Some recommendations in defeated Luzerne County charter may still take effect

Although Luzerne County voters rejected a proposed new home rule charter in November, some recommended changes may still be implemented.

County Council Chairman Jimmy Sabatino recently asked fellow members of council’s Code Review Committee to review the charter package drafted by an elected seven-citizen Government Study Commission and identify specific alterations they support.

With majority council approval, each supported change could then be put before voters as a ballot referendum, said Sabatino, who is chair of the committee that makes recommendations to the full council for its consideration.

Council also may have authority to implement some minor adjustments on its own through ordinances or code amendments, he added.

The county paid approximately $162,0000 for the study commission’s completion of a proposed new charter, according to the county Budget and Finance Division. The charter’s failure to pass does not mean the findings have no value, Sabatino said.

“We spent a lot of money for these recommendations, so we owe the public a second look at it,” Sabatino said at the February committee meeting.

County officials have “limited time” if they want to place any referendums on the Nov. 3 general election ballot, he added.

Sabatino said he believes any individual study commission recommendation can be implemented through ballot referendums except for a reduction in the size of the 11-member County Council because that alteration rose to the level of a significant structural change.

Councilwoman Denise Williams, who serves on the code committee, said she disagreed with some proposed charter recommendations but concluded others had merit.

“There was a lot of work that was put into it, and I think it really does bear having a conversation,” Williams said.

Williams strongly supports two charter changes that would have required the county manager to:

• Obtain council confirmation to remove the chief solicitor and chief public defender, believing a higher level of council involvement is warranted for those two division head positions.

• Seek council approval to transfer budgeted funds within departments if those funds are used to create a new position or increase the salary for any position above the annual amount budgeted for that year.

Williams also agrees with eliminating wording that prohibits Election Day poll workers from serving on county boards due to their receipt of a county payment — a prohibition she does not believe is warranted and that has prompted complaints.

She also wants further discussion on the study commission’s proposals involving three county boards.

On the Joint Airport Board with Lackawanna County that oversees the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International Airport, three council members would serve instead of two council members and the county manager or his/her designee. This was based on an argument that this board serves more of a legislative purpose.

Williams said she agrees with the legislative argument but would want more feedback on the pros and cons.

The study commission proposed permitting council to appoint alternate members to fill in on the county’s three-citizen Board of Assessment Appeals as needed if permanent members are absent or have a conflict hearing any requests for real estate assessment reductions. Williams said she wants to know more about the need for additional assistance.

Under another proposed charter change, the five-member county Retirement Board that oversees the employee pension fund would have a citizen member in a seat currently held by the county budget/finance division head. The county manager, two council members, and a member of the retirement system also serve on that board. The change would have allowed the manager the option to select a designee to serve in his/her place.

“I think having a citizen on there would be great. I’m all for that on any board, and I just want more information on how that would work and how that person would be appointed,” Williams said.

Williams said individual referendums could be placed on ballots in multiple elections, so voters have a greater opportunity to research and digest the changes.

Other council members may have their own ideas of proposed changes, and they could be prioritized by a majority, Williams said.

Councilman John Lombardo, who serves as committee vice chair, also supports revisiting the charter recommendations.

Lombardo said he was “disappointed” in the final package recommended by the study commission but believes its review was worthwhile and that “some good things came out of it.”

For example, he agrees with the commission proposal to address board appointment prohibitions. Under the commission’s proposed change, citizens who work for a county contractor — even if they have no direct involvement in the work or decisions — would eligible to serve on county boards and commissions if the nature of interests and relationship is provided in writing and reported in public.

Lombardo said he also supports the study commission recommendation mandating maintenance of a reserve fund and wants to further discuss its proposals involving budget transfers to determine if they should be considered for a ballot referendum.

Term limits for the county’s elected District Attorney also must be addressed as stated in the study commission’s proposed charter, Lombardo said.

The current charter has a three-term limit, regardless of whether the terms are full or partial. As a result, county DA Sam Sanguedolce’s maximum time in the office is reduced from 12 years to less than seven years because two prior partial terms were counted toward the total.

Sanguedolce was elected to his first full, four-year term in November 2023.

The proposed charter kept the three-term limit but did not county elected or appointed terms of two years or less toward the limit.

Lombardo also wants to clarify the roles of the county’s five-citizen Election Board and county administration, including the Election Bureau.

“I’m not taking a position on what I believe it should be. We need to use the information the study commission gave us to do a deep dive on our own and consult and confer with the Election Board, Election Bureau, and administration to make changes from there,” Lombardo said.

Legal analysis from study commission solicitor Joseph J. Khan, of Curtin & Heefner LLP, had said the Pennsylvania Election Code, or Title 25, is clear that election boards have employee appointment authority and other responsibilities currently performed by the county’s administration.

However, concerns were raised about providing complete control over elections to five unelected board members — potentially to a majority of three board members from the same political party.

Councilwoman Dawn Simmons, the remaining Code Review Committee member, said she is reviewing the proposed charter again and will present some possible recommendations.

Sabatino said he wants to take a closer look at the parts of the study commission report that “strengthen transparency and fiscal discipline.”

“That includes requiring a county reserve fund, clarifying financial oversight rules, and cleaning up administrative language that has created confusion over time,” Sabatino said. “At the end of the day, taxpayers should feel confident that County Council works for them and that the rules of government are clear, accountable, and focused on protecting their tax dollars.”

Sabatino said the committee likely will meet in April to start reviewing recommendations that may be forwarded to the full council.

Charter defeat

The proposed charter was defeated in a vote of 26,688 for and 41,403 against.

Study Commission Chairman Ted Ritsick said after the November election that rejection of the package left referendums on specific, limited alterations as the only option if changes are warranted in coming years.

Ballot amendments are not an “easy or efficient process,” he had added.

“It is my hope the document our commission drafted will be able to guide Luzerne County to the solutions that it needs,” Ritsick had said. “Using the ballot question process, it will now be up to County Council to confront these challenges directly, campaign for approval, and demonstrate the leadership our residents deserve.”