A 2023 Operational Assessment of Gracedale, Paid for By Taxpayers, Collected Dust for Three Years

Northampton County Council's Wednesday discussion with Continuum of Care Director Thomas Carson and Gracedale Administrator Michelle Morton included a detailed discussion of the 2023 Affinity operational assessment. at Gracedale. 

This report was ordered by a previous County Council over former Executive Lamont McClure's veto. Council thought it would be helpful to have some "outside lens" on Gracedale. Tara Zrinski, then a Council member, supported McClure's veto. 

This outside performance audit has pretty much been collecting dust since that time. After Michelle Morton was hired as Administrator in March 2025, it was never provided to her. She told County Council on November 9, 2025, that she had yet to see this report. When she testified before the Investigating Grand Jury on December 30, 2025, she still had failed to read it. 

Carson has. 

He told Council it produces a remarkably candid picture of the problems facing Gracedale. This raises questions about why many of the report's recommendations were not addressed sooner. Carson suggested Gracedale use the 2023 Affinity report as a blueprint and give current management time to implement its recommendations. He noted many of its findings and recommendations are the same issues he has been reporting to now County Executive Tara Zrinski.

Carson plans to meet with Gracedale's administration and nursing leadership and go through the Affinity report line by line to determine what needs to be done. "I'm not going to stand here before this committee and suggest everything is fine when the facts tell us otherwise," he declared. But he also stressed that Gracedale's problems are only a part of "the entire story." He has met employees who have devoted years and even decades to Gracedale and remain deeply committed to its residents.

Carson said employees want leadership that listens, communicates, holds people accountable and is present. His commitment to Council was straightforward: "I will tell you what I know, I will tell you what we are doing about it, and I will be accountable for the results."

Affinity findings that Gracedale had no referral tracking system, was poorly marketing itself and had no formal daily "standout" or shift-turnover meetings, have remained poorly addressed. But the most striking part of Carson's presentation involves employee morale.

The Affinity report said employees felt demoralized by negative media coverage and the frequent public discussion of Gracedale's problems. Carson said that finding remains relevant. He mentioned one employee had told him that she covers the Gracedale logo on her sweatshirt when leaving the facility because she is embarrassed to be identified with Gracedale.

WAGES AND AGENCY STAFFING

Affinity found that Gracedale's wages were noncompetitive. Three years later, that is still the case. Carson said some employees struggle to make ends meet, feel forgotten by the county, and many leave for higher-paying jobs. He described compensation as a "critical" problem.

Carson said the recent increase in nursing-supervisor pay was a step in the right direction and that paying all nursing staff more could result in the elimination of agency nursing. The Affinity report said Gracedale spent approximately $11.3 million on agency staffing in 2022. Now it's roughly twice that amount.

In one positive note, nine people were beginning new-hire orientation last week, the largest number Carson has seen since he arrived a few weeks ago. 

Only one is a nursing supervisor, but Carson "hopes" at least 90% of the supervisor positions are filled by the first quarter of 2027. 

WHY WAS THE 2023 REPORT SHELVED?

Council member Dave Holland asked Carson perhaps the most important question of the evening: Why was Council only discussing a taxpayer-funded 2023 report in October 2026 when it contained apparently relevant concerns?

Carson was unable to answer because he was not at Gracedale in 2023 and could only speculate that someone the report was unneeded.

AGENCY CONTRACT AND RATES

Council member Nadeem Qayyum had questions about the disparity between county and agency hourly rates.

Examples cited during the meeting included:

CNA: $17.88 county versus $36.40 agency.

LPN: $25.50 county versus $53.20 agency.

RN: $32.60 county versus $84 agency.

Morton acknowledged that agency rates are substantially higher.

THE CNA TRAINING PROGRAM WAS STOPPED BY DOH

Council member Lori Vargo Heffner asked what happened to a CNA training program that had once been used to recruit workers. Morton said originally that the program had been placed on hold because too many people were using it to obtain their CNA training and then leaving for jobs elsewhere. She later told the truth, admitting that the state DOH actually removed Gracedale's training certificate as a result of deficiencies, meaning the facility currently is unable to operate the CNA training program. 

Vargo Heffner asked whether Gracedale could require trainees to remain employed for a certain period or repay training costs if they leave. Morton said Pennsylvania law prevents the county from simply imposing such a requirement. She was asked to send the legal authority to Council's Solicitor for review. 

In effect, Gracedale was spending money and staff time training people who were not necessarily staying at Gracedale.

Morton also said Gracedale's population has changed. Whereas the facility had historically been more heavily geriatric, it now has many more residents with mental-health issues and associated behavioral challenges.

Management decided that staff-development resources would be better spent providing additional training to existing employees.

There was also a second problem: following an abuse incident last July, the Department of Health removed Gracedale's training certificate, meaning the facility currently cannot operate the CNA training program.

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS 

Though Carson appeared sincere, he was hesitant and neither he nor Administrator Micheelle Morton were able to answer fully at least seven substantive questions or information requests.

1. How many Gracedale employees are covered by union contracts?

2. How many union positions are filled and how many are vacant?

3. How many employees are outside the union?

4. The biggest unanswered question was posed by Council member Jason Bouletter. How many county-employed nurses are required to operate a 450-bed Gracedale without agency nurses? - Both Carson and Morton looked like deer caught in the headlights when asked a pretty important financial and resident care question.

5. What were the exact dates of the three new Department of Health citations?

6. When will the agency contract receive a formal audit, and what would that audit show?

7. Why were the recommendations in the 2023 Affinity report not fully implemented before 2026?

There were also several questions that initially received incomplete answers and required Council members to press for clarification, particularly concerning agency staffing, the formal shift-change meetings and the CNA training program.

THE BIGGER ISSUE

The testimony creates an interesting paradox.

Carson and Morton both essentially agreed that the Affinity report identified legitimate problems. They also agreed that many of those problems are still relevant. What's troubling is that several problems identified in 2023 — referral tracking, marketing, employee morale, communication, accountability and staffing — remain issues three years later.

And the biggest unanswered question may be the one Carson was asked directly: Why did a taxpayer-funded report identifying these problems in 2023 apparently sit without being fully implemented until the current administration began addressing them?

Carson's answer was essentially that he was employed elsewhere and hence was unable to explain what happened. Morton's explanation was that current management independently identified many of the same issues and has been working on them since she arrived.

That leaves an important accountability question for County Council: Who was responsible for implementing the Affinity recommendations between 2023 and the arrival of the current Gracedale leadership, and why were so many of them still outstanding three years later?

Two words. Lamont McClure. He bristled at the notion of an operational assessment and simply ignored it. 

(More to come on Monday). 

Gracedale Still Has No Protocol with Upper Nazareth Police for 911 Calls

 On June 23, 2025, repeated calls to 911 occurred when Octavia Robinson, an agency nurse who was suffering some sort of mental health breakdown, decided to perform an exorcism on a resident (E.B.) by assaulting her. In addition to sticking fingers down E.B.'s throat and stuffing clothes and towels into E.B's mouth, Robinson was seen pounding E.B.'s back and chest with her fist, screaming that there was a demon inside E.B. This assault continued for 30 minutes before police responded. She was seriously injured and died shortly after the assault though her death was unrelated to the assault. 

