Erie County council votes to sue over 2025 budget, asks Auditor General to audit finances; ordinance limiting county resource use introduced

Erie County Council on Feb. 25 voted 4 to 3 to direct the council solicitor to file suit to enforce the 2025 annual budget and to seek to enjoin what the resolution called the administration’s “illegal tax collection efforts.” The council later approved a separate resolution asking the Auditor General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to investigate county budgeting and accounting policies for 2023, 2024 and 2025.

The measures came after weeks of public concern and extended council debate about three different budget figures that members and commenters said have appeared during the 2025 budget process. “There was the original proposed budget and then there was a budget the council passed and then there seems to be this third budget that is mysteriously being announced by the executive,” public commenter Bridal Tapfler said during the hearing.

The Auditor General request (Resolution 4-2025) passed on a roll call after council members discussed controller capacity and ongoing local reviews. Mary Rennie, speaking during public comment, urged the action: “The Home Rule Charter provides for the county services and facilities with the highest degree of accountability, efficiency, and economy,” she said, arguing a forensic review was needed.

Council members described differing reasons for their votes. A number of council members who opposed the lawsuit said they were reluctant to impede municipal tax collection or preferred a court to settle the dispute. One council member said municipalities’ tax notices would go out and that filing suit did not inherently prevent collections. Another said the case was about “the separation of powers” and protecting council’s appropriations authority.

Beyond the two resolutions, council introduced—on first reading—an ordinance (Ordinance 11-2025) that would amend the Erie County Administrative Code to tighten restrictions on use of county resources and limit county accounts and social media to official government business. The proposal followed multiple public comments criticizing posts on county-managed social media and alleged misuse of county pages to amplify political messages; public commenter Matt Dexter said such matters “are not the questions of an opposing team or a political enemy” but of public accountability and urged courts and the Auditor General to open the books.

Council also held first readings of ordinances connected to Pleasant Ridge Manor, including a proposed guarantee agreement and a $700,000 letter of credit, and a supplemental appropriation for juvenile probation. The Pleasant Ridge measure was introduced as a first read—action on it was not final and no adoption was recorded.

Votes at a glance

- Resolution 3-2025: “A resolution directing council’s solicitor to file suit to enforce the 2025 annual budget and enjoin the administration’s illegal tax collection efforts.” Outcome: approved, 4–3. (Motion language as introduced.) - Resolution 4-2025: “A resolution directing the Erie County Chief Clerk to request the Auditor General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to conduct an investigation of the budget and accounting policies employed by the county administration for the budget years 2023, 2024, and 2025.” Outcome: approved (roll-call vote recorded in favor by members present). - Ordinance 11-2025: First reading—amend county administrative code to restrict use of county resources and limit use to official government business. Introduced; vote on final adoption not held. - Ordinance 9-2025 and Ordinance 10-2025: First readings introduced (Pleasant Ridge guarantee; juvenile probation supplemental appropriation). No final vote recorded. - Other: Appointment votes for advisory boards were acted on and recorded by roll call during the meeting (see minutes).

Council members and public speakers repeatedly asked for clarity on line-item changes and transfers. “The controller’s part of the controller’s function is to look at the year before,” a council member said during debate, urging that local capacity be used before or alongside a statewide audit. Several council members described finding transfers and line-item adjustments that they said had not been adequately explained during the budget process.

Public commenters pressed council to pursue transparency and enforcement. Brian Graff said the finance committee meeting was “available for viewing on YouTube” and encouraged fellow residents to watch the testimony; Olivia Heibach, CEO of Meds, framed an unrelated county policy concern about ICE detainers as part of a broader call for county accountability. Gretchen Blau and others criticized the county executive’s public messaging and urged enforcement of county resource rules.

Chairman Scatella and other council members said some issues are likely to be resolved in court if litigation proceeds, and several members said they hope the Auditor General’s review will clarify accounting practices and transfers. The Pleasant Ridge guarantee and the administrative-code ordinance remain in first-read status; the lawsuit directing action on the budget is now formal council policy and will be handled by the council solicitor.

Next steps include solicitor filings on Resolution 3, any follow-up communications with the Auditor General under Resolution 4, and committee consideration of the introduced ordinances. The council scheduled its next regular meeting for March 11, 2025.