2012 February » PureBunkum

The Buck Stops With You – No, With You- Don’t Look At Me

Local

Feb 292012

If The Times Leader didn’t dig into the billings of Kingston attorney Angela Stevens, it’s highly unlikely the public would ever have learned she overbilled the county, possibly knowingly.

We sure couldn’t count on county Judge Tina Polachek Gartley, who signed off on Stevens’ bills without reviewing them. At the very least, this judge should be reprimanded for her careless handling of taxpayers’ money.

Did Judge Gartley even look at Stevens’ bills before approving them for payment? If she did, how did she not notice that a part-time lawyer was raking in more than $144,000 a year? Then again, how did this judge fail to notice that there are not 46 hours in a day? TL staff writer Terrie Morgan-Besecker discovered that Stevens charged the county for that extra long, non-existent day. Her petition for payment said she prepared 46 bills that day that took her an hour each.

Now another lawyer has come forward with 151 bills totaling $39,000, some which date back to 2010, the newspaper reported today. Judge Gartley has already approved them for payment, Besecker reported. By all means, consider those bills not yet reviewed.

Attorney Jami Brown said she fell behind on her billings; that’s why they’re so late. She sure doesn’t typify most lawyers, whose billings have you at hello.

As for Stevens, why are we even paying someone, a lawyer no less, for the time it takes to prepare a bill and then for the time it takes to deliver it to the courthouse? Stevens charged county taxpayers $36 to travel from her Pierce Street office and across the bridge to the courthouse.

But, don’t worry, taxpayers, Stevens promised to “rectify” the errors and even hired an outside auditing firm to examine her bills. The county will do likewise.

Now county solicitor Vito DeLuca has entered the fray. A former client of Stevens came forward and said he had notified former county commissioner Steve Urban, who’s now a county council member, that he suspected Stevens’ bills didn’t match the services she provided. Urban said he notified DeLuca, who said he doesn’t recall there was a question with bill discrepancies; otherwise he’d have gotten on it right away.

County Controller Walter Griffiths said he didn’t review the bills because he thought Gartley did. Chief Public Defender Al Flora said he didn’t review them because his only involvement was that his budget was the conduit through which the bills were paid.

But the best excuse of all was Gartley’s. She said she takes lawyers at their words when they submit a bill because they subject themselves to perjury charges if they provide false information.

Pray tell, how does one ascertain whether anyone is providing false information on bills if those bills are simply rubber stamped?

Maybe The Times Leader should submit a bill for reviewing these payments and bringing to light what escaped our county overseers – the possible overpayment of tens of thousands of taxpayers’ dollars, which is indefensible

- Betty Roccograndi

The Duchess of DC Lives It Up

National

Feb 282012

Michelle Obama headlined a fundraiser recently, bashing the rich, as she and her husband are prone to do. But both are shameless when it comes to hitting them up for money so they can remain in the White House.

They’ve grown very accustomed to the opulence the presidency affords them.

“If a family in this country is struggling, we can’t be satisfied with our own families’ good fortune,” Mrs. Obama told the approximately 300 people who paid between $300 and $10,000 to attend the Cincinnati fundraiser, the Washington Examiner reported.

Well there are many families struggling, but despite her patronizing words, Michelle Obama appears quite satisfied with her own family’s good fortune.

A 17-day Christmas vacation in Hawaii apparently wasn’t enough R&R for our jet-setting First Lady.

Michelle Obama and her daughers spent President’s Day weekend on the ski slopes in Aspen. The president sat out that latest vacation, the 16th in three years, according to several news organizations. He was busy schmoozing with Hollywood powerbrokers. He needs their money for his re-election campaign.

And to think that the Bushes were ridiculed for being wet blankets, opting to go to bed around 9 p.m. with a book instead of dancing the night away hosting White House parties and Mick Jagger. Then again, President George W. Bush and his wife Laura didn’t use the White House as their personal entertainment center.

The First Lady’s ski trip this month is all the more appalling considering she had just returned from the reported $4-million Hawaiian vacation her family, including the president, took over the holidays. Because she couldn’t wait for her husband to seal the deal for a 2-percent payroll tax cut for us peons, Mrs. Obama and her daughters left early, costing taxpayers $100,000 in additional flight and security costs, The Hawaiian Reporter revealed.

Last year, she spent President’s Day in Vail with the rich and famous shortly after returning from Hawaii. In August 2010, she and Sasha had a mother-daughter get-away in Spain on the public’s dime. In June 2011, she took her mother and daughters to South Africa.

Michelle Obama can sit still no longer than her husband, who seems to spend more time on the campaign trail than working in the White House.

But this First Lady has demonstrated a “let-them-eat-cake” arrogance where her luxurious get-aways are concerned. She’ll leave a day or two early if her husband is held back, with nary a care about how much more taxpayers must spend to finance her selfish whims.

Then again, her husband has no concept of money either, having added $4 trillion to the country’s deficit since he took office.

Even at the president’s State of the Union address, Mrs. Obama showed up, not in a dignified suit or tailored dress, befitting such an address, but in a royal blue cocktail dress, waiving to the crowd like she was Eva Peron.

Wonder where she and Sasha and Malia will be headed for St. Patrick’s Day? Maybe a European vacation or perhaps a few days in Rio.

Wonder how many vacations she’ll take when her husband’s out of office and she has to pay for them herself?