In the 14 months that have passed since this incident, the county has yet to establish an official protocol with police concerning 911 calls and what is or is not an emergency. My understanding is that when receiving a 911 call, the dispatcher will first contact Gracedale to determine whether there is a real emergency. But no formal policy has been established, even after residents made multiple calls to 911 about a mentally ill nurse who was allegedly assaulting a resident. On June 23, three calls had to be made before a nursing supervisor got off her ass to check out the complaint. Then it was she who placed the fourth call. 

It is this incident, and an obvious breakdown in communications between Gracedale and Upper Nazareth police, that led District Attorney Steve Baratta to commence a Grand Jury investigation. You would think that something that sparked a grand jury investigation might induce Gracedale and county administrators to establish a formal policy. According to Upper Nazareth Tp Police Chief William Cope, he has reached out several times and has written to the county but has been ignored. 

At Wednesday's Gracedale Oversight Committee hearing, Continuum of Care Director Tom Carson told Council member Jason Boulette that he asked for a meeting but has received no response. 

But he only asked for a meeting this week. ... 14 months after an assault in which a resident could easily have been killed. 

Boulette told Carson that Chief Cope requested a meeting in June and after the Grand Jury report, releases a statement saying that he had followed up on that letter and had requested a meeting. 

"I've been in contact with him," said Boulette. "I know he's been reaching out and trying to get a meeting."

I don't know about you, but I am simply astonished that Gracedale has made no effort to establish a formal 911 protocol.  Administrator Michelle Morton should have been on top of this as soon as it became clear that three 911 calls were made before a nursing supervisor decided to do her job.

This is clear mismanagement, and it has continued until now. 

Third Suicide at NorCo Jail

In late June, I told you that there had been two suicides at NorCo jail within the span of 10 days. Executive Tara Zrinski has acknowledged a third suicide on September 23. 

Pedro Santiago-Espinosa, age 38, was described in an obituary as a "free spirit" and a Liberty High grad.  But he also had an extensive criminal history.  He had just finished an arson trial on September 21 and was found guilty in February of indecent assault. He had been sentenced to 5 1/2 to 11 years in state prison on that charge but was in NorCo's jail for the arson case. 

Gracedale Had Two Serious Deficiencies in September and Failed to Notify NorCo Council

The long-awaited first-ever meeting of the Gracedale Oversight Committee was finally conducted yesterday afternoon. Though there are only four members, all of  NorCo Council, with the exception of Jeff Warren, were present. This heavy attendance is what'll happen when an Executive proposes a 43.5% tax hike and wants $12 million to go to Gracedale. 

Chair Kelly Keegan, who voted against establishing a Gracedale Oversight Committee, explained yesterday why she waited so long to call a meeting. She said she wanted to give Tom Carson, the newly appointed Director of the newly created Continuum of Care department, some time to familiarize himself with his new role. She said she'd take responsibility for the delay, and I can accept her reasoning after watching him yesterday. I'd say he even needs more time.

It was a very lengthy meeting and I will provide more detail in a separate post. But for now, I want to focus on two September inspections that resulted in G-level deficiencies — a classification described as involving actual harm to a resident. We'll learn more about them when the state Department of Health (DOH) posts its surveys. There was also a third, less serious, deficiency.

At a meeting in early February, Council member Dave Holland requested that County Council be immediately notified whenever DOH visits Gracedale because there is a 41-day lag between when a visit occurs and when it is posted online. He was assured that Council would be notified, but that never happened. 

Holland: "So you're telling me you had a survey on September 10 and there was a G?

Administrator Michelle Morton: "Correct."

Holland: "That's the first time this County Council is hearing that. Does anyone else have that information?"

Morton: "I believe that was sent in." 

Holland: "I'm telling you No. Whose responsibility is it to notify this Council when we have surveys because that did not happen? Anybody in the room? Anybody? Whose responsibility is it to do that?"

At this point, Executive Tara Zrinski said that function would have been up to the Human Services Director but now belongs to Carson. She apologized that she failed to make that duty clear to him.

This communication failure is significant because Gracedale remains on a Provisional II license. Pennsylvania records identify Gracedale as operating under that provisional status, following deficiencies that resulted in the downgrade.

As miffed as he was about the failure to notify Council of two serious deficiencies, Holland said the more serious issue was the new G-level deficiencies and what it could mean for Gracedale's provisional license. He had been encouraged that Gracedale might be moving toward getting out of provisional status, but that new G-level deficiencies could make that more difficult.

Zrinski acknowledged that losing the license was theoretically possible but argued that the latest incident was different from previous problems and that the appropriate response was to correct the problems rather than assume the facility would fail. "We are not going to lose this license," she flatly insisted. She said remained optimistic.

Council member Theresa Fadem was less optimistic. "I support optimism, but what's going to happen if we lose this license? Why are we being asked to fund another $12 million? I don't understand what is going on here. We're throwing money at a problem and we could just lose Gracedale. What is happening"

Zrinski rejected the notion that the county was simply "throwing $12 million" at Gracedale. She said the $12 million represents a budgeted county contribution based on what the county wants Gracedale to become, rather than what the facility looks like today.

She downplayed the G-level deficiencies saying "they are not as horrific as you think. We are not going to lose this license." She argued Gracedale only gets more attention because of a critical Grand Jury report. She also blamed agency nurses, claiming, "We need our eyes on people. That's how things like this happen."

Fadem remained unpersuaded. "How do we expect to attract more people to Gracedale when we keep doing the same thing over and over again and expect different results? Isn't that what somebody called the definition of insanity?"

Zrinski: "I do understand the definition of insanity." She then went on to say that other nursing homes have problems, too, referring to an incident at Moravian Hall Square. But Fadem noted that Gracedale, unlike Moravian Hall Square, is a publicly run facility. Zrinski then said she is putting out fires daily.

Council member Keegan, who is a nurse, told Zrinski that she would be sure to keep her eyes on patients with histories of problems. She said she wants to hear that every single employee is staring at the residents to ensure they don't fall, they don't choke or have other issues that can be prevented. Zrinski sarcastically suggested bubble wrap, but no one laughed "We want to hear that employees are taking extra care because this is serious," said Keegan.

Zrinski then got emotional. "Things can happen in a second. And when they do, you think, 'I should have been watching." And you blame yourself. You can't think that all of us sitting here today haven't thought, 'Damn it. We failed again.' because we do. That goes through our heads. And we're trying so hard. This is not easy."

She then returned to her seat.

This emotional exchange indicates that Gracedale's problems are beginning to take a toll on Zrinski, who does seem intent on keeping a poor administrator and unwilling to look into other publicly run nursing homes. 

The next Gracedale Oversight Committee will be December 2 at 4 pm.

I will report on other aspects of the meeting tomorrow.

