friday, I told you that it was very possible that the wrong Mail-in-Ballots (MIB) were being sent to voters in Easton City Council's District 2 race. The two candidates for Easton City Council are Sharbel Koorie and Julie Zando-Dennis.   But one voter told Koorie that the ballot he received was for the race in another district, where a candidate is running unopposed. Koorie called the elections office and was told that this was a one-off. An election worker just accidentally placed the wrong ballot in the envelope addressed to the voter in District 2. It was more than a one-off. 

As Julie Zando-Dennis observed yesterday on her Facebook page yesterday, at least 48 incorrect ballots have been mailed. Apparently, the elections office is calling or writing to voters to ask them to request a new MIB or is voiding the incorrect ballots. But how many voters will recognize these calls or letters as legitimate? 

There is no question that the election in Easton District 2 has been tainted. This error cannot be caught during the official canvass because the ballots themselves are separated from the envelopes once the envelopes are opened to assure voter privacy. 

This marks the third time since 2019 that NorCo has botched an election.  In 2019, the voting machine manufacturer failed to calibrate the machines. In 2023, the machines were improperly tested and elections officials failed to provide enough emergency paper ballots to voting precincts. Now the wrong MIB has been sent to voters. 

I personally think elections workers have been asked to do much. They are conducted a MIB election, a ballot-on-demand election and voting in person, They also have been tasked with opening and operating two satellite offices. They simply are being asked to do too much, and this is leading to problems. 

Unfortunately, the only remedy I see in District Two is a special election between Zando-Dennis and Koorie. Both candidates are very depressed at what has happened. But it is the voters who have been shortchanged. You have the right to an election that, as Lamont McClure says, is "legal, fair, and accurate." This is none of those things. 

Unfortunately, other raceswith cross-filed candidates have been compromised as well. In most cases, this makes no difference. But it does in Nazareth's School Board race. I will tell you about that in the post below.

NorCo GOP County Council Candidates Brown and Goffredo Decline to Raise Money

John Brown and John Paul Goffredo are two incumbents seeking re-election to NorCo Council. They've been to several campaign events and to the usual parades and festivals. So they've campaigned. Yet neither has raised any money through they could easily do so, choosing instead to let the other three candidates eat. Is this a mistake or genius? We'll find out on election day. 

Both are from the slate belt and Goffredo should easily win. He never hesitates to share his views. I am less sanguine about Brown, who tends to be stand-offish. 

An Easton City Council Race Now Officially Screwed up by Elections Office Errors

Last week, I told you that at least one mail-in ballot was mailed out by the elections office on the Easton City Council District 2 race between Julie Zando-Dennis and Sharbell Koorie. A voter in District 2 called Koorie after receiving a MIB for a City Council race in another district in which there is only one unopposed The elections office conceded the error and explained that an elections worker made the mistake of placing the wrong ballot in the envelope intended for a District 2 voter. They minimized the possibility that others have received the wrong ballot by saying they received no calls. Apparently, they were wrong. It was no one-off. It was a systemic failure by elections officials affecting dozens of voters.

This is what Julie Zando-Dennis, one of the candidates, posted on her Facebook page. 

District 2 Ballot Alert – What Voters Deserve to Know

As your Democratic candidate for Easton City Council – District 2, I want to share a critical update about a ballot error affecting our West Ward community.

On October 27, Northampton County officials publicly described the issue of a voter receiving the wrong mail-in ballot as a “one-off” incident. But when I followed up directly with the Election Office on October 28, I was told “a couple of dozen” ballots were affected. Today, October 29, that number has grown to 48 incorrect ballots.

This is not a one-off. Voters deserve clarity.

Affected ballots were labeled correctly for District 2 but contained the wrong candidates—specifically, a District 3 ballot listing Susan Hartranft-Bittinger, who is unopposed in that race.

If you received a mail-in ballot and it does not list both District 2 candidates—Julie Zando-Dennis (Democrat) and Sharbel Koorie (Republican)—please call the Northampton County Election Office immediately at 610-829-6500 to request the correct ballot.

Based on my campaign’s count, there are 132 Democratic mail-in voters in District 2. If Republican mail-in voters total roughly the same, that’s approximately 264 mail-in ballots overall. With 48 ballots affected, this error touches 18.18% of all mail-in ballots—a significant portion of our voting base.

It’s also important to note: Democrats are statistically more likely than Republicans to vote by mail, making this error especially concerning for Democratic representation in District 2.

