Luzerne County study commission approves proposed home-rule charter, unanimously certifies final report

The Luzerne County Government Study Commission voted to approve a proposed home-rule charter and then unanimously certified its final report after technical difficulties interrupted the meeting and multiple emailed public comments were read into the record.

The commission voted 4-2, with one abstention, to approve the charter; later the commission voted unanimously to approve and certify the final report, with the certification leaving the notary date blank so it can be completed when notarization occurs. The meeting included a recess to resolve Zoom and in-room audio issues before commissioners resumed public comment and action.

Public commenters — read into the record when audio problems prevented some attendees from participating live — raised repeated objections to provisions they said would weaken independent oversight. Anita Davis of Wilkes-Barre urged keeping county council at 11 members and opposed changes she said would allow council to alter the board of elections. Alyssa Coleman of Swartzell Borough said proposed eliminations or weakening of the ethics commission and changes to election oversight were “misguided and nonsensical.” Walter L. Griffiths Jr., identified in the comments as the Luzerne County controller, argued that provisions in the draft charter (citing drafts of sections including 3.08 and 8.04) would allow council to restrict the controller’s access to records and described that as a “fatal flaw.”

The commission’s consultant presented a final report accompanying the charter draft, saying the document includes a transition schedule and a short recommendation for a transition committee and that standard certification and treasurer’s report pages are included. The consultant also outlined plans for hard-copy distribution and said the county clerk or public library branches could be used to make printed copies available. A motion to table further action on forming a transition committee was approved earlier in the meeting.

Commissioners spoke before the charter vote, expressing a mix of support and concern. Several members called the draft an improvement and said it preserves key elements of the 2010 charter while adding fiscal controls and flexibility for county government; other members objected primarily to provisions they said would permit county council to change the Board of Elections’ structure and to alter the ethics commission’s composition. One commissioner summarized the public concern: the proposed changes could reduce independent oversight of elections and ethics enforcement.

Roll call on the charter approval was recorded as follows: Malakari — yes; Malcomis — no; McGinley — abstain; Mitchell — yes; Schaffer — no; Urban — yes; Ritsik — yes. The tally was reported as 4 yes, 2 no, 1 abstention. The subsequent motion to approve and certify the final report (with the notary date left blank for later completion) passed unanimously on roll call.

Commission staff and the consultant said the commission will arrange notarization and make certification pages available. The consultant also recommended a communications plan and noted that the report includes a certification page and the treasurer’s report; staff said the final certification and any hard-copy locations will be determined and published. Commissioners referenced a future public vote when discussing next steps for the charter, and multiple speakers noted the charter would be presented to voters in the fall election period.

During the meeting the commission also dealt with administrative items: a treasurer’s update referenced budget transfers and an invoice related to sheriff hours totaling $6,129.35 paid to date; staff confirmed standard language in the treasurer’s report noting that some expenses remain to be finalized. The meeting concluded after a period for non-agenda public comment and a motion to adjourn.

Next steps described on the record: complete notarization of the certification page, finalize any printing and posting plans with the county for public access, and proceed with the administrative steps required to carry the commission’s approved materials forward to the next legal or electoral process.