Luzerne County Council may ask court for temporary panel to craft ballot question

Luzerne County Council may take the extraordinary step of asking the court to appoint a temporary panel to ensure its charter amendment ballot question is on the Nov. 7 general election ballot, according to information released Friday.

A vote on this measure was added to Tuesday’s council voting agenda because election board certification is required for ballot questions, and the county’s volunteer, five-citizen election board did not vote to certify the question at its meeting this week.

Instead of certifying the ballot question as presented or proposing new wording, the election board unanimously agreed Wednesday to send it back to the county law office for revisions.

Council’s proposed amendment would revamp the charter section covering the election board itself and include changes in the way a fifth seat is structured and filled and the eligibility requirements for all board members. It also vacates the currently seated board if the amendment passes.

The resolution on Tuesday’s council agenda would petition the county Court of Common Pleas to appoint county judges or electors to serve instead of the the election board for the purpose of framing the ballot question set forth in council’s ordinance.

According to the proposed resolution, which was posted around 4 p.m. Friday:

Council, as the governing body, exercised its authority to place a charter amendment question on the ballot.

Under state law, the election board has the power to “frame the question that is to be placed on an election ballot.”

At its public meeting Aug. 16, the election board, “after being instructed of their legal requirement to do so, ignored the edicts of” the council ordinance and state law and “refused to either frame the charter amendment ballot question and/or place the referendum on the ballot.”

The election board “has no legal authority to refuse to frame a charter amendment question for the ballot and/or refuse to place the charter amendment referendum on the ballot as directed by Luzerne County Council.”

It also said there is “an inherent conflict of interest with the board’s involvement with the home rule charter amendment referendum.”

“Board members have specifically publicly referenced how adoption of the proposed charter amendment would negatively impact themselves personally including during the Aug. 16, 2023 board meeting while acting as board members,” it said.

Another completely opposite option — cancelling the ballot question entirely — also is on Tuesday’s council agenda at the request of county Councilman Stephen J. Urban, officials said.

A new ordinance would be required to rescind the ballot question ordinance. At least four of 11 council members must support its introduction, and a public hearing and majority vote would be necessary at a subsequent meeting for passage.

This proposed ordinance said it is “in the best interest of the citizens” of the county to rescind the council-adopted referendum and remove the question to amend the charter from the ballot.

Council’s Tuesday voting meeting starts at 6 p.m. at the county courthouse on River Street in Wilkes-Barre, with instructions for remote attendance posted under council’s online meeting link at luzernecounty.org.

Council has scheduled a closed-door executive session before the meeting, at 5 p.m., to discuss the election board’s decision to not certify.

Time is an issue because the election bureau must finalize the ballot by September so it can be proofed both before and after it is printed for mail ballots and programmed into electronic ballot marking devices used at polling places.

Board action

Due to the number of charter changes proposed by council, election board members agreed the decision should be presented to voters in eight separate questions instead of one.

Board members said the single question in council’s ordinance and a version proposed by the law office do not sufficiently inform voters of what they would be deciding.

Councilman Gregory S. Wolovich Jr., who proposed the charter amendment ballot question a council majority approved in June, said he is confident the essence of the proposed amendment can be captured in one yes/no question that does not exceed the 75-word limit under state law, particularly because a more descriptive “plain English” statement explaining each change must be posted at polling places and appear in legal advertisements.

If approved, the charter amendment would:

• Empower 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).

• Fill the fifth seat every two years instead of four years.

• Allow the board to select any board member as chair instead of automatically making the member in the fifth seat the chair.

• Vacate the current election board in January.

• Change the retroactive window for board eligibility prohibitions from four years to two years.

• Remove “paid election workers” from eligibility prohibitions.

• Reduce the continuous political party registration minimum requirement from five years to three years prior to board appointment.

• Omit a current requirement to vacate a board seat if the member files a petition for nomination or election or becomes a candidate for any elective public office.