Gracedale's Oversight Committee Will Finally Meet Today

Northampton County Council voted on July 2 to establish a Gracedale Oversight Committee. Over three months later, and after a critical Grand Jury Report, it will finally have its inaugural meeting today at 3:45 pm. It was scheduled during a non-meeting week and in the middle of the afternoon in what appears to be an attempt to discourage some Council members from attending.

The Committee is chaired by Council member Kelly Keegan, who voted against its formation. Council President Ken Kraft, who also voted against establishing this committee, is also a member. The other two members are Council members Dave Holland, who proposed this review panel, as well as Theresa Fadem. 

The Committee will first review a 2023 operational assessment that was ordered by a previous County Council over the objections of then Exec Lamont McClure. When Gracedale Administrator Michelle Morton appeared before County Council on November 6, she admitted that she had never read the report and appeared to be unaware of it. When she testified before an Investigating Grand Jury on 12/30/25, she still had failed to read it. 

The Committee is slated to receive a report from Tom Carson, the newly appointed Director of the newly established Continuum of Care. He has no experience in nursing home administration or nursing but said he would bring leadership and would speak to every employee at Gracedale. I'd like to know if he has. 

There will then be a discussion of "public image," which obviously is suffering as a result of both a critical Grand Jury Report as well as the numerous and serious deficiencies at the home since Michelle Morton became Administrator. Keegan likes to say she wants to hear about all the good things at the home. I'll be happy to report on objective findings like an upgrade in the Provisional II license or the removal of the abuse tag and a drop in the number of deficiencies. Unfortunately, the scuttlebutt is that the home has been cited with three new deficiencies within the past three weeks.  

Morton is slated to make her own presentation. I'd like her to explain how she is entitled to a one-step increase in salary when the home has been cited repeatedly since she's been there, and as recently as three weeks ago if the rumors are true.

I'd like to know why the DON, ADONs and assistant administrator are getting two-step raises in a home that is seriously challenged, especially when other career service workers are overlooked. This hardly restores morale. 

I'd like to know if a protocol has been established on handling 911 calls. I find it astonishing that, as of the date of the Grand Jury Report's publication, there still was no understanding on such an important public safety issue. Over 15 months have ensued since numerous 911 calls were made before Upper Nazareth police responded to a mentally ill nurse who was performing an exorcism. On at least two occasions, nurses said nothing was going on. Has a protocol been established? What is it? 

Recently, at Executive Tra Zrinski's request, County Council voted to establish significant payraises for 26 nursing supervisors ($52 an hour). Zrinski claimed that some agency nurses told her they would become county employees if this happened. How many agency nurses have become county employees? How many nursing supervisors have been hired since this increase? 

Gracedale needs $12 million from the county coffers in 2027. Previously, Administrator Michelle Morton and Human Services Director Sue Wandalowski assured Council that Gracedale would be only slightly over budget. What happened?  Before proposing a continuum of care, did Zrinski do a long-range plan about finances as well as the trend for seniors to age in place rather than be packed like sardines in a warehouse to await their deaths? 

How much should taxpayers have to spend to keep Gracedale operational? Sure, there's a moral obligation to care for the elderly, but that should include seniors on fixed incomes who are struggling to pay taxes. 

Congressional Candidate Bob Brooks Actually Received $30k in COVID Relief Funds and Falsely Denied Existence of Wiley Judgment

Late last week, I told you that The Free Beacon, an admittedly conservative website, posted a story suggesting that Bob Brooks, the Democratic nominee for the Pa. 07 Congressional seat held by Ryan Mackenzie, lied on his application for a $15,000 COVID relief grant. This was funded by the federal funds and administered by Northampton County as part of its attempt to help small businesses during the pandemic. 

Some of you downplayed the matter. "Where's the actual application?" asked one reader. "Produce the application or it's not true. Civil judgments did not preclude applicants from receiving COVID funds. There's no evidence of wrongdoing here."

Yesterday, NorCo GOP party chair Glenn Geissinger conducted a news conference outside the courthouse and brought the receipts. Due to a prior commitment, I was unable to attend. But Kevin Danyi, a prominent Bethlehem attorney, brought all the documents. 

Geissinger is asking both Northampton County DA Steve Baratta and US Attorney David Metcalf (Eastern District Pa.) to open investigations.

From Geissinger's letter, I have learned the following: 

1) Brooks actually sought and obtained two COVID relief grants for $15,000 in November 2020 and September 2021. He received $30,000 from a fund administered by Northampton County. 

2) Instructions included with both applications warned that false statements could result in criminal prosecution under federal law. Pennsylvania law also makes it a crime to make false statements to authorities. 

3) In the September 2021 application, Brooks was specifically asked, " Did you or anyone with an ownership interest in the business have any judgments against you?" Brooks answered "No."

4) At the time of this application, Brooks was a judgment debtor. In Wiley v. Brooks (2018-2005), a $130,386.36 judgment was entered against Brooks on November 19, 2020. That judgment was open of record, i.e. unpaid, at the time of his application. 

5) On both applications, Brooks was specifically asked, "Are you or anyone with an ownership interest in default on any loans or leases?" Brooks answered, "No."

6) In fact, two prior judgments were still open of record. One of these, Midland Funding v. Brooks (2012-8088) was originally entered for $4,005.26 and is open to this day. The other, FIA Card Services v. Brooks (2012-7769) was entered for $7,872.59 and was open until 2024. 

Facially, it appears that Brooks lied on both applications and deprived some worthy small business of funds it may have needed to survive. I say facially because the Midland Funding judgment may have been satisfied but is just open of record. But there is no question that Brooks lied when he denied the existence of the Wiley judgment.

In addition to seeking a criminal investigation for possible false statements. Geissinger wants federal and state authorities to look into the matters surrounding a possible fraudulent conveyance to avoid paying off the Wiley judgment. That matter, however, has since settled. 

Zrinski is Asking for More Than She Needs in Her 2027 Budget

On Friday morning, Northampton County Executive was late to her own news conference announcing her first proposed budget for next year. That was no inconvenience for me. Since the budget itself was yet to be posted online (that would only happen later in the day), I decided to skip it and just watch what she had to say during a rather disappointing Facebook Live, in which a jocular attitude, stray tangents and inappropriate laughter betrayed the gravity of the heavy burden she hopes to impose on property owners. She denied she was really late, saying, "Nothing happens without me." She proposed what amounts to a roughly 43.5% increase in property taxes, increasing the millage rate from 10.5 to about 15.6 mills.

A tax hike is more than overdue, if only to make working for the county a little more attractive for employees. Moreover, Zrinski knows that what she seeks will never be approved by County Council. I believe she intentionally inflated her demand so that County Council can claim victory when it trims her proposal to a more realistic tax hike of about 1.5- 2 mills. That may have been a smart play with County Council, but not with the public. I've seen calls to action on social media, calling on people to attend budget hearings and complain. 