I asked the Election Office how many of the 48 incorrect ballots were sent to registered Democrats or Republicans. They declined to provide that information, citing legal restrictions. I’ve formally requested the specific statute that prohibits disclosure of this data. Every vote matters. Every voter deserves accuracy. I will continue to advocate for transparency and accountability to ensure your voice is heard. Thank you for standing with me and for staying vigilant.

Both Julie and Sharbel have been let down by the elections office. More importantly, it is you the voter who has been let down. 

Sorry About the Technical Issues

For reasons still unclear to me, the postings today failed to load properly on mobile devices. I managed to fix the issue after some trial and effort, but in the process, some of your comments disappeared. I apologize. I like the interactivity of a blog and often learn things I would not otherwise know. 

Following the Money - NorCo Council Dem Candidates Fadem and Qayuum

Theresa Fadem (her report is here)  has done nothing. In June, she had $1,186.80 in her campaign fund. That's exactly what she has in her most recent report. She neither raised nor spent any money. Republicans couldn't have asked for a weaker candidate from Dems.

But they got one anyway. 

Nadeem Qayuum (his report is here) is worse. He's run for Magisterial District Judge ... and lost. He's run for Controller ... and lost. He's married to soon to be ex Easton City Council member Taiba Sultana, who has run for Mayor ... and lost ... and for State Rep. ... and lost. In her campaign for the state house, Qayuum circulated a petition on her behalf and obtained the forged signature of State Senator Lisa Boscola. His chief occupation is following his wife around to take pictures of her that she can then post on Facebook. He thinks the county can raise the minimum wage, but I'm uncertain whether he - like his wife - wants the country to establish diplomatic relations with Palestine. 

His campaign fund is called "Friends of Nadeem Qayuum," but it should be "Friend of Nadeem Qayuum. He only had one individual donate to his campaign other than himself. He claims to have raised $650 ($400 came from the Easton Area Democratic Committee) and is in debt for $850. 

Both Fadem and Qayuum are terrible candidates.

Following the Money - Lori Vargo Heffner on an Island

I've written many times about Lori Vargo Heffner (her report is here) over the years, both bad and good. She can be testy at times, as she certainly was when she told Executive Lamont McClure to "Shut Up!" at a recent County Council meeting. But she also has been a forceful voice for asserting Council's power as a co-equal branch of government. She has stood up against executive over-reach, which is something sorely needed in all levels of government. A healthy disdain for one-man rule was the basis of our Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation and Constitution.  She also taken a bipartisan approach to governing, which included voting for a Republican as Council VP. This apparently is a sacrilege to Council members like Kelly Keegan. And Lori has paid the price. She had no support from Lehigh Valley For All (who agree with us) during the primary, and trade unions run from her even though she supported their cherished responsible contractor ordinance. Many of the more partisan Dems like Keegan and Kraft have worked against her. So she's been on an island. But I have admired her courage in standing up for her beliefs. I really wish she and Lamont could sit down and talk. Life is too short for this kind of acrimony. I did not expect to see much in her campaign coffers, but she did better than I thought. 

She started with $1,412.45 and raised $6785.00 through October 20, giving her a grand total of $8,197.45. She did have 10 individual contributions of $250 or less. One of them came from Lisa Pektor, who with her father has an industrial development in Upper Mount Bethel. Vargo Heffner supported a LERTA (in which tax increases are phase in over 10 years) for that project based on assurances that it would lead to badly needed jobs in the Slate Belt. 

She accepted $500 from developer Nat Hyman, who spoke against a tax break for luxury apartments in Wilson Borough. 

She also accepted $1,000 from Nimita Kapoor Atiyeh, who also donated to Tara Zrinski. Nimita is married to Abe Atiyeh, who owns the work release facility leased to the county. 

She also accepted $1,000 from Blue Valley Holdings, LLC, a corporation apparently owned by natural foods importer Murat Guzel. I'm unsure whether a LLC contribution is considered a corporate contribution. If it is, it's illegal.

Although the trade unions have run from her, Vargo Heffner did get $500 from the PSEA. 

Now you may wonder if it's legal to accept donations from county vendors or those seeking something from the county. Unfortunately, it is both legal and common practice. Zrinski accepted money from Atiyeh and numerous county employees and hopeful county employees. Tom Giovanni took money, at least indirectly, from Lou Pektor. I have long suggested this needs to change, but it is far from the top of the list of issues that people consider important. Until the law changes, this practice will continue. 

Don't hate the playa', hate the game. 

