Saturday, April 30, 2011

Who Is Dismayed?

Chris Miller - one of the few Angle supporters was dismayed during the April 28 meeting because he feels that the Gracedale Initiative petitions were not circulated properly, huh! Did someone forget to send him a memo/email/fax or something informing him that two court cases ago it was decided that the petition was circulated within the letter of the law.

He went on to say "I'm not mad because this is going to be on the ballot, I am irritated because some people step all over the election process. That is not good. We are indeed a nation of laws under the Constitution. There is the right way to do something and there is the wrong way to do something".

On the first point - Regardless of your emotional distress, the question is on the ballot. Second point - your not right simply because you say your right, in fact, the courts ruled that you are wrong. Third point - If it good enough for the courts, it's good enough for us. Forth point - Because we are a nation of laws under the Constitution is why We The People prevailed. And on your last point - take a good and careful look at us, and then look at Stangle, it will become evident to you who is doing things right, and who is doing things wrong, if you are unable to see it then perhaps your not as smart as you think you are.

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Stoffa Should Have Understood Sooner

The determination of The People right from the start should have been recognized by our entire local government, unfortunately, it was not.

The result - A waste of taxpayer funds fighting the taxpayers, who initially went before CC and the administration humbly, seeking a win-win solution to the Gracedale issue, but instead were manhandled and chastised by CC led by the ex-president.

Well, as we have seen to date, The People decided to step into the ring knowing that they would have to fight. Did they want to fight? Of course not...but they were left with no other alternative...and fight they have, prevailing in every round to the point of a knock out VICTORY over Stangle and Nightmare when the question went to the ballot.

We The People never had a desire to do any of this and CC/Administration knows it...but today we respectfully extend a humble hand to Mr. Stoffa, who while misguided went down the wrong path, but at least yesterday he had the guts to say NO MORE.

In yesterdays ET:
"I don't want to fight these people anymore. I'm not going to take on the battle of getting rid of Gracedale while I'm in office," Stoffa said. Stoffa suggested in the article that he anticipates that We The People will prevail again on May 17th. He went on to say "I'm just being realistic about what's going to happen."

It's time now for Angle to SHUT UP, and allow the process to take it's course. The People are tired of your nonsense...and so is CC to the point that they too would like to see a change in November...We The People will give them a change.

Full ET Report:

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Stangle and Nightmare

These three dimwits have suffered defeat after defeat because they continue to underestimate the resolve, and intelligence of The People.

They are comical - they believe that if they lie to us enough times, that we will eventually be gullible enough to believe them...their latest lie - they are going to cancel Stangles two remaining informational meetings, yeah right! If we buy that one, their next deception will be to try and sell us the Brooklyn bridge. Well Stangle and Nightmare, we're not buying it. ;-)

During his first of three meetings last night, Angle seemed annoyed that COAF members were present, like we don't pay taxes. He asked  one of the COAF members "what are you doing here?" well, needless to say - it was explained it to him.

COAF was present because we care about our county, and we care about The People, and we want The People to know the TRUTH, something these shenanigans don't often tell.

Tomorrow our spokesperson Rev. Mario Martinez will once again face off with Angle and O'Hare on another episode of Jerry Spri...ohps, we mean Business Matters. Hopefully Mr. Ianelli will not allow the personal attacks he allowed the last time, but if he does, they will all discover JUSTICE, Ohps, Justus James is also on our side...Angle standing on O'Hares shoulders can't stand up to the Rev, they're definitely going to have their hands full with Justus.

Stay tuned...

Stangle On The Deception Path Again

WOW...didn't the ET say they were done reporting on Gracedale. Well they don't seem to have a problem reporting for Stangle. They did not call the other side so it seems they are a one-side newspaper reporting only what Stangles side says.

We would suggest anyone with a subscription to ET cancel it, perhaps that might change their reporting mis-practices.

Easton Express Report:

What Are We Willing To Do?

Are we willing to lay down and die, well that's what Stangle wants us to do, but the question is - what are we willing to do?

We have entered a ring with two of the most evil men in the state, if we don't hit back they will beat us up and knock us out.