Zrinski has attempted to justify what she calls an "honest budget" on her Substack page.  It is far from honest. She first tries to minimize it, noting it's only $24.19 a month for the average taxpayer. For some. already burdened by high school taxes, this could be the final nail. She then plays the woman card for some reason that should be completely irrelevant to this discussion. She also plays the blame game, accusing "past administrations" (former Exec. Lamont McClure) for putting her in this position. This may to some extent be accurate, but she was a willing participant as a member of County Council. She finally admits that it's only a "recommendation," meaning that it's more of a wish list than a truly honest budget.

Shortly after the budget became available, so did a very thorough, but anonymous, online analysis called WhoBuiltThisShit. Some think this came from the Zrinski administration in an attempt to throw McClure under the bus. I think the analysis actually makes both McClure and Zrinski look pretty bad, so I doubt it came from any of her supporters. It is possible that someone in Fiscal Affairs prepared this analysis, and we'll eventually learn who because the shelf life of a secret in NorCo is about 15 minutes. 

Zrinski is proposing a $44.5 million increase in property tax revenue, but more than half of this is to cover items that McClure left out of his final budget. A review of Zrinski’s proposed budget, her public statements, her County of Northampton Facebook Live presentation, her Substack writing, public reactions on social media and the independent analysis published at Who Built This Shit? suggests a more complicated picture. The county faces genuine financial pressures involving pensions, Gracedale, employee costs, overtime and its reliance on reserves. But the minimum amount necessary to address those problems should be far lower than what Zrinski seeks.

SPENDING INCREASES ABOUT 4%, BUT PROPERTY-TAX COLLECTIONS RISE MUCH MORE

The proposed 2027 budget totals approximately $566.9 million, compared with about $546.8 million in the 2026 amended budget. That represents an increase of approximately $20.1 million, or 4%. Property-tax collections, however, would increase by approximately $44.5 million, from roughly $99.5 million to $144 million. The difference is important.

It would be misleading to characterize the proposal as simply a $44.5 million spending increase. Some additional revenue would replace reserves and restore funding for obligations that were underfunded or deferred in the 2026 budget. But it would be just as misleading to focus exclusively on the $20.1 million increase in spending. Taxpayers are being asked to provide approximately $44.5 million in additional recurring property-tax revenue.

ZRINSKI HAS A LEGITIMATE ARGUMENT ABOUT THE 2026 BUDGET

One of Zrinski’s strongest arguments is that the 2026 budget did not fully reflect several expenses the county would ultimately have to confront. The independent Who Built This Shit? analysis found that the 2026 budget contained approximately $1.3 million for pensions, compared with approximately $8.2 million actually spent in 2025. The proposed 2027 budget contains approximately $12.2 million for pensions. The 2026 budget also contained no budgeted subsidy for Gracedale, even though the nursing home was expected to require approximately $3.9 million. The 2027 proposal includes approximately $12 million for Gracedale.The proposed budget also reduces reliance on fund balance by approximately $19.2 million. These figures support Zrinski’s contention that the county’s financial position cannot be evaluated simply by comparing the proposed 2027 budget with the 2026 budget.

Zrinski made similar arguments before becoming executive. During the debate over the 2026 budget, she criticized the practice of balancing a budget by failing to adequately fund programs and obligations. In that respect, her current proposal is consistent with warnings she made before she assumed office.

BUT THE NUMBERS DO NOT ESTABLISH THAT 15.5 MILLS IS THE ONLY ANSWER

The more difficult question is whether addressing those obligations requires the full proposed 4.7-mill increase. That seems doubtful. The independent analysis found that approximately $302.5 million of roughly $400.6 million in non-payroll expenditures—about 76%—is contained in broad or pooled categories These pooled categories make it difficult for taxpayers and County Council to determine whether savings are available. Tus is why I consider the budget dishonest or at least nontransparent.

Before approving any tax increase, Council should demand greater detail showing what is contained in the largest pooled accounts, who receives the money, whether expenditures are mandated and how much was actually spent in previous years. For major expenditures, the county should disclose vendors, contracts, purposes, prior-year spending, proposed spending and explanations for significant increases.

LIKE IT OR NOT, GRACEDALE REMAINS THE BIGGEST FINANCIAL AND POLICY QUESTION

Gracedale is at the center of the budget debate. In her Substack writing, Zrinski describes the county-owned nursing home as a public asset that provides accountability and a safety net for vulnerable residents. She has argued that the county should improve and preserve the facility rather than treat it simply as another expense. The proposed budget includes approximately $12 million for Gracedale. The independent analysis identifies that subsidy as an area requiring particular scrutiny. There are those who feel the cost of this facility, which is poorly managed, is simply too much.

Both positions can be valid. The fact that Gracedale requires taxpayer support is no justification, by itself, for selling the facility. But there still needs to be financial accountability. Zrinski has vowed to make Gracedale self-sustaining. When? How long will the county taxpayers be forced to support the facility, and at amounts that increase each year? When will the $12 million subsidy begin to decline, and when is it expected to reach zero? The administration should provide a five-year financial plan showing projected resident census, staffing costs, agency nursing costs, overtime, reimbursement rates, Medicare and Medicaid revenue, private-pay revenue and taxpayer subsidies. Without measurable benchmarks, self-sufficiency remains an objective rather than a demonstrated financial plan. I have long argued that the county needs to plan for this, especially as more and more seniors stay away from nursing homes.

OVERTIME DESERVES CLOSER EXAMINATION

The independent analysis found that the proposed countywide overtime budget is approximately $6.2 million, compared with actual overtime spending of approximately $8.3 million in 2025 and projected spending of approximately $8.9 million in 2026. At the county jail, approximately $2 million is budgeted for overtime despite spending of approximately $3.8 million. These figures raise a management question: Would hiring additional full-time employees cost less than continuing to pay large amounts of overtime? That question cannot be answered simply by claiming the county has too many or too few employees. A department like Corrections or Gracedale can have numerous authorized positions but substantial vacancies, forcing existing employees to work overtime. The county should publish authorized positions, filled positions, vacancies and overtime costs by department.

The same issue applies to salaries. The independent analysis found that 2026 salary expenditures were budgeted at approximately $99.9 million, while projected actual spending was approximately $96.4 million. This reflects vacant positions, meaning the county has a recruitment and retention problem.

WHAT THE INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS GETS RIGHT

The Who Built This Shit? analysis is valuable because it identifies questions the county should answer. Its strongest point is that the budget fails to provide enough detail for taxpayers to determine whether the proposed 15.5-mill rate is the minimum necessary. A $12 million Gracedale appropriation may be justified. A large overtime account may be justified. Major infrastructure projects and professional-services contracts may also be justified. But taxpayers should be able to determine why expenditures are necessary and whether less expensive alternatives exist.

WHAT COUNTY COUNCIL SHOULD DEMAND

Before adopting the budget, Council should require a detailed breakdown of the additional property-tax revenue, including: Pension obligations and required contributions; Gracedale’s operating subsidy and five-year financial outlook; Employee compensation and staffing costs; Jail and corrections expenses, including overtime; Infrastructure and capital projects; Professional-services contracts and other major vendors; transfers between funds and the amount needed to replace reserves; and New initiatives and other discretionary spending; Potential savings from filling vacancies, reducing overtime and renegotiating contracts.

