Luzerne County Courthouse File photo Luzerne County’s Government Study Commission heard presentations Thursday from two citizens involved in developing the current home rule charter — Christopher Kersey and Gerald Cross.
Kersey served on the study commission that drafted the charter, which took effect in January 2012, and also was part of the transition team that helped prepare for its implementation after voters approved the change.
Cross was executive director of the Pennsylvania Economy League when it served as a consultant to Kersey and other charter drafters. The nonpartisan and nonprofit public policy organization is serving as a consultant for the current commission, although Cross has retired.
The current seven-citizen commission will have until early next year to determine if it wants to make changes and, if so, another nine months to draft them. An extra two months is allowable if the commission recommends electing council by district instead of at large.
Kersey said he believes county government is operating better today than it was under the prior three-commissioner/row officer system based on what he’s read and heard, including fiscal improvements and other efficiencies.
In reviewing possible changes, such as reducing the number and size of council or deviating from a unified county law office, Kersey asked the commission to weigh the negative consequences and not only the positive ones.
Commission Vice Chairman Vito Malacari asked Kersey if there are any charter provisions he would change.
Kersey said he would consider relaxing some restrictions for citizens to serve on county boards, most notably the barring of those who are employed by a business that has a county contract.
Charter drafters spent a lot of time debating the pros and cons of an 11-member council, and Kersey said he understood the arguments for 11 but believed that was too large. He would recommend seven council members.
Kersey said he did not support three-term limits for council, the district attorney and controller because voters ultimately have the power to reject an ineffective elected official. While acknowledging term limits are popular, he worries they cause the county to lose some people with valuable experience.
He supported the charter’s election of council members countywide, saying the county provides the same services for all residents, such as courts, child welfare and real estate deed recording.
“There’s no Hazleton way to do this. There’s no Wilkes-Barre way to do this,” Kersey said of those services.
Kersey wholeheartedly supports the charter’s creation of a central law division and does not believe council, the election board and other entities should have their own legal representation. He predicted such a change would increase costs and lead to in-county litigation, saying the current system requires attorneys to focus on what’s best for the county as a whole and not individual departments.
Malacari asked for Kersey’s opinion on changing the manager to an elected post.
Kersey said he initially thought an elected manager would be better but was “100% wrong on that.” He believes the charter’s requirement for council to hire a manager based on merit was the correct choice so there’s no worry about an elected manager catering to campaign donors.
He also said he agrees with charter wording requiring merit hiring and anti-nepotism.
Cross outlined the history of home rule law and goals of the current charter.
He said he disagrees with descriptions that the charter has separate legislative (council) and executive (manager) branches because it makes it appear they are equal and opposing. Council is the governing body, and the manager is a “facilitator” serving at the pleasure of council, he said, expressing frustration over newspapers “playing up conflict between the manager and council.”
Cross also pointed out council could resolve many issues at any time through administrative code revisions, describing that charter-required document as a flexible operating manual intended to address details that the charter did not anticipate.
Although the charter is very specific in some matters, it is still very broad to give elected officials power to interpret and detail procedures as needed through the code, he said.
Cross said he does not believe an elected manager is in the county’s best interest, asserting it would lead to “more fights” and politics.
He cautioned charters have failed to win voter approval because they involved too much “inside baseball” and did not convince citizens they would solve problems. The famous charter oppositions mantra is, “If you don’t know, vote no,” he said.
In other business Thursday, the commission agreed to submit a 2025 budget request for $185,000 to the county administration to cover anticipated consultant, solicitor, clerical, security, information technology and miscellaneous expenses, such as legal advertising and printing/postage.
Local News
Comments / 0