Following the Money - NorCo Council Democrats Boulette and Holland Boosted BigTime By DemocracyFIRST PAC

Jason Boulette, a Wind Gap Borough Council member, and Dave Holland, a former Gracedale Administrator with a nursing background, are two of the five Democrats running for NorCo Council. Both have raised money and worked hard. But both have benefitted immensely from the largesse of a fairy godmother known as DemocracyFIRST. I have never before seen a PAC exert such influence in a county race before this cycle.

Jason Boulette (his report is here) raised a respectable $13,905 between June 10 and October 20, giving him a warchest of over $22,000. Not bad, but that pales when compared to the $57,709 in in-kind contributions he received from DemocracyFirst. This was spent on literature, paid door-to-door canvassers, rent, digital aids and mailers

It's a similar story with Dave Holland (his report is here). He raised a paltry $825 and appeared to be relying heavily on a $3,000 loan he made to himself until the fairy godmother- DemocracyFirst - showered his campaign with those in-kind donations. 

DemocracyFirst promoted Holland, Boulette and Zrinski. 

Boulette interestingly also received a $3,500 donation from the LV Ass'n of Realtors. It is highly unusual for that PAC to donate to a Democrat, although it also recently donated to Bethlehem Mayor Willie Reynolds. He also accepted $1,000 from outgoing Exec Lamont McClure. 

NorCo's Centenarian Lunch Rescheduled For November 10

A reader with a 100 yo mother has informed me that NorCo's annual luncheon for centenarians has been rescheduled for November 10, 11:30 am, at the Green Pond Country Club. This event had been postponed by Executive Lamont McClure, and he blamed it on the state budget impasse. This in turn led to widespread criticism. County Council President Lori Vargo Heffner suggested that Council could use their contingency fund. Republicans running for County Council offered to pay for it out of their own pockets. It is unclear to me who exactly is paying the small sum needed for this luncheon. 

UPDATED: Following the Money: Zrinski Outraises Giovanni 3 to 1 in NorCo Exec Race

Money may not be everything, but it sure helps if you're running for office. Based on the pre-election reports filed for NorCo Executive candidates Tara Zrinski (her report is here) and Tom Giovanni (his report is here), Tara Zrinski is well on her way to victory in November. In a county in which Democrats still maintain an edge in voter registration and in a race where the name "Trump" is nowhere to be found, she has outraised Tom Giovanni by a margin of 3 to 1, both in cash and in-kind contributions.

According to her report, Zrinski raised $93,687.00 between June 10 and October 20. She also received $64,698.14 in in-kind contributions, and I'm not talking about pizza pies. In contrast, Giovanni raised only $26,885.00 as well as $19,399.31 in in-kind contributions. 

Zrinski's report demonstrates a great deal of grass roots support. She received contributions of $9612.00 from 71 individual donors of $250 or less. Giovanni had far less grass roots support. His report shows only 32 contributions of $250 or less. 

Zrinski was also boosted by several large PAC contributions, the largest of which is IBEW ($15,000). She also received $10,000 from the Jane Fonda Climate PAC and $5,000 from Executive Lamont McClure's local campaign fund. 

Her largest individual contributor was Nimita Kapoor Atiyeh, wife of Abe Atiyeh. He owns the work release center in West Easton being leased by the county.

Zrinski benefitted immensely from in-kind contributions made by the Democracy First PAC. That group produced mailers, campaign literature, paid people to go door-to-door and even paid rent. 

Giovanni's largest PAC contributor was the Pa Future Fund ($5,000). His largest individual contribution came from Charles Baltic III ($1,500), a retired attorney who lives in Upper Mount Bethel and who has spoken out against satellite elections offices in Northampton County. His largest in-kind contribution is $17,000 from the state Republican party for both campaign literature and postage. He also reports $2,243 from a sign company called JES for banners. I believe that portion of his report is a bit misleading because it fails to explain who actually paid for these signs. I believe the person who did so was Lou Pektor and am pretty sue Tom told me that himself when we met to discuss his personal story. Tom supported a LERTA for his development in Upper Mount Bethel Tp.   

(Updated 7:34).

Federal Court Strikes Last Minute "Declaration" By NorCo's Former Custody Master

I've told you before about a federal (civil rights) lawsuit brought by Lisa Tresslar, who claims she was constructively fired as NorCo's custody master. In response to a motion to dismiss, District Court Judge John Gallagher found that there was merit in her claim that she was a victim of retaliation.  She had voiced concerns over new procedures in custody cases that would shield judges from hearing evidence of child abuse. Tresslar's contention is that the courts did this to insulate themselves from public rancor in the event that a child was abused after a custody order is entered. It was after she voiced her concerns that the courts basically stripped her of most of her duties, reducing her to a glorified clerk instead of a Harvard-educated attorney. The courts, however, maintain that they still wanted to hear this evidence, but only after listening to the parties. 