There is definitely room to cut. I particularly dislike the $500,000 grants to New Bethany and Skyline Investments. While New Bethany might be able to justify a grant, Northampton County Council voted 6-3 against giving Skyline a tax break for luxury apartments in Wilson Borough. It appears that Zrinski is seeking to funnel some dough to this for-profit venture through the back door, and at a time when the county needs every penny it can get. 

LV Congressional Candidate Bob Brooks Allegedly Lied on COVID Grant Application

Bob Brooks is the Democratic nominee for the Pa. 07 Congressional seat held by Republican Ryan Mackenzie. He likes to portray himself as an Everyman although he's a bit closer to a con man. Although he's finally paid off his mother-in-law's $130,000 judgment, it now appears that he outright lied when he applied for a COVID grant through Northampton County in 2021.

During COVID, Northampton County was given $30 million in American Recovery Plan federal funds to spend on relief efforts. Then Executive Lamont McClure set up a find for small businesses hurt by the pandemic, enabling them to apply for up to $15,000. 

Brooks, who maintained a lawn care business, applied. The application form made clear that "knowingly making a false statement to obtain a grant" would violate federal criminal law and could result in a five-year sentence as well as a fine of up to $250,000.  

According to The Free Beacon, a conservative news outlet, Brooks lied on his application. To be specific, he denied having any judgments against him despite that $130,000 judgment. In addition, there were another two open judgments from credit card companies at the time he applied for this grant. 

Not only was Brooks awarded a COVID grant, but it was for the full $15,000.

Since the judgment from his mother-in-law was appealed to the Superior Court, it would be hard for him to plead ignorance.

Over 3,500 people have been prosecuted for COVID fraud nationwide. But Brooks thinks he should be elected to Congress

that matter was very much open when he applied for a COVID grant threough Northampton County

UPDATED: How Did LV Delegation Vote on House Bill Opening Up Primary Elections

The Pa/ State House voted on Tuesday to allow unaffiliated voters to vote in primary elections for candidates for public office. They would still be barred from voting for internal state party offices like committee members. The bill passed 115-88 and goes on to the state senate. 

How did members of the Lehigh Valley delegation vote?

Voting Yes were Bob Freeman (D - Pa. 136), Steve Samuelson (D - Pa. 135), Mike Schlossberg (D - Pa. 132), Pete Schweyer (D. Pa. 134), Ana Tiburcio (D - Pa. 22), and Joe Emrick (R - Pa.137)

Voting No were Ann Flood (R- Pa. 138), Milou Mackenzie (R - Pa. 131) and Zach Mako (R- Pa. 183) and Gary Day (R- Pa. 187)

Opening primaries is one way to assure that everyone has a say. Currently, 44% of voters nationwide consider themselves independents. It will also result in more moderate party nominees. 

Currently, 20 states have open primaries in which members of one party can choose to vote in another party's primary. Pennsylvania's proposed law would only allow unaffiliated voters to choose to vote as a Democrat or Republican. 

UPDATED 11:12 AM - In the original version, I had Gary Day as a Yes and was mistaken. 

Zrinski to Unveil NorCo's 2027 Budget on Friday

According to a news release, Executive Tara Zrinski plans to unveil her 2027 Budget from Northampton County on Friday, 10:30 am, at the Human Services Building, located at 2801 Emrick Blvd in Bethlehem Tp. It will be her first budget as county executive. A tax hike is all but guaranteed. 

Her proposed budget will go into effect even if it is rejected by County Council. They have the power to amend the budget but have no authority to interfere with revenue projections. 

The budget must be balanced.

Will she pay into the county's pension funds this year? Will she begin addressing the wage disparity that exists? Will she fund open space? 

Stay tuned. 

UPDATED: Mackenzie's Comms Director Edited Website With Racist Tropes

I've seen some of Arnaud Armstrong's comments as Communications Director for Congressman Ryan Mackenzie, who is facing a tough battle against blue headwinds that just may blow Democratic challenger Bob Brooks into office. Some have been downright bizarre, like his explanation when Mackenzie was accused of embellishing his career in the private sector. Rather than dismissing this DCCC story as clearly false, which it was, Armstrong gave it weight by saying that these were "passing mentions, mostly from third parties." But now a much uglier story has surfaced. During his days at UPitt, Armstrong was the "editor" of an online conservative leaning website called Polis Media that decided it would be fun 

Members of that website shared memes including jokes about statutory rape, the Holocaust, a young African-American boy looking at a piece of cotton candy and saying, 'You mean I don’t have to pick it and I can eat it?!'"

Armstrong gave the incredible explanation that they "were shared with facetious intent and certainly not reflective of the beliefs of those who shared them.” They were joking, so it's OK, right? He also called it an experiment to see "what the worst of the internet could produce."

He may find out soon when his boss loses a close election because of his (at-best) juvenile antics.

UPDATED 10:15 PM: The original version of this story indicated that Armstrong himself posted these tropes. That is inaccurate. He was part of the group chat and was the editor of this site. 

Zrinski's Campaign Funded in Part by County Employees and Vendors

We all know what happened in Allentown not all that long ago, when former Mayor Edwin "Fed Ed" Pawlowski was charged and eventually convicted of public corruption. For a brief time, it had a chilling effect on campaign contributions. But the Lehigh Valley's pay-to-play culture has gone on far too long to let a few federal bribery prosecutions get in the way. Pay-to-play is back, and with a vengeance. Candidates are spending more now than they ever have. 

Years ago, before I even started this blog, I used to be at nearly every county council meeting, asking them to curb the practice by enacting an ordinance that would bar anyone who contributed to a county elected official or candidate from county employment. I also would complain about county vendors who contribute to county candidates and asked for legislation that would bar them from doing business with that county or municipality for a limited period of time after the donation.

I was a real pain in the ass, unmindful of the simple reality that the more you harp on any topic at a public meeting, the less effective you become. I thought I was dazzling them with my oratory. I was boring them instead. 

Though I've stopped haranguing elected officials on this topic, I do remain concerned about county candidates who accept donations from county employees and vendors. 

Executive Tara Zrinski presents herself as a grass roots candidate and truly is. Over the years, her finance reports demonstrate that she has a solid base of small and local donors. But when she ran for Executive, she began accepting money from county workers whose further employment with the county would be in her hands. She also accepted donations from two county vendors. 

COUNTY EMPLOYEE DONATIONS

Below is a listing of county employees who donated to her 2025 Executive race 

• Lamont McClure — $15,000. McClure was Northampton County Executive and supported Zrinski as his successor. After the election, he was appointed a PT Assistant County Solicitor 

• Susan Wandalowski — at least $1,090. County Human Services Director.

• Melissa Rudas — at least $1,050. County solicitor.

• Michael Corriere — at least $750. Former county council member and assistant county solicitor.

• Michael Emili — at least $815. County Public Works director.

• Tina Smith — at least $550. County DCED director.

