On Sunday, JD Malone had an article on the District Magistrate Race in the Nazareth area (read it here). He notes that five candidates are vying to "preside over the court that covers Nazareth, Bath and Stockertown and the townships of Upper Nazareth and East Allen."
If you want to meet these candidates, stop by the Nazareth News Agency on Thursday, April 26 between 7 p.m. and 9 p.m. for a Candidate Open House. All five candidates will be in attendance to meet residents and voters and answer their questions in a casual, non-partisan format.
Contact me for more information (email: editor@newsovercoffee.com).
9 comments:
I intend to be there and I'll have questions. This is an extremely important position and people should take the time to educate themselves. The ET article is a great starting point. But the best way to do this is by questioning the candidates. Let me throw some things out, and I'll voice my concerns in advance rather than springing them on these candidates.
1) Isn't Falcone tied into the Democratic machine? Isn't that why Rodney Applegate filed her petition challenge? What has she promised the Dem machine?
2) Falcone is already a lawyer. Isn't she just looking for a part-time job to supplement her income? Is she willing to pledge she will resign her position and devote herself full-time as a magistrate?
3) Hammer and Siegfried are both full-time police officers whose colleagues actively appear in Nazareth's district court. How the hell can they expect to be impartial? They are going to be very familiar and friendly with the Colonial Region, Nazareth and Upper Nazareth cops who appear to testify. A district judge is supposed to be neutral and impartial - not another arm of the police department.
4) I like Todd Buskirk , who works at Northampton County prison, but why the hell is a judicial candidate talking about a "tough stance" on gang activity? That's fine for a DA or a cop. It's not fine for a judge.
5) WillBuskirk be collecting a public pension from Northampton County while he draws his salary as a part-time magistrate? I'm sick of all the double dipping.
6) Nearly every Buskirk sign I see appears next to as building owned by Orwig. What the hell is up with that? When campaign finance reports are filed, we'll see that Orwig is a big time donor. That bothers me because Orwig owns the building where the district justice office is currently located, and I have to wonder whether there's been a secret deal to continue to rent there, even after Nazareth moves its offices.
5) Capobianco tells me he'll move his offices to the new Nazareth location, which will end up saving taxpayers money. He tells me he will devote full-time to this position, something that is needed. Rather than talking about "getting tough," he tells me he will start a program to educate the youth, and will visit schools on a regular basis to provide some educational awareness. He is in law enforcement, but as a deputy sheriff, is not tied into individual police departments like Hammer and Siegfried. And he won't be drawing a pension.
6) Falcone claims the next judge must be an attorney because of the "complexity of the law." Really? Is she saying that nonlawyers are incompetent? Does that include Elmo Frey? Does she know better than the state legislature? My own experience is that the best district judges are nonlawyers because they have something most lawyers lack - common sense. And if only lawyers who understand the "complexiuty of the law" should be judges, why is it that none of us have ever seen her in a courtroom? Has she ever tried a jury trial in Northampton County?
hey bernie,
each of the candidates told me they view the magistrate position as a full-time job.
JD,
Of the 5 candidates involved, it would have to be a full-time job for 4 of them. Four of the five could not simultaneously work in law enforcement or at the prison and be a judge. But for the 5th candidate, I've read no pledge that she will give up her provate practice. I've heard nothing from her indicating she will no longer practice law but will devote all her time and energy to the magisterial position. That's one question to which I want a very clear answer. I don't want her or anyone to say they'll be a full-time magistrate and then discover that they're doing something eles that they'll explain away as a part-time occupation.
This troubles me. I also know for a fact that Falcone's, Dave Ceraul, sent a fax to local lawyers asking them for their support.
I'm just getting back into the primary races after worrying about things like my lawn and garden, etc., but I remember reading about the nomination petition and that the judge stated that it was really short on numbers.
I know the Applegate's very well and know that they are decent, upstanding people in the community. They are retired teachers and local business owners. They are well-respected and very civic-minded.
It sounds like they challenged that petition for all the right reasons. And after hearing that the petition challenge was valid, it definitely sounds like they did the right thing. They pointed out an ineligible and inaccurate nomination petition.
Which, if I'm not mistaken, is exactly what you did with Franczak, Bernie!
I've also had John Capobianco, Gary Hammer and Yvonne Falcone stop by my house. And after listening to all of them talk, my decision is clear. I've got a blue and white lawn sign with the name Falcone on it to prove it.
Anon 5:06!
There was a blatant difference between Franczak and Silfies. Franczak did not even live here, and dropped out on his own when he was made aware he couldn't use his YMCA address to establish residency. No one sued him. But had he insisted on running, he would not be answering to me. His violation was substantive, and he'd have bigger worries than me.