- Betty Roccograndi

Charge This Lawyer With – Something

Local, PB-Ometer

Feb 242012

It was an “oversight,” an “error,” a boo boo.

No, billing county taxpayers for working a 46-hour day is akin to medicare fraud.

In a stunning investigation, Times Leader Staff Writer Terrie Morgan-Besecker reported today that local lawyer Angela Stevens overbilled the county thousands of dollars through some very creative billing practices.

She got away with it because county Judge Tina Polachek Gartley rubber stamped her bills instead of reviewing them. Gartley is “distressed.” Well, that’s too bad, because we’re disgusted.

Gartley’s lame excuse for not reviewing the bills was that she takes attorneys at their word and that it was not feasible to review them, considering all the motions and court orders that land on her desk. Is she for real? It’s a good thing Stevens didn’t slip through a bill for working a 76-hour day.

At $55 an hour, Stevens was paid $144,554 last year for representing parents after Children and Youth Services took away their children. Besecker noted that she would have had to work 50 hours a week for 52 weeks. But not if she was crafty with her bookkeeping, which she was.

For starters, Stevens made one trip to the courthouse on Aug. 17, 2011 to deliver 19 petitions for payment, but she charged the county for 19 separate trips, Besecker discovered. Stevens must have walked because she said it took her 36 minutes to get there from her Pierce Street office, which is a short distance away. Or maybe she stopped for lunch at the Pierce Street Deli on the taxpayers’ time.

Polachek approved paying Stevens $627 for that one trip to the courthouse, taking her at her word, as was her practice, that she delivered those petitions in (19) 36-minute trips, or as Besecker pointed out, was actually payment for a single 11.4 hour trip from Pierce Street to the courthouse to deliver 19 petitions. She could have driven to Myrtle Beach in that amount of time to hand deliver her bills.

But don’t worry, taxpayers, Attorney Stevens said her office “will work with the county to rectify the error.”

In another incident of thumbing her nose at county taxpayers, Stevens turned in a bill for working 46 hours on October 31 to PREPARE 46 bills for payment. An hour each at $55 per hour comes to $2,530. TRICK OR TREAT, taxpayers!

Oh, that! Stevens said of course she didn’t work 46 hours on Halloween. She said her work pertaining to those bills actually covered several days over the month. She said she decided to submit a single charge “for bookkeeping purposes.”

Now, that’s a good one – even for a shady lawyer.

Others involved in paying Stevens were the county’s Chief Public Defender Al Flora Jr. and county Controller Walter Griffith. Flora said his budget was simply the conduit from which such bills were paid. Flora said he did sign payment authorization forms before sending them to Griffith to issue checks.

As for Griffith, he said, “If there is an affidavit from two people, one who is a judge and one who is an attorney who did the work, who am I to question it.” Oh, I don’t know. The county controller?

Stevens apparently outsmarted a judge, a chief public defender and a controller. But, hey, oversights happen.

Her law partner at Pyrah/Stevens, James Pyra said he believes the billing errors were an oversight. Of course, he does. “Based on everything I’ve seen , it appears as if certain routine entries like travel time and fees to report petitions got carried over across files,” he told Besecker. “We are going to undertake a comprehensive review of all these records. We want to get this right.”

Pyrah and Stevens were formerly associated with the law firm of Harry Cardoni, who was at the center of the corruption probe of convicted county judge, Michael Toole. In exchange for helping him win an insurance case, Cardoni allowed Toole to use his beach house.

County President Judge Thomas Burke defended Polachek Gartley, saying she had a lot on her plate last year. This from a president judge who threatened to sue the county if his budget was cut. Also this week, Judge Burke defended another judge, Willliam Amesbury, after his star turn at a Save Meyers High School rally, letting everyone know where he stood on a possible school closing that could end up before the Court of Common Pleas.

Surely Polachek Gartley is embarrassed, and she should be. But she said she takes lawyers at their words because they subject themselves to perjury charges if they submit false information on petitions for fees.

So what are you going to do here, judge?

- Betty Roccograndi

As Rodney Dangerfield Might Say, Take My Hotel, Please.

Local, PB-Ometer

Feb 232012

It was quite telling that CityVest officials, who own the Hotel Sterling, were no-shows at Tuesday night’s Luzerne County Council meeting.

They sent their lawyer instead. That’s fine, so when are our lawyers going to go after this non-profit organization for defaulting on its $6 million loan?

CityVest had grand plans. It would purchase the hotel, borrow $6 million of taxpayers’ money to fix it up, find a developer to restore it, pay back the county’s loan and then make a fortune for themselves.

Instead, it bought the aging hotel, borrowed the money, did not find a developer and told the county, you can have it back, we’re broke.

Nice loan if you can get it.

Scranton Attorney George A. Reihner said none of this was CityVest’s fault. It was guided by national experts. Those national experts, who were likely paid a handsome sum, fared better than the county did.

Reihner also said, “Misinformation and false accusation by the uninformed persist.”

Was he talking about CityVest using $325,000 of taxpayers’ money to purchase a property adjacent to The Sterling from Gregory and Stephanie Lull - $140,000 more than the couple paid for it? Or were we misinformed that CityVest also paid off the $303,000 lien the city of Wilkes-Barre had on the Lulls’ property?

