Luzerne County DA drops suit but urges council action on ‘illegal’ home rule provisions

Litigation filed last year over the timing of Luzerne County’s district attorney election has been withdrawn by the county DA’s office and council.

County DA Sam Sanguedolce said Thursday the decision was reached after discussions with council and lawyers for his office and the county, with all parties concluding it is not practical to proceed at the county court level.

“Doing so requires trial and likely appeals from the losing party. I am happy to have the voters decide whether they wish for me to continue as their district attorney,” Sanguedolce said.

Sanguedolce and council had filed the legal action against the five-citizen election board in August 2021 over differing interpretations of a new state statute that kicked in when Sanguedolce filled the DA seat vacated by Stefanie Salavantis in March 2021.

This legislation requires the first assistant DA to serve “until the first Monday in January following the next municipal election” that occurs at least 90 days after the vacancy.

An election board majority concluded the race had to be on last year’s November general election ballot because that was the next municipal election, and it set a two-year term to match when Salavantis’ term would have been over.

The council/DA suit asserted the race could not be held until the next odd-numbered municipal election year — 2023 — for a four-year term so county voters would have an opportunity to select nominees in a primary election.

Visiting Chester County Senior Judge Robert J. Shenkin denied a preliminary injunction attempting to remove the race from the Nov. 2 ballot, and Commonwealth Court upheld Shenkin’s decision in late October.

Sanguedolce, a Republican, ran unopposed and was the top vote-getter in countywide races. The county’s Democratic Party did not nominate a candidate.

Because the Commonwealth Court appeal focused solely on the preliminary injunction, the council/DA suit was still pending before Shenkin to adjudicate the underlying legal disagreement.

Council voted in December to end its use of Stevens & Lee after the law firm filed paperwork discontinuing council’s involvement in the county litigation, with some council members expressing concerns about additional legal expenses.

Proceeding with the case would have interpreted whether the new law required the election and the term length of two or four years.

Sanguedolce said Thursday he is hopeful county council will address term limits and other related issues in the county’s home rule charter.

The charter imposes a three-term limit for DA, which would be a maximum 12 years with four-year terms. However, Sanguedolce’s appointment last year and subsequent election to a two-year term counted as two terms under the charter, which means he would only be allowed one more four-year term if he wins re-election in 2023.

That would limit him to less than seven years instead of 12.

Charter legality issues also came up when council initially moved to remove Salavantis as DA based on her filing of a nomination petition to run for judge.

“I have raised the need to correct the illegal provisions of the home rule charter with council,” Sanguedolce said. “It began with the simple majority vote to remove my predecessor from office and extends to most provisions of the charter that purport to supersede state law. It is my hope that they will act to correct those issues before further legal action is necessary.”