Luzerne County Council withdraws plan to vote on home rule study commission

After holding an unscheduled executive session during Tuesday’s meeting, Luzerne County Council decided not to proceed with a vote on a ballot question to form a Government Study Commission.

Councilman Tim McGinley called for the executive session when motions were made to vote on introducing the ballot question ordinance.

McGinley pushed for the session to discuss the legality of proceeding with the study commission question while another ballot question already has been approved for the Nov. 7 general election.

A council majority had voted in June to approve Councilman Gregory S. Wolovich Jr.’s ballot question asking voters if they want to reconstitute the election board.

The state’s home rule handbook indicates a study commission and charter amendment ballot cannot be on the ballot in the same election. County Controller Walter Griffith and others also have questioned the legality.

Aug. 8 is the last possible day for council to file a ballot question ordinance with the county election bureau for placement on the Nov. 7 ballot, the law office has said.

It would take time to cancel the election board ballot question, and it’s unclear if a council majority was willing to proceed with that option. That question was approved through an ordinance. The county’s home rule charter said an ordinance is required to rescind an ordinance, which means council would have to introduce a rescinding ordinance at a future meeting and then subsequently hold a public hearing and final passage vote.

Following the executive session, county Chief Solicitor Harry W. Skene said he briefed council members on a memo he sent about the matter Tuesday afternoon outlining legal opinions and options.

“Depending upon the option(s) chosen, there could be possible litigation issues that needed to be discussed in executive session,” Skene said later.

Council had intended to vote on the same study commission question a majority had rejected in January, which asked voters if they want to convene a seven-citizen commission to assess the home rule charter and recommend whether to keep it, revise it or try a different structure, which could include reverting back to the prior three-commissioner system.

If council had proceeded with final passage to place the question on the ballot, voters also would have simultaneously elected citizens to serve on the study commission.

On the issue of the election board reconstitution ballot question, county Election Board Chairwoman Denise Williams said Tuesday she has cancelled a July 31 special meeting to consider requesting an outside legal opinion on the legality of that ballot question.

The county law office sent a communication to the election board Monday night informing the board it does not have legal authority to obtain outside counsel or reject council’s legislative decision to place the question on the ballot.

Instead, the board’s limited role in the matter is determining the wording of all questions and preparing a “plain English” explanation of the purpose, limitation and effects of ballot questions, the law office indicated.

The ballot question asks voters, in part, if they want council to appoint the fifth election board member of any affiliation instead of leaving that choice up to the four council-appointed members (two Democrats and two Republicans).

It also would automatically vacate the current election board in January if the question passes, although council members have stressed current members would be free to reapply.

County airport

Council voted Tuesday to earmark $6 million in federal American Rescue Plan funding for capital improvements at the county-owned Wyoming Valley Airport in Forty Fort and Wyoming.

McGinley unsuccessfully sought an amendment to reduce the airport allocation to $3 million. He argued a $6 million earmark would leave a little over $1 million in reserve and said council may want to consider providing additional funding for upcoming small business and public assistance programs if there is an “overwhelming” number of applications.

Councilman Brian Thornton disagreed, saying the county largely ignored airport needs for decades, and “it shows.” More than $7 million is needed for projects at the complex, but $6 million will go “a long way,” he added. He stressed the projects are “not just cosmetic” and will address safety issues.

Thornton also said he believes county-owned projects should be a priority in the American Rescue program to reduce the need to fund them with local real estate taxes.

Councilman Kevin Lescavage reiterated the airport operates an in-demand pilot training program and serves as a fueling station for medevac and law enforcement aircraft, which means it is important to save lives.

Council Vice Chairman John Lombardo said the airport cannot be neglected.

McGinley said he supports providing an earmark for the airport but could not approve $6 million. He was the lone vote against the allocation.

Council also unanimously voted Tuesday on a lease renewal with Valley Aviation Inc., the airport’s longtime fixed base operator.

Public assistance

Council had previously earmarked $5 million in American Rescue funds for a public relief program not yet finalized.

County Manager Romilda Crocamo presented a proposal to council during its work session Tuesday to earmark the funds to one or both programs currently administered by the Commission on Economic Opportunity, or CEO:

• Whole-Home Repairs Program, which provides funds to income-eligible homeowners to preserve their aging homes.

Funding must be used to complete repairs or projects that improve health, safety and habitability, energy or water efficiency or access for those with disabilities.

To date, CEO has received 901 fully completed applications that are currently undergoing eligibility review, with a sizable percentage from the elderly, Crocamo said.

An estimated 112 homes will receive funds of up to $24,999 with the $3.24 million state funding already earmarked for the program.

Crocamo estimated approximately 180 more homeowners could receive funding with an additional $5 million from the county.

• Heating and Utility Assistance Program

This program provides $290 in assistance to eligible homeowners and renters, and CEO continues to encounter a “very high number” having difficulty paying utility costs, Crocamo’s submission said.

A $5 million county allocation could provide assistance to an estimated 15,517 households, it said.

Several council members said they support splitting the $5 million to provide funding to both programs. They expect to vote on a plan next month.