What ensued is something known as discovery, in which the parties to a lawsuit can explore the evidence from each side. In this case, that included 20 depositions and over 4,000 pages of documents. The parties then file what is known as a Motion for Summary Judgment, arguing that the uncontroverted facts establish they are entitled to win as a matter of law. In this case, both sides have filed motions for summary judgment, but Tresslar's is under seal because it contains sensitive information about specific cases.

In the motion for summary judgment filed by the courts, a number of legal claims like legislative immunity are raised. But what struck me most was the contention that Tresslar was biased in favor of Stanley Margle, a lawyer who has been implicated in two drug prosecutions and who once represented her. In addition to numerous text exchanges, the courts have documented text messages that show Tresslar providing legal advice or legal strategy to Margle as well as messages that disparage one of his opponents. 

Tresslar responded with a lengthy "Declaration" even though discovery had already been closed and motions for summary judgment had been filed. 

Yesterday, Judge Gallagher struck both Tresslar's Declaration as well as 20 paragraphs from another filing submitted by her.  He notes that motions to strike should be granted “'where the allegations have no possible relation to the controversy and may cause prejudice to one of the parties, or if the allegations confuse the issues in the case.' As this Court has previously recognized, Plaintiff is not permitted to present facts that are immaterial to her First Amendment Retaliation claim. Allowing Plaintiff to do so would confuse the issues in this case. Moreover, the Court finds that the prejudice at issue is substantial."

While this is no proof that Tresslar's lawsuit is on life support, it's certainly in trouble. 

I Welcome Immigrants But Not Taiba Sultana

At last week's meeting of Easton City Council, there was quite the argy-bargy over Council member Taiba Sultana's latest attempt to make immigrants feel at home in Easton. Her earlier attempt at an ordinance failed. Her latest effort - a nonbinding resolution - was tabled so that the language can be cleaned up

During the chaos that seems to follow her wherever she goes, Sultana accused Council member Frank Pintabone of raising questions "because immigrants can't vote for you and you want to make sure you have votes of all the racists, all the white people."

She's continued to bray away on her Facebook page at Pintabone, while weighing in about every five minutes about how bad it is in the US

She's entitled to her opinions. She can claim white people who disagree with her are racist. This is America. She can even criticize the way we responded to the 9-11 attack on Twin Towers, as she actually did on September 11, a day that most Americans remember as the worst thing to happen here since Pearl Harbor. 

Here's what she said.

"On this day 24 years ago, 2,977 people lost their lives. In their names, the U.S. launched a "War on Terror" that created terror by spending $8 trillion of public money, our taxes, killing more than 900,000 humans across Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Pakistan. We were told it was for justice; it was for oil, arms deals, and imperial control. Honoring the fallen means condemning the lies that sent so many more to their graves.

I SAID WHAT I SAID!!!"

She's certainly entitled to claim we are all about imperial control. But my question is - why is she here? If she hates the United States so much, why did she leave Pakistan and move here? Shouldn't she return there or to one of the many countries that endorses her hatred of the US?

I know there's a lot of xenophobia out there, but she herself is full of hate. 

She claims Easton, obtained by the Penns as a result of an admittedly shaky deal known as the walking purchase, is on Lenape land. If she believes that, why would she want to be a member of Easton City Council?

Have You Considered a Bullet Vote?

In the Northampton County Council election, there will be five winners and five losers on election day because voters can pick up to five candidates. This is where what is known as the bullet vote comes into play.

Bullet voting is a tactic used in multi-winner races. For example, on Northampton County Council, you may vote for up to five candidates. But let's say you really like one of them. If you vote for that person only, you have effectively given him (or her) five votes. 

In smaller areas like the county races, a bullet vote has much more impact. 

In this year's County Council race, a concerted effort by Democrats has been made to ensure the defeat of Council President Lori Vargo Heffner. Although she has supported Democratic causes like a responsible contractor ordinance and has advocated for continued human services and higher pay for county employees, she has differed with Executive Lamont McClure on issues like the voluntary employee health center. She has also been bipartisan, even to the point of voting for Republican John Goffredo as Council VP. 

In my view, that's no basis for voting her out. That's a basis for keeping her in office We benefit from different points of view in a democratic form of government.  