Were our local newspapers uninformed or misinformed when they reported that little nugget?

And did allowing the Lulls to make a hefty profit on their property when there was a $303,000 lien against it have anything to do with former county commissioner Todd Vonderheid and Greater Wilkes-Barre Business & Industry executive Larry Newman co-signing the couple’s mortgage loan to help them buy the property?

Those behind CityVest include some heavy hitters in this valley. And while we’re at it, just what was former U.S. Congressman Paul Kanjorski’s role in this non-profit? These are questions that need to be answered.

Our county council is debating whether to get quotes to mothball the Sterling and/or to demolish it. Driving past this wreck this morning, viewing the rusted air-conditioners in the windows, those which weren’t smashed that is, was a sickening sight, knowing that taxpayers invested $6 million to ready it for the wrecking ball.

Attorney Reihner said his clients rejected mothballing the building because it would have “frozen the chance for redevelopment” and that the county funding was intended to “jump start a project on the site,” The Times Leader reported.

HUH!! Did it stand a better chance of being redeveloped with busted windows, a leaky roof and additional disrepair?

Reihner also told the council that CityVest is willing to immediately give the county title to its property. He might as well have said that CityVest also had a bridge to nowhere it ‘s willing to hand over.

So we’ll ask this for the umpteenth time, is it the taxpayers who are on the hook for $6 million or CityVest?

CityVest owns the Hotel Sterling. Why aren’t they the ones trying to get funding to demolish it and then market the land? Why aren’t they the ones trying to get supplemental insurance?

Why is this our problem when they own the building?

- Betty Roccograndi

To Meyers: And I,I,I, I, I Will Always Luuvv Youououou.

Local

Feb 222012

Few things inflame the passions of a community like the prospect of a school closing or a church.

As a rookie reporter, covering the West Side for The Times Leader, I recall the packed Wyoming Valley West School Board meetings (and all the front-page bylines) after rumors erupted that the district planned to close the Rutter Avenue Elementary School in Kingston.

Like Meyers High School, not only did that beloved school need costly repairs, it was deemed unsafe.

Parents, students, teachers and residents came out in droves to “Save Our School.” A citizens’ group was born. In the end, the school was shuttered and is now the site of upscale townhomes.

So it’s not surprising that a similar scenario is playing out on the other side of the river amid rumors that Meyers may be facing a similar fate for similar reasons.

No one wants their ”queen of the prom,” which Stephen Barrouk called Meyers, to become South Wilkes-Barre’s incredible “hulk,” which Robin Shudak said it would become if boarded-up. Like the beautiful prom queen of pop, Whitney Houston, years of neglect and abuse led to her slow, agonizing demise.

Previous reports said it would take untold millions of dollars to repair Meyers. We can’t even imagine the cost of building a new school. And if there is a mass exodus from Wilkes-Barre, as some said there would be if this school closes, there goes the city’s already shaky tax base.

And as many pointed out at last night’s school board meeting, merging Meyers students into other district schools would result in a logistical nightmare. And after learning that rival gangs are duking it out at GAR, what parent would want their child going there? This could be a boon to charter and private schools.

In light of all this, the school board, which, sorry, hasn’t proven it’s worthy of anyone’s trust in recent years, is faced with a huge dilemma.

The good thing is that the school board is being watched – by lawyers, too, and a judge.

Actually, should Luzerne County Judge William Amesbury, who made a splash with his protests, have spoken out at all? Aren’t we supposed to not know where a judge stands on any divisive issue? You know that justice is blind thing.

But there he was, front and center, telling us exactly where he stands, that Meyers “is part of the substance and soul and the fiber of those who have walked through its halls.” Judge Amesbury has walked those halls. He may have to recuse himself , though, if any of the lawyers at last night’s meeting file suit against the board.

Meyers grad Attorney Michael O’Donnell warned that he and other Meyers alumni/lawyers will be paying close attention to make sure the board follows “to the letter of the law,” the state School Code as it pertains to school closings.

Is it possible that everyone is jumping the gun, or do they see the handwriting on the wall?

Board President Mary Anne Toole told The Times Leader that the board never had any intention of voting to close Meyers on Tuesday (Phew!) or any time soon. A study of Meyers came about, she said, after board member Phil Latinski made a motion last year to close it, but it failed.

Then, poof, a study was commissioned as opposed to Latinski’s supposedly preposterous suggestion being shelved.

When district curriculum supervisor Andrew Kuhl told an angered crowd that closing Meyers would result in seventh- and eighth-grade classes in other district schools ballooning to averages of 29 to 32 students, Superintendent Jeff Namey assured everyone that the district would not allow that to happen.

Namey then pulled a rabbit out of his hat, and everyone was satisfied.

- Betty Roccograndi

Stay Focused On This One

Local

Feb 202012

Anyone who lives, works or runs a business in the city of Wilkes-Barre, don’t let the Wilkes-Barre Area School Board out of your sight.

The board, which has proven time and time again that it is out of touch with taxpayers, may be close to closing Meyers High School. Maybe it needs to be closed, but certainly not before an objective, thorough study of district operations is conducted.

If you were upset with the Luzerne County Council hiking your taxes by 2-percent, hold onto your wallets if this board decides to build a new school.

The board meets tomorrow at 6 in the administration building to review an engineer’s preliminary findings.

