UPDATE: Luzerne County voters have decisively rejected a proposed revision to the county’s Home Rule charter in the elections held on November 7, 2023. With 120 out of 186 precincts reporting, the count shows 29,993 votes against the charter and 20,184 in favor. Mail-in ballots reflect a similar trend, with a rejection tally of 10,635 to 7,749.
The proposed charter aimed to reduce the county council from 11 members to 9 and modestly revise the county’s government structure. This proposal followed a 2010 charter that eliminated the previous three-county commissioner system and ended elections for seven row offices. Under the current charter, only the district attorney, controller, and council members are elected officials. Critics argued that the new charter would concentrate power within a smaller council, diminishing representation for smaller communities and underrepresented groups.
The push for the revised charter originated from a government study commission formed after voters approved a referendum in April 2024. The commission, which included Tim McGinley, voted 4-2 to propose the new charter. McGinley, who previously served on the council, expressed concerns that the proposal strayed from the goal of minimizing political influence in governance.
Walter Griffith, the county controller, branded the proposal a “bait and switch,” claiming it would allow council members to alter who can serve on the county election board and ethics commission. The backlash was evident, as most current council members and candidates opposed the charter.
Despite the opposition, proponents like Sam Sanguedolce, the Luzerne County District Attorney, and state Rep. Brenda Pugh, R-120, voiced support for the charter. Pugh emphasized in a Facebook post, “This isn’t change for change’s sake — it’s about a more effective, ethical, and responsive county government.” Sanguedolce stated that reducing the council size would enhance accountability.
However, the charter’s proposed revisions included controversial term limits that would not apply retroactively, allowing Sanguedolce to potentially extend his tenure beyond the standard four-year term, raising questions about transparency.
As Luzerne County grapples with this pivotal decision, the rejection of the revised charter signals a strong message from the electorate about the direction of their governance. The implications of this vote are profound, shaping the future structure of the county’s government and the representation of its communities.
What’s next? The county government will continue under the current charter, and discussions about future governance reforms are likely to remain a focal point in upcoming council meetings. Voters can expect ongoing dialogue about how to balance effective governance with representation in the months ahead.
Stay tuned for more updates as this story develops and as Luzerne County navigates its ambitious governance landscape.