• Stephen Baratta — $500. Northampton County district attorney. (Ironically, Zrinski suggests Baratta had political motives for a Grand Jury report critical of Gracedale when he actually supported her campaign).

• Mary Lou Kaboly — $500. Former county human-resources director.

• Mark Aurand — at least $300. former deputy county controller and now, the county administrator.

• Richard Groff — $500. Now a county election commissioner.

A COUNTY ARCHITECT GIVES $2,000

One contribution has a particularly direct connection to county business. Randy Galiotto contributed $2,000 to Zrinski. He is a principal of Alloy5, the Bethlehem architectural firm selected by Northampton County as project architect for replacement of the Government Center parking deck.

County procurement records identify Alloy5 as the project architect. County Council approved approximately $463,000 in architectural services for the project, but it is important to note that Alloy5 was selected on June 18, 2025, six months before Zrinski was ever elected. but six months after Zrinski's election, County Council unanimously approved a $62,400 increase to Alloy5. 

A $10,000 CONTRIBUTION FROM THE FAMILY OF A COUNTY LANDLORD

Another notable contribution came from Nimita Kapoor-Atiyeh, who gave Zrinski $10,000. Kapoor-Atiyeh is the wife of Abe Atiyeh, a local real-estate developer who owns the West Easton work-release facility leased by Northampton County. Thus, a $10,000 personal campaign contribution came from the immediate family of the owner of property being leased by the county.

In addition to the work release center, an Atiyeh company (Ridge Ventures recently agreed to lease a property in Bethlehem Township to the county for a DUI center at a rent of $2,500 a month over a period of 10 years.

These records establish the contribution and the family/property relationship. There is no evidence, aside from the contribution itself, that the contribution was made in exchange for favorable treatment by the county or that the county's lease was affected by it.

These donations are completely legal. I have no reason to believe that Zrinski's decision-making is in any way impacted by those who gave her money, especially because she has a broad base of grass roots support and is actually at odds with a District Attorney who donated to her. But to remove any uncertainty, these types of contributions should be limited or outright banned. 

Why 6thTuesday Pre-Election Campaign Finance Reports Should Be Mandatory For All Elections in Pa.

Under current Pa. law, only statewide candidates must file 6th Tuesday pre-election reports, which cover the period between June 8 and September 22. Other nominees, including state house and senate candidates, can wait to detail their expenses until October 23, 2026, the 2d Friday before the actual election. This system worked when most people voted on election day. People could inform themselves in advance about who is financing electoral hopefuls.  That system no longer works. 

Changes in our election laws now permit Mail-in Ballots and Ballot by Demand well in advance of election day. Candidates have responded by intensifying their fundraising efforts much sooner than in previous campaigns. You can see this in your mailbox on a near daily basis. Those who wait to make their pitches risk losing a critical segment of voters who prefer the convenience and simplicity of MIBs and Ballot-by-Demand over standing in line at the polling place. 

The problem is that many who chose to exercise these voting alternatives have no idea who is funding the campaigns of the politicians they choose. They are unable to follow the money in any meaningful way. 

For that reason, the state legislature should change current campaign finance laws to make 6th Tuesday pre-election reports mandatory in all campaigns. 

NorCo Court Administrator Charged With Criminal Mischief After Domestic Dispute

Earlier this month, Lehigh Valley Live reported that Northampton County's Court Administrator Jermaine Greene has been the subject of a temporary Protection From Abuse Order (PFA) based on allegations by his wife that he soaked his wife's clothing in gasoline, broke her rib and threatened to kill her. 

It is important to note that a temporary PFA is based on allegations alone. Rightly or wrongly, I generally avoid writing about temporary PFAs unless they are accompanied by contemporaneous criminal charges or involve a police officer. I've taken a lot of heat for refusing to write about this story. Greene has many enemies at the courthouse. Moreover, there are those who would rather see me writing about Greene's PFA than a very negative Grand Jury report about Gracedale. 

I am writing about the PFA now because criminal charges have been filed. Greene been charged by Middle Smithfield Tp police with criminal mischief as a summary offense based on his wife's allegation that he soaked her clothing in gasoline on August 22. No charges have been filed concerning any assault or death threat. 

The courts have declined comment.  

(This was originally posted on 9/26, and is being reposted).

President Judge Craig Dally: DA Can Hire Assistants Without Interference By Executive

Back in August, I told you about a mandamus action that District Attorney Steve Barratta filed against the Northampton County Executive. The suit was filed after 11instances in which the Exec has prevented Baratta from onboarding new hires. 

A mandamus action is one that compels a government official to perform a clear and nondiscretionary duty that it has refused to perform. In this action, Baratta filed a motion for peremptory judgment, which can only be granted when his right to relief is clear. 

It is.

Late last week, President Judge Craig Dally ruled in Baratta's favor. (See links to Opinions  below)

In this action, Baratta filed a well-written brief that should serve as a primer for anyone interested in county government. 

Judge Dally ruled, as he did once before when John Morganelli was DA, that the county's top prosecutor has the right to select the pay grade for a newly hired assistant District Attorney so long as he remains within the budget allotted by County Council and stays within the pay grade scale they establish. "[T]he District Attorney has not asked this Court to grant him the 'unfettered authority to cut checks from a checkbook that belongs to the County,' is not asking the Court to grant him the ability to exceed the budget allocated to his office by County Council, nor is he arguing for the authority to construct salary standards for new hires by pulling numbers out of the sky on his own accord."

"A cursory review reveals that the Home Rule Charter bestows within the District Attorney a hiring power, which this Court has applied to encompass the authority to select the pay grade step, on the schedule and within his budget provided by County Council, at which his newly hired Assistant District Attorneys start. Any insinuation otherwise is flatly inconsistent with the law of this County."

The Pa County Code does provide that the "number of assistants and salary shall be fixed by the county salary board [which is county council]." But as Judge Dally observes, " Since the District Attorney is not pursuing the unilateral authority to select his pool of assistants or construct the salary schedules for his Office, the Court finds that the District Attorney's position is wholly compliant with [the County Code]. Simply selecting the pay grade step on the schedule produced by County Council does not constitute the District Attorney infringing upon County Council's authority to fix the salaries for his assistants."

What makes this case truly bizarre, aside from the Executive's interference with an independently elected official, is that Northampton County courts have already ruled on this exact question. In the Morganelli case, to which I alluded above, the Judge Dally ruled that "[w]hile the District Attorney is limited by Council in the numbers of assistants he can hire and the range of the salaries he sets for them, he, pursuant to his hiring power, selects the pay grade step at which each of his Assistant District Attorneys start."

Instead of following an established precedent, the county tried to have Dally recuse himself. Not only did that effort fail, but the county solicitor's office was itself disqualified because it was trying simultaneously to represent Lamont McClure, a former Exec and current assistant solicitor, who had been subpoenaed to testify. The solicitor's office was conflicted. Does that office represent him or the current Executive? 