Former temporary school director Dr. Mark Schiowitz has sounded the alarm and advised his former colleagues that “the fate of Meyers must await a comprehensive decision about facilities and not be dealt with in a vacuum.”

That brings to mind the behind the scenes maneuvering to close Luzerne County’s juvenile detention center in order to clear the way for the building of a new, privately-owned one. That clandestine scheme exploded into one of the biggest corruption scandals in the state. The quartet which engineered that reckless deal made millions on the backs of taxpayers and unsuspecting juveniles.

Just think of the number of individuals, consultants, architects and firms who would get rich if a new school is built.

Dr. Schiowitz, one of the more level-headed individuals to ever serve on the WBA board, believes Meyers must remain open, that to close any of the three city high schools, except in the case of an emergency, could trigger district-wide chaos. He cites potential bussing and overcrowding nightmares and security problems stemming from rivalries.

Let’s talk about rivalries. Did any parent, teacher or student ever think that one day they’d have to worry about rival gangs infiltrating their schools? A machete attack by two Dominican Republic punks? Is anyone safe these days when rival gangs are going at it near school grounds, in this case GAR? Who’d want to send their child there if Meyers closes?

Dr. Schiowitz, in a letter to the school directors, said, for the sake of argument, maybe closing Coughlin should be considered, but then again it “does not house the city stadium, so I guess it would be hard to promote spending for a new one.”

Hmmmmm. Is something in the works here?

The Wilkes-Barre Area School Board is faced with a monumental decision. Is Meyers worth repairing, or should it be closed? The only thing we do know is that this particular school board has lost the public’s trust and with good reason. It unabashedly engaged in pay-to-play politics and had no compunction about naming a director charged with a crime as its president.

And it has ignored offers of help, including one from loyal PureBunkum reader, Dr. Richard Holodick, who is friends with an out-of-town facilities expert who was willing to meet with the board at no cost to the district. That generous offer was met with not even a thanks, but we’ll handle this response. Who turns down free professional help? Board members who see fit to name a convicted felon as its president, that’s who.

The closing of Meyers will have long-ranging repercussions for students, parents, teachers and taxpayers. It is imperative that everyone pays close attention as the board grapples with this school’s fate.

And demand that all discussions be held in public. The stakes are far too high for this board to dare keep the public in the dark.

- Betty Roccograndi

Thanks For The Bone, Washington

National, PB-Ometer

Feb 192012

After he returns from Hollywood to raise millions of dollars for his political coffers, President Barack Obama will gladly sign a bill extending unemployment benefits to millions still out of work.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

And the bill, which our politically-inspired lawmakers in Washington approved Friday, throws a bone to those who do work – $20 more a week in take-home pay, that is if you earn $50,000 a year. If you earn $25,000, you’ll get $10.

The goodies will raise the country’s already soaring deficit by another $141 billion in the 2012-2013 fiscal year, according to published reports. So let’s all enjoy that extra $10-$20 a week because Obama believes his “jobs bill” is the way to go to strengthen our fragile economy, fragile in large part because of him and his administration.

I wish someone would explain how extending unemployment benefits can be called a jobs bill, and how allowing workers to keep $10 to $20 of the money they, not the government, earned in the first place, vastly improves the economy.

We’re joined by U.S. Rep. Tim Holden, a Democrat from St. Clair, doing a commendable job repeating his party’s talking points. Holden said, ”This money will not only help these Americans and their families, but will allow for our economy to continue its improvement. It would have been a travesty if we failed to extend this tax cut for the working class while protecting tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans,” Holden told The Times Leader.

We bet those grateful American families are beside themselves planning how they might spend that extra $10 to $20 a week. Thanks, Tim.

Then there’s U.S. Rep. Tom Marino, who had to hold his nose while he voted for the bill. Marino, a Republican from Lycoming County, approved it, ”though I was biting my tongue as I cast my vote,” he told the TL. Why, we might ask, if it was so repugnant a bill, did you vote for it? Oh yeah, he likes it in Washington and wants to get re-elected.

Lou Barletta, the Republican who represents the 11th Congressional District, also voted for the bill not only to prevent a tax increase, he said, but because it also addresses unemployment compensation reform, including ensuring that “welfare funds can’t be accessed at ATMs in strip clubs, liquor stores and casinos.”

And here you thought they already couldn’t. Silly you.

At least we have one man in Washington who sees the bigger picture and had the guts to vote against this bill, whose real goal is to improve Obama’s re-election ambitions by casting him as the warrior for the middle class.

PA Sen. Pat Toomey, a Republican, said this bill does little, if anything, to stimulate economic growth.

“In a time of ballooning deficits and a stagnant economy, we have a responsibility to put our government on a fiscally responsible path,” Toomey said. “Unfortunately, Congress did the opposite today,” he told our local newspaper.

But, Sen. Toomey, Barack Obama said that even though extending unemployment benefits and increasing our allowance by $10-$20 a week will cost $141 billion in one year, we will slowly recoup more than $50 billion over the coming decade. And, Sen. Toomey, the Associated Press reported that Obama’s hard fought measure will “pump more than $100 billion into the economy before Election Day. What good timing, if it really happens.

So what that Obama also said that he would cut the deficit in half during his first term in office but, instead, added $4 trillion to it. He’s coming back from Hollywood and making it possible for unemployed workers to stay unemployed and allowing the rest of us to keep $10 to $20 of our pay.