You might also consider a bullet for Dave Holland, a former Gracedale administrator, or Jason Boulette, who also takes a bipartisan approach and is even endorsed by some Republicans. 

Following the Money - NorCo Pre-Election Finance Reports Were Due Friday

Campaign finance reports for Northampton County candidates running in November's election were due Friday.  As of Sunday evening, none have been posted on the county's webpage. This is done by the elections office, Since it is already preparing for or conducting three elections (Mail-in Ballots, On-Demand Ballots and In-Person), a slight delay in getting these reports posted is understandable. But I wait to cast my vote until I see who is financing an election as well as how the money is spent. I hope to be able to start reporting on these reports on Tuesday. 

Are Wrong Mail-in Ballots Being Sent in Easton City Council Race?

I've been an ardent advocate of mail-in ballots (MIBs). They make it easier for people to vote and should increase turnout. They are a great convenience to those with mobility issues or many people who work two or three jobs to make ends meet. Though possible, I see no more fraud than exists in other forms of voting. But I presume that elections officials are actually sending the correct ballots. Unfortunately, in one Easton City Council race, it is certainly possible that the wrong ballots have been sent to several voters.

According to Sharbel Koorie, who is running for Easton City Council District 2, has been contacted by a voter in his district who received a MIB for a City Council race in another district. The elections office conceded the error and explained that an elections worker made the mistake of placing the wrong ballot in the envelope intended for a District 2 voter. They minimized the possibility that others have received the wrong ballot by saying they received no calls. 

Frankly, that does nothing to reassure me. Many voters in local races have little understanding of who is running in what district and would likely just assume everything is as it should be. In reality, this kind of error could very well disenfranchise several voters in that district race. It could hurt Koorie. It could also hurt his opponent, Julie Zando-Dennis, even more. She's a Democrat, and Democrats tend to like MIBs. 

There is no way of knowing for sure unless those ballots are segregated with the return envelopes and opened separately to ensure that the ballots are correct. It's questionable whether this can be done without violating Pa law providing that ballots are private.

Here's the email I received from Koorie: 

A voter in the 8th Ward East area of the City of Easton received a mail in a ballot with the correct envelope label but the wrong ballot for district 2. The ballot he received was for district 3 and had Susan Hartranft-Bittinger's name on it, not my name or my opponent's name. This was explained to me at the voters office as a human error. They told me the process of how they are mailed and received. They said that when they mail these out they do one ward at a time in a bin, they print the labels, adhere them to the envelopes and then stuff the coordinating ballots. Sometimes while doing this they said they could run out of ballots and the person would go back to the room and get more ballots. They believe someone grabbed the wrong ballot by accident and mailed it. My concern is we don't know how many people may have received the wrong ballot, this person's last name started with an "S" does that mean everyone after "S" received the wrong ballot or did they run out of ballots at the letter "L" and everyone after received the wrong ballot. They claim that if there were more people they would have already called by now.

I happened to see the woman who lives across the street from the person who received the wrong ballot and she claimed she voted for me already. I asked her if she remembered how many names were on the ballot for Easton city council she believed only one, I explained that was incorrect there should have been two, she followed up and said she can't remember 100% it was a week ago that she filled it out but believes it was one.

We are running in a small district which had around 365 votes in the primary and this fall we could have 6-700 votes total. A few wrong ballots could sway the election one way or another. This particular voter went to the county courthouse while I was there and they verified he received the wrong ballot and gave him a new ballot and yellow envelope. I just feel this is wrong. I have been knocking on doors for 12 weeks working hard to meet all the voters and was feeling real good about my chances of winning. I'm going to continue working hard until election day. Am I overreacting or could this be an issue.

I informed my opponent so that she was also aware. I also reached out to the Republican party officials to let them know as well. Should the county put something out on their site since they actually verified the wrong ballot was mailed just in case there are others? My number again is [redacted] if you have any questions. I know you have the pulse of the county and would know what should be done to make sure everything was fair.

I appreciate you reading this long rant.

Sincerely,

Sharbel Koorie candidate for Easton City Council representing District 2

NorCo Controller's Budget Proposed to Shrink From $987,800 to $816,500 in 2026

Northampton County Controller Tara Zrinski's budget for 2026 is $816,500, which is 17% below her $987,800 budget this year. She explained that she has eight staffers, a part-time solicitor and one vacancy.  

In response to a question posed by Council member Jeff Corpora, Zrinski conceded that she will be unable to fill that vacancy with the budget as proposed. She said she was told that the money for the vacant position might be available if "we need that staff member."