(In the past, I've been able to upload judicial opinions and briefs to Scribd. That system is currently inoperable, but I have uploaded Judge Dally's Order Denying the County's Motion for Judgment as his Order granting DA Baratta's Motion for Peremptory Judgment to Google Drive. You can click on the links to read these matters). 

Should NorCo Council President Have Unfettered Authority to Appoint Committee Members and Chairs.

In early July, Northampton County Council voted 6-3 to establish a Gracedale Oversight Committee proposed by Council member David Holland. Earlier that evening, Executive Tara Zrinski condemned the idea. Council President Ken Kraft first tried to table the matter, and when that failed, he voted against it. So did Council members Kelly Keegan and Nadeem Qayyum. (Qayyum had argued in support of the Oversight Committee, so I think his No vote was a mistake.) Though he ultimately voted to establish the committee, Council member Jeff Warren said he had "serious" reservations about the word "oversight."

Each of County Council's standing committees exist for that express purpose - oversight.

After this vote, Kraft chose to ignore the expressed will of a Council majority and dragged his feet at establishing any oversight committee. July and August breezed by with nothing. It looked like that would happen in September, too, until District Attorney Steve Baratta released the findings of an Investigative Grand Jury highly critical of Gracedale's administration. 

Now the committee has been established and Kraft named Keegan the Chair even though she voted against it. He also put himself on the committee, although he voted against it, too. 

The Chair should have been Holland, who not only proposed the idea of a Gracedale Oversight Committee, but was also himself an administrator there and elsewhere. 

Near the end of last week's meeting of Northampton County Council (September 17), Holland suggested that it's time for the governing body to decide how committee members are appointed. Holland pointed out that though the Home Rule Charter provides that the Council President (currently Ken Kraft) has the authority to preside at meetings, nothing in either the Charter or its rules and regulations governing the conduct of meetings invests Council President with the authority to members to Council's various standing committees. That has been a matter of tradition rather than law. He believes the President should nominate the committee members and Chairs, but the vote to confirm should be made by Council's nine-member body. 

This matter has been referred to Council's Governance committee, which is next scheduled to meet in October. 

If Council does decide to take control of committee appointments, it should do so by ordinance so that it binds future county councils. 

What Government Reforms Would You Like to See - Part 2

Yesterday, I presented you with a list of governmental reforms that many of us would like to see. The comments were quite interesting.  

One person, likely a member of NorCo Council, attacked me for supporting term limits for county offices. I do believe term limits for state and federal office are way overdue. But the truth is that I never supported term limits on a county level and consider that a gray area. I would oppose them for offices like borough council or township supervisor because those offices pay very little but take up a lot of time. It is hard to attract good people. On the county level, I did support letting the people decide the question in a referendum. This was opposed by former Council members Kevin Lott, Ron Heckman and Tara Zrinski. It was also opposed by former Exec Lamont McClure, whose veto had to be overridden. One person suggested that a term limits bill should be called the Bob Freeman Act. 

Most of you would like to see some form of open primaries but a few of you would limit voters to party members. I know that outfits like Working Families oppose open primaries and I think this is probably because the only way they can get one of their more extreme candidates nominated is through a closed primary. 

One of you, a reader named Hoople, had a great idea. "If you cannot vote for a candidate - do not live in the area they will represent - you cannot contribute to their campaign. Exceptions for relatives - if your, for example, son is running for office and lives out the area, you can make a small donation to the campaign.

" "If you are a paid elected official and you vote for a tax increase, your pay is adjusted down by the percent you approved. 17% tax increase? Your pay takes a 17% cut.

"If you are a paid elected official, you cannot endorse candidates at campaign events. Writing an op-ed in support is sufficient. No more using a paid day to travel and rally for someone."

I've begun work on a post detailing elected officials who accept donations from their subordinates as well as people who have business interests with the municipality they represent. It is a fairly widespread pratice, but I consider it a form of soft corruption that should be banned. I expect to bring you that story in a day or two.

What Governmental Reforms Would You Like to See?

Below is a list of government reforms proposed, way back in 2016, by Ron Beitler (now a Lehigh County Comm'r), myself and a few readers. These were sent to then Governor Tom Wolf and the Lehigh Valley delegation to the state house and senate. I never received a reply.  

These are neither Republican nor Democratic proposals. You either believe in good government or you don't. Feel free to add any suggestions you have. 

1. Term limits now and tweak the terms. Three four-year terms for State Reps. Two six-year terms for State Senators. A two-year term for State Reps is too short. They have to start campaigning for the next election virtually the day after they win. (I would oppose term limits for municipal offices because it is hard enough to attract people.)

2. Reduce the size of PA government so state rep districts have 85,000 people within. This is small enough to maintain constituent services at the current level, but large enough to eliminate 52 positions entirely.

3. Eliminate pensions for elected officials. Salaries for a full-time state legislator should be adjusted to be the median for the district represented. It is a full-time job, but not a career. Pensions are for career positions.

4. Enact Resign-to-run rules that would apply to any full-time elected position that draws a taxpayer funded salary.  Lehigh County Controller Mark Pinsley should not be able to use the perks of his office as a springboard to the state senate. The only exception is if the candidate is in the final year of his term.  

5. End gerrymandering by establishing independent commissions to do the redistricting. (The current commission is appointed by incumbents to help them keep their jobs.  

6. Require all candidates for statewide office to file campaign finance reports electronically so the people know immediately how the campaign is being funded. Too many candidates refuse to file electronically, and the state elections office is never in a hurry to get reports online.  Each county government should adopt ordinances requiring that campaign finance reports be posted on the county webpage within 24 hours of filing. (NorCo lists campaign finance reports, but this is at the whim of the Exec, who could change her mid tomorrow. County Council needs to adopt an ordinance requiring their publication).

7. Ban the use of campaign funds for criminal defense.

8. Increase penalties for noncompliance with state campaign finance laws and continue the requirement that a candidate pay for violations out of his own personal funds.

9. All local governments should be required to provide an Internet broadcast of every meeting. If it is too expensive, the government should be dissolved.

10. Ban gifts of any kind, on a state and local level.

12. Require receipts for per diem payments.

13. Allow independent voters to participate in Primary Elections.

14. Ban local governments and school districts from attaching risky derivative "swaps" to their debt.

15. Ban candidates or elected officials from using campaign funds to make contributions to any other PAC or candidate committee. This prevents money laundering and ensures that money given to a candidate is used only for his campaign.

16. Limit campaign expenses to year of election requiring forfeiture of unspent monies. Eliminate rolling campaign accounts and expenditures in non election years. I believe district magistrates must spend it or lose it and cannot accumulate funds when they are unopposed. Similar rules for everybody.

17. LIST candidates on the ballot (per office) in random order with no party affiliation attached.

18. In addition to term limits, place "None of the Above" on the ballot for every elective office. If "None of the Above" wins a majority or plurality of the votes, the other candidates are disqualified and a new slate of candidates (including "None of the Above") must be drawn for a new election. Lather, rinse and repeat until someone other than "None of the Above" receives a majority of the votes.