Imgine what he can do if we give him another four years in office?

Perish the thought.

- Betty Roccograndi

Someone Doesn’t Like Our Mr. Lawton

Local

Feb 162012

Hmmmmm. A disabled vet in Calaveras County sure doesn’t like our incoming county manager, Robert Lawton. He went so far as to post a disparaging video on You Tube.

Is Mr. Lawton getting off to a bad start in Luzerne County, showing up late for his new job? He was supposed to start on Feb. 21 but asked for an eight-day delay because he’s driving here from California.

Another strike against him is his job-hopping resume. For some reason that was not a concern of our new county council, which proclaimed that Lawton is our guy to turn around a county that, over the years, has built up a half-billion dollar debt, which we’re all paying for in staggering interest rates.

Anyway, here’s the video that found its way to YouTube. Although it’s not flattering, at least our new manager didn’t seem to lose his temper during the confrontation. And let’s face it, making enemies goes with the territory, but with a disabled vet? When the video ends, click onto another one in the block which pictures him. That one shows a personable Robert Lawton saying he’s eager to work with his new staff and department heads in Solano County.

Let’s hope he works out in Luzerne County, or the council’s judgement will be called into question, considering the importance of this hiring. The council has already lost brownie points with the public after reneging on a promise to not raise taxes.

- Betty Roccograndi

Common Sense For Dummies

National

Feb 152012

President Barack Obama, in pitting the haves against the have-nots, said – with a straight face too – that this is not class warfare.

“It’s common sense. It’s common sense,” he explained of his budget plan to enact new taxes on the wealthy. He had to repeat his claim in case anyone was laughing so hard, he missed it the first time.

At a recent national prayer breakfast, Obama said his allies, including Jesus, Mohammed and the Jews, agree with him, that those who have been blessed need to step up and share their bounty with their fellow man. Or, to put it another way, that those who have worked hard to attain success need to step up and support those who prefer to sit home and watch TV.

Does anyone remember when Joe the Plumber caught Obama off guard and asked him if he advocated redistributing the wealth? Candidate Obama just smiled condescendingly at Joe, who saw right through the future president.

Obama prefers the euphemism, restoring economic fairness.

Does anyone remember when new President Barack Obama said that by the end of his first term, he would cut the federal deficit in half? He has an answer for that.

“Everybody who is out there back in 2009, if you look back what their estimates were in terms of how many jobs had been lost, how bad the economy had contracted when I took office (BUSH’S FAULT), everybody had underestimated it. People thought that the economy contracted 3-percent. It turns (out) it was retracted close to 9-percent. We lost 8 million jobs in a year’s span, about half a year before I took office (BUSH’S FAULT) and half a year after I took office,” Obama told an Atlanta Fox News-affiliated television station.

Now poor Obama said he’s getting “pelted in the media.” For a little miscalculation like that? Ahhhh.

Would he have been elected had we known that instead of cutting the deficit in half like he promised, he’d increase it by $1 trillion each year?

Well, Obama is not finished. He’s now telling us to trust him, that he needs to spend more to get the country back on track down the road.

And, exercising his version of common sense, he wants everyone making over $250,000 a year, including struggling small businesses, to pay more taxes. And when those small business owners die, he wants to get his hands on their money before their kids do. Yes, he wants to reinstate the estate tax, more aptly called the death tax.

And if that’s not enough common sense for you, he wants to increase taxes on those who invest, on those responsible enough to save for a rainy day and to provide for their families’ futures. He’ll do that by raising taxes on dividends. Why should those who save get to keep all the earnings from their investments? Obama has plans for that money so hand it over. Have you no common sense?

So now after admitting that in 2009 everyone and his brother underestimated how many jobs had been lost and just how bad the economy was, he says, “The key, though, is we’re setting ourselves on a path where we can get our debt under control.”

And we’re supposed to just trust him, $5 trillion in additional debt later, that he now has it right. Just trust him with our money for another four years.

Common sense dictates that we send him packing in November.

- Betty Roccograndi

Okay, So Now What?

Local

Feb 142012

President Barack Obama saying that we have to keep this recovery on track is akin to the Luzerne County Council saying that we have to keep the union concessions coming.

Both are preposterous. There is no recovery, and the county’s unions refuse to budge.

Now that The Times Leader has done its homework for our new council and incoming county Manager Robert Lawton, we’ll just have to sit tight to see what they do with these salary figures, outlined in a three-part series.

And we can only hope that Lawton is not a pushover as were some previous county commissioners and president judges, who gladly gave away the store while a disinterested and apathetic public slept. And we’ll see whether council Chairman Jim Bobeck means what he says with the tough talk.

“If they can’t get a handle on escalating costs, there are going to be serious issues down the road that lead to greater cuts,” Bobeck told the newspaper, vowing to reverse what he called “years of contractual negligence.”

Could Bobeck be talking about the TL’s findings that under one union contract, probation officers hired in 2010 at a salary of $42,511 will receive raises totaling $12,407 within four years, bringing their salaries to $54,918? When was the last time your employer gave you a 29-percent pay hike?

Union leader Charles Majikes unconvincingly justified the top-heavy salaries in the probation department saying we just don’t understand the dangers his officers face.