In Silfies' case, she was just four signatures short of the 100 required to be eligible on the ballot. She acted in good faith, relying on a list provided by the voter registration office. The lawe did not smile on her, but she had a claim in equity. The challenge against her was an undemocratic exaltation of form over substance. I certainly would never have sued anyone over a technical defect like that, and feel bad that voters were deprived of the opportunity to make their own choice.
As far as the Applegates are concerned, I'm sure they're nice people and very civic-minded. I'm equally certain Applegate is part of the local Democratic machine. He fosters machine politics as opposed to real democracy. His view of good government and mine are probably two different things. It is people like Applegate that make tyrannical party bosses like Joe Long possible. It is people like Applegate who make those smoke-filled back rooms possible, where the local machine endorses their own boys instead of letting the people decide things. We saw how that works in Nazareth.
I am troubled by Falcone's association with that local party machine. I'm also troubled by the needless challenge to a candidate who was probably going nowhere anyway.
I'll have more to say on my own blog instead of monopolizing Ross' with a topic that really interests me. And I do respect your informed decision.
For the record, I am Republican as are my entire family and we are Falcone supporters. When you are presented with an opportunity to vote for a highly qualified candidate, why would you settle for less? Her connection to Applegate doesn't bother me at all.
I don't know the inner workings of the Democrats but I know who Yvonne is and what she stands for.
I respect your informed choice. Mine is different. The people will decide. I'm just thankful for an opportunity to pose some tough questions. All of the candidates deserve credit for their willingness to appear at Ross' forum.
I appreciate Bernie's stepping up to start the conversation on these candidates. This race will have a very big impact on the community for a long time. While it is not a life appointment, it could very well be given the history of these positions.
The person in this role must have the capacity to determine who has made a mistake, who needs help, and who has been offered help and refuses to accept it.
To say this is an easy position would be an understatement. It is one of great responsibility.
If you have questions, come out to the meeting Thursday and ask them - one to one. Again, there will be no debate, instead it is a chance for people to meet the candidates and decide which person is the one you would want to elect.
Having said that, a different spin is possible for several of the points Bernie makes.
1. If you don't have enough signatures, shame on you. There is a process in place and everyone is encouraged to get many more than they need in the event of a challenge. It may have been an honest attempt, but it could also be viewed as a case of doing the least that is required to be eligible. I think people would want more commitment and to be on the ballot for a judicial position the candidate's application should be beyond reproach.
2. If there is a powerful party machine, you'd only say you weren't interested in their support if you knew you weren't going to get it or you weren't eligible to get it. I can't blame the person who got the endorsement for making the correct campaign play.
3. I don't believe District Magistrate is part-time, at least in pay. My understanding is that the position pays mid $70,000 with state benefits. I like the pledge idea to commit to full-time or at least demonstrate a minimum of 40 per week to the job.
4. I don't think Buskirk's comments were that far removed from Hammer's, "I look at this as the next step in my law-enforcement career."
5. Buskirk's relationship financially with Orwig as you saw will be revealed when reports are filed. Using an existing office is always easier than moving. There would be as many good reasons to stay put as there would be to move. Who is to say if Orwig is actively supporting Buskirk, or if Buskirk asked to place the signs and others didn't?
6. Do you mean Capobianco is going to move the magistrate offices into the new borough building? This is the first I've heard of this and it would seem if you are concerned with "cozy" or "friendly" relationships putting the magistrate into the building that houses the police force (on both floors) would create exactly the situation you are concerned about with Hammer and Siegfried.
7. Again politics vs. reality, if I were Falcone and I was the only attorney in the race, you better believe I'd want to promote the idea that an attorney is required for the position.
Finally, as in any local election, I know a handful of these candidates and am receiving their mailings already. I look forward to talking to them, because it has seemed to me that some one on one time in more casual conversation will give you a good feel for the person's ability. Are they comfortable in the conversation? Are they coached? What came across as genuine and what did you think about it?
I'm looking forward to speaking with them all and look forward to seeing you (Bernie) and everyone else there Thursday.
Ross,
I appreciate you taking the time and trouble to have this forum, and compliment each candidate who comes.
I believe John does intend to try and relocate his offices to Nazareth's new municipal offices if elected. For God's sake, it's only across the alley now. And I did hear that mentioned as a hopeful possibility by borough officials during a public meeting. It makes financial sense. It makes the secretaries who work in a DJ's office feel more secure. It's what's done in Palmer. In Easton, Gay Elwell is moving to the courthouse. All of this saves $ for taxpayers. I don't see that having a DJ office near a police HQ presents an appearance of impropriety. In fact, I think it's logical. That's why courthouses are usually next to jails.
I'm fascinated by your able attempt at turning everything around. And you're right. It's called spinning. I'll be posting this fascinating and important topic on my own blog tomorrow. In fact, I took the day off to research and write the post.
Post a Comment