Click here to subscribe today or Login.
It didn’t work for Nancy Pelosi, and it won’t work for Walter Griffith.
Last week, Luzerne County Councilman Griffith theatrically tore up an unopened letter from county District Attorney Stefanie Salavantis and shoved the pieces through the mail slot in the DA’s Office door.
As reported on the front page of today’s paper, the letter from Salavantis had been handed to Griffith by council Chairman Tim McGinley. who indicated Salavantis was raising assertions Griffith should not be voting on matters in her office due to an alleged conflict.
This is a complicated issue, so let us carefully explain the case.
1. Ripping the letter
Why did Griffith rip the letter up and not read it?
Griffith said he did so because it was presented to the chair instead of him, and he believes Salavantis should notify him directly if she has any concerns about him, not through his colleagues.
Salavantis said her hand delivery of the letter to the council chairman was proper protocol because she believes the matter “affects county council as a whole” regarding decisions related to her office.
McGinley, meanwhile, said he had no advance warning when Salavantis gave him the letter and said he did not share the letter with council colleagues or anyone else.
2. Conflict allegations
As today’s story explains, Salavantis believes there is a potential for conflict based on the fact that two detectives in her office previously investigated Griffith’s possible violations of the state’s Wiretap Act along with Federal Bureau of Investigation agents. Attorneys affiliated with her office also approved search warrants.
In order to avoid a potential conflict at that time, Salavantis’ office referred prosecution to the state attorney general’s office because Griffith was county controller and had oversight responsibilities pertaining to her office. A referral was appropriate “based on the appearance of impropriety” and provisions in the county home rule charter and ethics code, she said.
In 2013, Griffith pleaded guilty to three misdemeanor counts of obstructing the administration of law for illegally recording three conversations when he was controller in 2010 and 2011.
Griffith agreed to resign as county controller, remove himself from the 2013 controller race and not to seek elective office during his three-year probation term. Griffith said he did not know he had to expressly obtain permission to record.
Given that history and potential for retaliation, Salavantis said “it is our position that Mr. Griffith is required by multiple county codes to abstain from votes pertaining to this office.”
3. Griffith’s response
Griffith said he has “no intentions” of recusing himself or abstaining from voting on DA’s office matters and was elected to make decisions on the behalf of residents.
He also said he does not have a vendetta against Salavantis.
“It was my mistake, and I admitted it. I do not hold a grudge,” Griffith said. “I’m moving on. I paid my penance, and today’s a new day. Move on.”
4. Our thoughts
Griffith said he does not have a vendetta against Salavantis.
Maybe not, but ripping up that letter and shoving it into her mail slot sure doesn’t suggest any respect for her.
Salavantis is an attorney, a high-ranking elected official and county department head. She, too, has obligations to residents and taxpayers: To uphold the law, and to work with council and the administration to ensure her office has the resources to do so in the most efficient manner possible.
Given the history between her office and Griffith, we feel it’s reasonable that Salavantis raise this concern now to avoid any potential problems in the future.
What seems unclear to us is whether the DA’s allegations can stand on their own, or whether they should — as Griffith suggests — be submitted to the state or county ethics commission for review.
We agree that it might be wise to have an outside entity review the matter, just as the DA’s office turned prosecution of Griffith to the AG’s office during his criminal case. Griffith was grossly out of line, however, in tearing the letter unread and suggesting that Salavantis should have presented it to him personally. That’s suggests no inclination to cooperate.
Griffith’s petulant reaction, coupled with Salavantis’ clear need to handle this by the book, are exactly why the DA was right to forward the letter through the chairman.
Griffith might have “paid his penance,” but his behavior shows a total lack of leadership and maturity, just like Pelosi’s speech ripping at the State of The Union.
Screaming “I represent the people” every time someone calls him on it is going to get tired fast.
— Times Leader