“When we go knock on a door, we have no idea what’s behind the door,” Majikes said. The same could be said of every local police officer, who does not receive a 29-percent pay hike in the span of four years. At least we don’t believe they do. Who knows?

If Majikes swayed anyone by playing the danger card, he lost the argument when reporter Terrie Morgan-Besecker asked him about the domestic relations officers who also receive fat , above average salaries but sit behind desks protected by metal detectors and guards.

Making all union leaders proud, Majikes said they’re still at risk, that if someone approaches their guarded windows because of delinquent child support payments, God only knows what that person might do. “They’re told we’re going to take this much money off of you, people react differently,” he said.

Is it any wonder that those domestic relations officers must be shaking in their boots behind their gilded cages?

And we’d like to know whether it’s necessary to employ five supervisors in the Probation Services department at $59,685 salaries plus a director who’s paid $78,159? Chief Public Defender Al Flora Jr. has a point when he complains that, “The salary structure in the county does not make any sense.” He said the starting salary for assistant district attorneys and public defenders is $20,000 less than some county employees who have less formal education and experience.

Not our problem, says union head Majkes in so many words. He said if county officials over the years weren’t happy with the union contracts, they didn’t have to approve them.

Nya Nya, Nya Nya Nya.

So today, the county council, reneging on its first promise to those who elected them, will hike taxes by another 2-percent, which was made necessary to avoid further layoffs. Union leaders balked at any suggestions of “shared sacrifices.”

Chairman Bobeck said the unions should not expect the council to do that again and that the council will take a close look at union contracts and seek concessions.

See you at binding arbitration.

- Betty Roccograndi

Open? As In Secretly Spending Taxpayers’ Money?

Local

Feb 102012

One of the more interesting comments regarding the announcement that no charges will be filed in connection with the purchase of home alarm systems for two Wilkes-Barre City officials was the mayor’s.

“My administration has been and remains an honest and open one,” Leighton said. That’s rather amusing considering that city taxpayers didn’t have a clue that they paid almost $15,000 to install the systems for Leighton and former administrator, J.J. Murphy, after the two received threats.

Open? As our pal, Bill Clinton, might say, that depends on what the definition of open is. The city council never approved the purchases at an open public meeting.

The news that the state Attorney General dismissed all complaints against Leighton and Murphy came as a surprise to Leighton (sure it did). He told The Times Leader he was unaware of the Jan. 6 letter Luzerne County District Attorney Stephanie Salavantis received. The TL said it got a copy from Salavantis’ assistant.

Funny that the AG’s office, which closed the case, didn’t contact Leighton with the good news or send him a copy of the letter. Is that any way to treat a public official who had to defend himself against what he called “frivolous” and “baseless” charges? He has to wait a month to learn from a reporter that he’s been exonerated?

“In the end, justice prevailed,” said J.J. Murphy, before hoping out loud that complainant Linda Urban, wife of county councilman, Stephen Urban, has a good lawyer.

He also issued this harsh heads-up. ”This is a warning to anybody who wants to slander public or private individuals and should make them think twice.” Of course, he’s got a point. Urban accused him of larceny and theft by unlawful taking and the mayor of criminal conspiracy to commit larceny. There is no love lost between Urban and Leighton, that’s for sure.

As far as secretly using public funds for the two alarm systems, taxpayers had a right to be upset. And because Leighton and Murphy didn’t disclose the purchase publicly, they made matters worse. They said city police Chief Gerard Dessoye recommended the systems after the two city officials and Murphy’s family were threatened.

My question is this. What gives the city’s police chief the right to recommend spending taxpayers’ money as he personally sees fit? What if he were threatened? Could he simply order, on the QT, that an alarm sytem be installed in his house? Or at one of his detective’s? Or a friend’s? Where do you draw the line?

If our new county council members are threatened because of decisions they make, like reneging on campaign promises, should taxpayers provide them with home security systems or bodyguards when they ran for these positions knowing there may be personal risks due to unpopular votes?

Shoud the District Attorney be allowed to pick and choose who gets taxpayer-financed protection without taxpayers’ knowledge?

Murphy left City Hall in 2010 to start his own consulting business and said the charges filed against him hurt that business and insinuated they may have jeopardized his consideration to be hired as county manager. He charged that Urban’s motivation was to hurt Leighton’s re-election campaign and “thought it was important to also defame my character.”

The message is clear: Don’t mess with a public official unless you have all your ducks in order.

But don’t be discouraged, either, if you believe anything is amiss in City Hall, and, lately, there’s been plenty of reason to think that.

- Betty Roccograndi

$6 Million Later

Local

Feb 092012

This is a good one.

Most home and business owners make certain they have adequate insurance in case someone is injured on their properties.

Not CityVest. The non-profit, which defaulted on a $6 million loan to restore the Hotel Sterling, believes others should be held liable if any damages or injuries occur when the hotel is eventually demolished. Incredibly, CityVest - which owns the dilapidated structure - also expects others to pay the bill for tearing it down. Others are the very same taxpayers who are already out $6 million.

CityVest is holding up the demolition of The Sterling by not signing an agreement which would remove the county – which is NOT the owner – from liability, The Times Leader reported. Unbelievable.

How is that any different than someone falling on your neighbor’s property, and you’re the one who is sued?

The county council is grappling with how to proceed here. A few are actually hesitant about taking it down. Harry Haas doesn’t “want to haphazardly demolish a piece of our history.” Maybe Harry can place a call to Donald Trump because, unfortunately, no developers expressed an interest in The Sterling after touring the aging wreck.