*****

Some new ideas 

19. Limit both individual and PAC contributions to $1,000 a year. 

20. Ban all public employees from contributing to candidates in races for the municipality by which they are employed. 

21. Prohibit all individuals who contribute to candidates for a specific municipality from having any form of business relationship with that municipality for a period of two years after making the contribnution. 

How Does Gracedale Stack Up With Other Lehigh Valley Nursing Homes?

I've spent a lot of time covering the problems at Gracedale over the past several years. This home gets a lot of coverage from me because something always is going on there and it is publicly owned. It also recently attracted the attention of a NorCo Investigating Grand Jury. Is it packed with lies and perjury, as Zrinski asserted just last week? And what about other nursing homes in Northampton and Lehigh County?  Are they even worse, as NorCo Exec Tara Zrinski has suggested during a county council meeting? I've reviewed the Department of Health and ProPublica inspection records for nursing homes in Northampton and Lehigh counties from 2024 to present. They reveal numerous deficiencies since 2024, ranging from relatively minor regulatory violations to findings classified as posing immediate jeopardy to residents’ health or safety. Gracedale is among the worst. 

What is a deficiency? It means inspectors determined that a facility failed to meet a federal or state requirement. The seriousness of those deficiencies, however, varies considerably.

The most significant findings involve deficiencies classified as J, K or L, the highest levels on the federal scope-and-severity scale. Recent federal data identify J-level findings at both Gracedale and Bethlehem South, while Phoebe Allentown had a K-level infection-control finding in 2025.

Gracedale

It appears that the coverage I've given is warranted. It has had more than 20 deficiencies since 2024.

Among the most serious was a J-level finding in May 2026 , which occurred six months after Exec. Zrinski assumed office. It involved a failure to ensure that the nursing-home environment was free of accident hazards and that residents received adequate supervision to prevent accidents. Federal records classified it as immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety, affecting a few residents.

Gracedale also had a serious finding in September 2025 involving resident assessment and care planning. Pennsylvania Department of Health's inspection records document the September 23, 2025 abbreviated survey and resulting deficiencies.

Inspection records also show a K-level staffing finding in May 2026 (5 months after Exec. Zrinski was in office), determining that Gracedale did not provide enough nursing staff every day to meet residents' needs and did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. That finding was classified as immediate jeopardy and resulted in a $21,756 fine. The Pennsylvania Department of Health's inspection database shows that a subsequent abbreviated survey completed August 10, 2026 found no deficient practice related to the particular complaint allegations investigated during that survey. 

Bethlehem South

Bethlehem South Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Center has accumulated 28 deficiencies in the current federal reporting record.

Its most significant recent finding came from a June 9, 2026 complaint inspection. Inspectors cited the facility at the J level, finding that it failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect. J means immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety. The facility also had two D-level deficiencies in an April 29, 2026 complaint inspection involving pressure-ulcer care and bowel and bladder care. The inspection resulted in a $27,378 fine. Pennsylvania's inspection records subsequently reported that the deficiencies cited in the June 30, 2026 survey had been corrected by the July 17 revisit.

Bethlehem North

Bethlehem North Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Center also has a substantial number of deficiencies. A February 2026 standard inspection identified deficiencies involving such areas as nutrition, treatment and care, resident notification, activities of daily living, range of motion and infection control.

A May 2026 complaint investigation also produced an E-level deficiency involving the failure to timely report suspected abuse, neglect or theft.

The pattern illustrates why simply counting deficiencies can be misleading. A facility can accumulate a large number of D- or E-level findings without those findings reaching the immediate-jeopardy level.

Phoebe Allentown

Phoebe Allentown Health Care Center had 13 deficiencies, one of which was particularly serious. An August 19, 2025 complaint inspection produced a K-level infection-control deficiency. Inspectors found that the facility failed to provide and implement an effective infection-prevention and control program. The finding was classified as immediate jeopardy and involved some residents.

A July 2025 standard inspection produced three additional D-level deficiencies involving resident rights, range of motion/mobility and accident hazards or supervision. That inspection also resulted in an $11,087 fine.

Interestingly, Gracedale Administrator Michelle Morton came to NorCo from Phoebe. At last week's County Council meeting, Zrinski stated that she visited that home to pick up a few pointers. Why she'd visit a home with a K-level deficiency is beyond me. 

Cedarbrook

Cedarbrook Senior Care and Rehabilitation has accumulated 16 deficiencies in the current federal record. This is Lehigh County's public home. The deficiencies are all minor involving resident rights, assessments, activities of daily living, resident care, accident hazards, dietary equipment, infection control and reporting of suspected abuse or neglect. They've all been corrected. 

Complete Care at Lehigh

Complete Care at Lehigh LLC has 12 deficiencies. They include deficiencies involving food handling and storage, pressure-ulcer care and pharmacy services. Most of its recent deficiencies were classified at the D level — meaning no actual harm was identified but there was potential for more than minimal harm.

Northampton Post Acute

Northampton Post Acute has 15 deficiencies. A May 2026 standard inspection identified four D-level deficiencies, including problems involving resident rights, care planning and accident hazards or supervision. Those deficiencies were documented as corrected during a June 2026 revisit.

Easton Skilled Nursing

Easton Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation has 20 deficiencies. They include repeated issues involving resident care and activities of daily living.

A December 2025 inspection produced nine health deficiencies, most at the D level.

An April 2026 complaint inspection also cited the facility for an infection-control deficiency.

The Gardens at Easton

The Gardens at Easton, including its memory-care operation, has had several deficiencies during the period examined, generally at the lower levels of the severity scale.

What the severity ratings mean

The federal nursing-home inspection system uses a scope-and-severity system that ranges from relatively minor deficiencies to immediate jeopardy.

D, E and F indicate no actual harm was found, although there was potential for more than minimal harm. G, H and I indicate actual harm that did not rise to immediate jeopardy. J, K and L represent immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety.

Consequently, a nursing home with 20 D-level deficiencies should not automatically be considered more problematic than a facility with fewer deficiencies that includes a J- or K-level finding. The nature and seriousness of the deficiencies matter at least as much as the raw number.

What the records do show is that several nursing homes in Northampton and Lehigh counties have experienced recurring regulatory problems since 2024. Gracedale, Bethlehem South and Phoebe Allentown have each had recent deficiencies classified at the immediate-jeopardy level. 

The good news is that Gracedale is making strides to improve. Just last week, Northampton County Council voted to raise the wages for nurse supervisors to a level that is competitive and should attract professionals. Executive Tara Zrinski has stated this is only the beginning of changes to compensation. In six visits from the state Department of Health since May, no deficiencies have been found.  Gracedale Oversight Committee has been established, although it has yet to meet. 

Zrinski Announces that New Parking Deck Construction to Start in October

At last week's NorCo Council meeting, Executive Tara Zrinski announced that work on a new parking deck for the courthouse campus will begin in October. This work was supposed to have started in July, but had to be postponed because the bidder failed to comply with the county's responsible contractor ordinance. 

This is a good time to consider a bus, bicycle or one of those dreaded e-bikes savaged on the season opener of South Park America.