Click here to subscribe today or Login.
Tuesday, March 04, 2003 Page: 7A
THE VOTERS COMMISSIONERS TOM PIZANO, TOM MAKOWSKI, I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED IN
YOUR DECISION IN NOT FILING AN APPEAL ON BEHALF OF THE VOTERS AND TAXPAYERS
ASSOCIATION, AND LET’S INCLUDE THE LUZERNE COUNTY ELECTION OFFICIALS. YOU
SHOULD HAVE LET THIS MATTER RUN ITS COURSE TO THE END AND IT WOULD NOT LEAVE A
LOT OF UNANSWERED “IFS.” IN MY OPINION, THE COUNTY ELECTION BOARD ALONG WITH
YOU HAVE EGG ON YOUR FACES. JUDGE AUGELLO RULING ON THE WILKES-BARRE CITY
ELECTION, REDUCING SEVEN COUNCIL MEMBERS TO FIVE AND VOTE BY DISTRICTS,
IGNORED THE PENNSYLVANIA ELECTION CODE. THE CODE REQUIRES 20 SIGNATURES AND 20
DAYS TO FILE AN APPEAL, NOT 14 SIGNATURES AND 395 DAYS LATE, A VIOLATION. IT
SEEMS THIS WAS OVERLOOKED AND THE ISSUE WAS FOCUSED ON THE PLAIN ENGLISH
VERSION. LET ME PUT THIS WRITING IN PLAIN ENGLISH: 1. 2,252 VOTERS VOTED FOR A
CHANGE IN CITY GOVERNMENT. 2. ACCORDING TO PA. ELECTION CODE, APPEALS CAN BE
FILED CONTESTING THE ELECTION REGARDING ITS OUTCOME. 3. I REPEAT AGAIN TO FILE
AN APPEAL, PA. ELECTION CODE REQUIRES 20 SIGNATURES AND 20 DAYS TO FILE AFTER
THE ELECTION. THIS APPEAL SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN HEARD BECAUSE THE STATUTES OF
LIMITATION HAD EXPIRED. 4. THE APPEAL FILED WAS SIX SIGNATURES SHORT AND FILED
395 DAYS LATER INSTEAD OF 20 DAYS. 5. THE PLAIN ENGLISH VERSION WAS PRINTED IN
THE CITIZENS VOICE. 6. THE ELECTION BOARD OF THE COUNTY FAILED TO POST THE
PLAIN ENGLISH AT THE POLLS. 7. WHOSE FAULT? 8. WILKES-BARRE CITY COUNCIL HAD
THEIR LAWYER TO TRY AND STOP THE TAXPAYERS GROUP FROM JOINING THE
APPORTIONMENT SUIT AND USED OUR TAXPAYERS’ DOLLARS TO FIGHT US. 9. JUDGE
AUGELLO WAS COY IN HANDING DOWN HIS DECISION. WHY DID HE WAIT FOR FRIDAY, JAN.
17? FOR AN APPEAL TO BE FILED IN 10 DAYS, SATURDAY, SUNDAY, AND MARTIN LUTHER
KING DAY, IT LEFT US ONLY FIVE DAYS TO FILE AN APPEAL. 10. THE JUDGE WAS GIVEN
THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE CASE BECAUSE THE PLAIN ENGLISH VERSION WAS
PRINTED IN THE CITIZENS VOICE. HE FAILED TO OVERTURN HIS DECISION AND AGAIN HE
ANNOUNCED IT ON A FRIDAY. WHY FRIDAY? WE WOULD LOSE FOUR DAYS AND THIS WOULD
INCLUDE THE WEEKENDS TO FILE AN APPEAL TO THE COMMONWEALTH COURT. WAS THIS
ANOTHER PLOY TO GIVE US LESS TIME? 11. YOU COMMISSIONERS HELD A CLOSED-DOOR
MEETING ON MONDAY, FEB. 10 TO DISCUSS IF THE COUNTY WOULD APPEAL. ON
WEDNESDAY, FEB. 12 YOU HELD A PRESS CONFERENCE AT 2 P.M. AND ANNOUNCED YOU
WOULD NOT APPEAL. WHY? NOW WE LOSE THREE DAYS TO APPEAL TO THE COMMONWEALTH
COURT. 12. WAS IT NOT THAT THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND ELECTION OFFICIAL
ERRED AND THE TAXPAYERS AND VOTERS HAVE TO PAY FOR IT? 13. THE VOTERS VOTED
FOR SEVEN COUNCIL MEMBERS REDUCED TO FIVE MEMBERS AND ELECTED BY DISTRICTS.
THE ELECTION RESULTS PROVED IT. 14. IF JUDGE AUGELLO FOLLOWED THE ELECTION
CODE THE CASE SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN HEARD. BEING WHAT HAD TRANSPIRED, YOU
COMMISSIONERS HAD THE RIGHT TO APPEAL, BUT YOU TURNED YOUR BACKS ON THE VOTERS
(YOUR EMPLOYERS). 15. THE CITY OF WILKES-BARRE FILED AN APPEAL REGARDING THE
STEAM HEAT PLANT, THEY WERE ONE DAY LATE AND THE COURT RULED IT WAS TOO LATE
$400,000 TAXPAYERS’ MONEY LOST. 16. FOURTEEN (14) PERSONS FILED AN APPEAL 395
DAYS LATER AND THE JUDGE HEARD THE APPEAL AND VOTED IN FAVOR OF IT. 17. DO YOU
UNDERSTAND WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN IN PLAIN ENGLISH? 18. HAS THE UGLY HEAD OF
POLITICAL POLITICS CONTINUED TO SURFACE BY SUPPORTING PARTISAN POLITICAL
OFFICIALS? 19. I’M ASHAMED AND APPALLED BY YOUR CONDUCT AND HOW YOU REPRESENT
VOTERS AND TAXPAYERS OF WILKES-BARRE AND LUZERNE COUNTY. 20. GENTLEMEN WOULD
YOU CLASSIFY THIS AS CLEAN OR DIRTY POLITICS IN LUZERNE COUNTY. CHARLES URBAN
WILKES-BARRE