What hasn’t been discussed is whether the county plans to take action against CityVest, which borrowed $6 million and seems to have no plans whatsoever to pay it back. Is it really that easy? Borrow $6 million, and because your plans don’t work out, just walk away? Sorry, folks. Better luck next time? Just raise taxes. See ya.

Surely, county officials obtained a promissory note, guaranteeing that CityVest would pay back this loan. Right? Please tell us, they did.

So just what did we get for our $6 million investment to restore the Hotel Sterling?

Well, we got a report that said it would cost between $26.8 million to $35.6 million to restore the once glorious landmark, which is now barricaded to prevent bricks, mortar or glass from falling on passing pedestrians or vehicles.

And we got an estimate of around $1 million to now tear it down.

We got a building that could collapse at at any given moment, which is why we also got traffic headaches for anyone leaving Wilkes-Barre City heading to the West Side.

What did we get for our $6 million? Nothing.

The county’s interim manager Tom Pribula plans to meet with the council on Tuesday to discuss the situation. CityVest officials, once again, could not be reached for comment, probably because they cannot justify their nerve in expecting taxpayears to clean up their mess.

Pribula, at least, doesn’t plan to take this sitting down. He told the TL, “We’ve already wasted enough time and money on that project, and we’re going to protect Luzerne County’s interest above and beyond anybody else’s interest.” Well, that’s good to know.

But Pribula said something else that was interesting. He said, that he’s not political and that “I won’t bend for any political reasons,”

Is it possible that politics is a factor here when $6 million of taxpayers’ money is on the line?

- Betty Roccograndi

What Would Jesus Do?

National

Feb 082012

Well first let us tell you what Jesus wouldn’t do. He certainly would not order Catholic institutions to cover contraceptives and morning after pills in their health care plans as the Obama administration has brazenly dictated.

But if Jesus were running the country, there is something He would do, according to President Barack Obama. Why he would make the rich pay more in taxes and then redistribute the wealth, as Obama wants to do.

“For me as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus’ teaching that, “for unto whom much is given much shall be required,” Obama said at last week’s National Prayer Breakfast in Washington.

What would Mohammed do? Well, he’d pretty much do the same thing.

That principle, Obama said, also “mirrors the Islamic belief that those who’ve been blessed have an obligation to use those blessings to help others.”

The Jews? They’re also on board with Jesus, Mohammed and Obama with their ”doctrine of moderation and consideration for others,” Obama told his congregation at the prayer breakfast.

What would Obama’s pastor of 20 years, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, do? He’d scream, “God damn America.”

Is there no end to Barack Obama’s bag of tricks to get re-elected? Is there no end to his phoniness or hypocrisy?

One day he’s channeling historical Biblical figures to bolster his coalition for engagement in class warfare and the next, he’s igniting a firestorm requiring Catholic institutions to cover in their health care plans birth control, which the Catholic Church is firmly against.

The sheer nerve of this man.

Barack Obama will blindside Roman Catholics when it suits his purpose, then use them to push his class warfare agenda.

“I think to myself,” Obama said, “if I’m willing to give something up as somebody who’s been extraordinarily blessed and give up some of the tax breaks that I enjoy, I actually think that’s going to make economic sense. ”

And then he suggested to the prayer breakfast attendees that Jesus would agree with him. Well, guess what? Jesus would absolutely not agree with the president forcing His church to offer condoms to His flock. Or as Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan, archbishop of New York, put it, “To force American citizens to choose beteween violating their consciences and forgoing their health care is literally unconscionable.”

Speaking at the prayer breakfast, Obama also said, he wakes up every morning and says a “brief prayer” and spends “a little time in scripture and devotion.” I’m sorry, but does anyone really believe that? He can trample on someone else’s religious beliefs, and we’re expected to believe that he’s a man of faith?

Would he ever tell Muslims that because of national security concerns, if you want to live in this country, we cannot allow you to walk the streets with only your eyes showing?

Obama surely was reading from his teleprompter at that prayer breakfast because the only time he has been seen even going to church is when a photo op was necessary. Then we’d see the Obamas dressed to the nines heading off to Mass as though it were a weekly ritual for them. Last we heard, they still hadn’t joined a church since moving into the White House three years ago.

Maybe they just haven’t found a pastor who speaks their language as the Rev. Wright did.

Obama once said that Rev. Wright was like family to him, but when his pastor of 20 years became a problem once his radical rants were exposed, it was bye bye Rev. Wright.

It’s really hard to believe much of what this president says.

What would Jesus do? Probably not give His blessing to Obama’s re-election.

-Betty Roccograndi

Yabba Dabba Doo

Local

Feb 072012

Remember The Flintstones episode where Fred, Wilma, Dino and the cat go to the drive-in diner for a snack? I didn’t either, but Luzerne County Councilwoman Linda McClosky Houck does.

What happens is, after a hard day at the quarry, Fred takes his stone-age cartoon family out to eat. They place their order, which a skinny waitress struggles to deliver. It’s so heavy, she drops their humongous rack of ribs onto the car, a little stone vehicle, powered by Fred’s chubby, little feet. It topples over.

Monday night, McClosky Houck compared that cartoon episode to Luzerne County’s being $400 million in debt.

