Is it Editorial OCD?
    _________________________

    RAVES of chuckles reading today's ed piece, "Honeymoon," on heraldstandard.com,
    for the sheer kick of providing us with an early Sunday morning laugh, counting yet
    another instance that the editorial board or writer(s) seemingly gets off by parroting
    its ever too sickeningly familiar reminder that former commissioners childishly fought
    with the public during recorded meetings, even calling the public "morons."

    Only it isn't really funny.



    "Honeymoon," written at the start of the tenth month work performance review period
    together of the current board of commissioners, slaps out at Commissioner Angela
    Zimmerlink for voting against recent LERTA giveaways and against the
    reappointment of a county authority member.

    What the thinking public knows -- for some time, too -- is that Zimmerlink opposes
    LERTA and Koz giveaways. People who voted for her knew so. There's no surprise
    there. Plenty of people view those types of tax free zones as corporate welfare
    measures.

    What the ed piece online today fails to remind readers is that two former
    commissioners in August of 2015 approved a LERTA by a 2-1 vote, yet, quite
    pitifully, were unable to identify the parcel or area receiving the LERTA and could not
    or would not publicly identify the name of the property owner to receive the LERTA.

    "Honeymoon" failed to remind us that two former commissioners blindly voted on that
    LERTA 13 months ago unable to say with any respectable degree of certainty
    whether that LERTA would pertain only to one parcel of land or an entire business
    park.






    "Honeymoon" failed to go one of many more steps it should have gone, to follow up
    with past LERTA businesses to update on expansion of staff or production since
    LERTA fringes kicked in, for example, for that one particular property owner 13
    months ago.

    At the time, the business on the property receiving that LERTA employed 130 full-
    time workers and wanted to hire 175 more staff through 2018. Have any new
    proposed jobs been created there since that vague LERTA was approved 13 months
    ago? As a whole, how about others who have benefited from other past LERTA or
    Koz tax breaks? How many stuck around to provide sources of employment for
    county residents under LERTA status, stayed for the complete duration of the 10-
    year periods, or stayed beyond the LERTA period without tax breaks?




    "Honeymoon" failed pretty miserably to tell us why Zimmerlink and others are wrong
    to oppose LERTA designations by saying nothing more in its copy than officials need
    LERTA. "Honeymoon" failed to throw out any new information or solid data proof of
    benefit that LERTA designations in the long run contribute significantly to public
    funds and revenue and employment opportunities for an area.   



    As for the appointment of the authority member, "Honeymoon" fails to acknowledge
    that three commissioners in early 2016 unanimously rejected the re-appointment of
    an authority member in favor of new blood. One or two citizens sent letters of interest
    and were interviewed, including the authority member initially rejected for
    reappointment, only now re-appointed this month again to fill the vacancy.

    Nobody here, either, understands why Zimmerlink would motion to name someone to
    a county authority who had not sent a letter of interest to be considered, but she had
    just as much a right the second time voting last week to oppose the original authority
    member's reappointment as the three commissioners unanimously did the first time
    voting for new blood on the authority in earlier 2016.




    RANTS, though, that the ed piece takes the low road by pointing out that citizens
    had to intervene or interrupt or be obstructionists to get a board of commissioners to
    conduct proper business as per County Code and laws. RANTS that the ed piece
    concludes that "The only good thing with these disputes is that Zimmerlink and her
    supporters haven’t tried to shout down Vicites and Lohr like they did Ambrosini.
    Things have been civil, and let’s hope they remain that way. It’s quite possible to
    disagree without being disagreeable. But unless Zimmerlink starts working more with
    Vicites and Lohr, the honeymoon will definitely be over."

    RANTS that the media, this week, instead, was not all over the recent decision by
    Lohr and Vicites to spend Act 13 funds improperly by disregarding PA DOT's policies
    on Act 13 fund distribution. The two officials wrongly believed that the state's Public
    Utility Commission governs the funds and sought approval from the entirely wrong
    state entity before approving a $45,000 expense.

    RANTS, once again, that the paper continues its sad preoccupation with slapping
    Zimmerlink and the citizens who once interrupted illegal or improper meeting
    business when County Code and laws were violated and commissioners accused
    one another publicly of bid rigging and the media ignored it all. (25 Sept 16)


    CLARIFICATION: Robert Gordon did submit a letter of interest to
    serve on county boards or authorities. It is noted above that
    Zimmerlink nominated him to serve on a board and that he had
    not applied. This is incorrect. Gordon did request to sit on any
    county authority or board.