The Times Leader reported that but didn’t ask any hard follow-up questions, like: Linda, which previous county courthouse officials remind you of Fred Flintstone and Barney Rubble?

The obvious answer, of course, is Greg Skrepenak and Todd Vonderheid since, using Linda’s analogy of the courthouse’s financial problems to The Flintstones, those two bit off more than they could chew on several occasions, borrowing and borrowing and adding to the county’s explosive debt.

And who can forget that $58 million, 20-year lease?

Last night’s council meeting to raise taxes by another 2-percent was a hoot in other ways as well, and not only because the council reneged on its promise to not raise taxes.

While McClosky Houck recalled The Flintstones, Councilman Ed Brominski had Barack Obama on his mind, and he was not pleased.

Brominski, whom we’re learning can be counted on to infuse a little levity into otherwise dry agenda items, like the county budget, was miffed that the six members who voted to raise taxes came with a prepared statement so taxpayers would not be mad at them.

“I didn’t know we were going to have a state of the union address here,” he said, adding that he was offended. He complained that the council is giving the county’s new manager a budget with a tax increase when he’s being paid $110,000 plus benefits to run a more efficient operation.

Then, Stephen J. Urban, kind of warned courthouse employees that he will be watching them to make sure they are working, as opposed to, we’re guessing, reading the paper or playing online solitaire like they do on “The Office.”

Urban said he never sees overworked people at the courthouse and that he will alert both the council and incoming county manager Robert Lawton if he sees anyone slacking off when we’re raising taxes.

Urban might want to check with the unions first before he begins proweling the halls looking for loafers. Their contracts may very well contain language that allows unionized employees to take 3 p.m. catnaps before getting ready to leave for the day. And if the council tries to interfere, the unions could demand binding arbitration, and we all know how that goes.

So now after agreeing to a $122.6 million budget that includes up to 60 layoffs and another tax hike on county homeowners and businesses, the council, next Monday, will hold a meaningless mandatory public hearing on the budget. I say meaningless because no matter what you say, the budget will be adopted the next day.

So just go to vent or have a few laughs.

Like the Flintstones say, “You’ll have a yabba dabba good time, a dabba good time, you’ll have a gay old time.”

- Betty Roccograndi

Ethics Commission: Nepotism’s Okay With Us

Local

Feb 032012

The state Ethics Commission has determined that Wilkes-Barre City Mayor Tom Leighton did nothing wrong when the city hired time and time again his kids for summer jobs and internships.

Incredibly, the ethically-challenged Ethics Commission reasoned that Leighton didn’t hire them; his human resources director did. All he did was sign the executive orders putting them on the city’s payroll.

You say tomato; I say tomahto.

Busy executive that he is, maybe Leighton didn’t even notice the names on the orders as he was routinely signing them. Maybe his human resources director didn’t even make the connection that she was recommending her boss’s daughters, son, niece and nephew over the years.

Maybe his daughters and son didn’t even tell Dad they were applying for summer jobs and internships because they didn’t expect or want any special treatment.

Maybe the Ethics Commission needs to disband because the message it just sent was there’s nothing wrong with nepotism as long as the elected official remains at a safe distance.

So for all you school directors, city councils, boards, and authorities out there, just make sure that you abstain from voting when your wives, husbands, daughters, sons-in-law are about to be hired. If anyone files a complaint, don’t worry, it won’t be worth the paper on which it’s written. The brohouha will blow over. It usually does.

So we need to ask, if the mayor didn’t do anything wrong, why did his daughter, niece and nephew immediately resign last year from their positions after The Citizens’ Voice uncovered their hirings and reported on all the others? They shouldn’t have. Maybe the city should give them back pay with interest because they needlessly resigned under apparent duress.

Mayor Leighton was pleased with the ruling. “I respect the decision,” he said, “I’ve worked hard for the city over the last eight years, and I will continue to work hard in my third term.” That’s good to know, but your statement has nothing whatsoever to with the bullet you just dodged.

Leighton more than likely also respected the commission’s veiled blessing to hire his kids again if he so chooses.

“In the future it would be advisable to obtain an advisory opinion from the commission prior to participating or acting in any matter that may be reviewable under the provisions of the Ethics Act,” said the commission’s executive director, John J. Contino, Esquire

Or in laymen’s terms, just call us first before you hire your daughter this summer. But don’t worry, we’ll okay with it and will nip any citizens’ complaints in the bud. We get it. To the victor goes the spoils, and if the public doesn’t like it, that’s just too bad.

And just between us, our bark is worse than our bite.

- Betty Roccograndi

Older Entries

PureBunkum

The Buck Stops With You – No, With You- Don’t Look At Me

The Duchess of DC Lives It Up

Charge This Lawyer With – Something

As Rodney Dangerfield Might Say, Take My Hotel, Please.

To Meyers: And I,I,I, I, I Will Always Luuvv Youououou.

Stay Focused On This One

Thanks For The Bone, Washington

Someone Doesn’t Like Our Mr. Lawton

Common Sense For Dummies

Okay, So Now What?

Open? As In Secretly Spending Taxpayers’ Money?

$6 Million Later

What Would Jesus Do?

Yabba Dabba Doo

Ethics Commission: Nepotism’s Okay With Us

Follow Me

Polls

Archives

National

Site Links

Local Bloggers