Every single person in the county, including all employees, in and out of county who say that they care about the residents of Gracedale better be ready to fight.

We need to pound the pavement informing the un-informed, presenting to them TRUTH.

WE MUST SAVE GRACEDALE, and REMOVE ANGLE. The serpent lied in the garden, and he lies to us today in NorCO.


LIES, LIES, LIES. That's what they tell.

We need to mobilize, to educate the masses, and that means everyone interested with this matter. We cannot leave it to others, WE MUST ALL ACT NOW.

By November we will begin transforming our local government, make no mistake about it STANGLE - enjoy what you have while you have it, because soon...Your Both Gone!

We The People have knocked them down better than four times, WE MUST NOW GO FOR THE KNOCKOUT.


Sunday, April 24, 2011

Stoffa, Angle - Deceive The People

Both of these politicians are true politicians, and we know that today because they have both deceived us on more then one occasion.

Consider that on or about October of 2010 Mr. Stoffa put a budget on the table that fully funded Gracedale through 2011 WITHOUT A TAX was he deceiving us then, or is he deceiving us today. Back then Stoffa did not believe in a tax increase or the sale of Gracedale, but today he does. Was he right then or is he right today, in either case there is a deception.

Mr. Angle on the other hand, told Stoffa "your budget is a piece of crap" and decided to put together his own budget. Angles budget supposedly was reduced magically by the wisdom of Angle. What was disclosed shortly after? That Angles budget had been inflated to give Angle an opportunity to look like he reduced it, giving him the appearance of being a financial genius. However, the truth was discovered and disclosed, so instead it actually made Angle look like the fake, fraud, and phony he always talks about. And as we understand it, it is not the job of CC to put budgets together, just to approve or disapprove them. Both Agnle and Stoffa always feel they can do whatever they want, whenever they want. When is DA Morganelli going to pull the rope on these two shenanigans?

We know today that these two dishonorable men are tag team partners (a dem and a rep?), and it certainly appears like the whole budget episode was nothing more than a staged orchestrated scheme designed to give Angle a lift to victory in the 2011 election coming up later this year. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN Mr. Bojangle...because The People have connected to our government in a way that has educated us to the truth...and the TRUTH is both of you must go.

Today they say they are going to close down Gracedale, because no one on CC is prepared to raise taxes - no kidding? The reason they are not willing is because it is not necessary. In today's ET Angle again says taxes will have to be increased between 15% and 20%, really? is it 15 or is it 20. Don't you know how to do the math to provide an accurate number...or is it just another deception? Of course it's a deception, an intended scare tactic design to confuse the people into voting for the sale, but guess what...We The People are not remotely as gormless as you make us out to be, and that is something that you will surely discover for yourself come November Mr. Angle.

Remember this Mr. Stoffa, and remember this Mr. Angle, anything even slightly less that the TRUTH is an outright LIE. and also be reminded that illusions are fabrications of the TRUTH, come November when all your smoke and mirrors are no longer you will meet your reality - so dust off your fishing pole, your gonna need it!

Did You Hear The Latest?

Christ the King has risen!

Happy Easter.

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Does Might Make Right?

Absolutely not, although some social misfits like Angle and Stoffa might think so.

Who could have ever imagined Stoffa saying that he could do anything and everything to sell Gracedale. NorCo, please consider that without any definition - ANYTHING and EVERYTHING means that there are no boundaries or restrictions, and no boundaries or restrictions means that he could do whatever he wishes and no one can stop him. In essence, he said that the only rule that applies to him and his administration is NO RULES. Is he going insane?

Next he'll tell us that might makes right...not so fast Stoffa - history testifies that when might makes right The People usually find themselves oppressed, and in many cases crushed by their government. Is that what you would like to see happen here in Northampton County Mr. Stoffa? Well, we don’t think so.

WE THE PEOPLE are about to clean house at the polls starting with Angle, so please don’t force another petition because you already know what we “HELLBENT People” can do.

You know what we find sad John, that we trusted you. We truly, truly trusted you, and you betrayed that trust. You know, and we know too John that you intentionally deceived us. Do you know why we trusted you John? Because we did not vision you as a duplicitous person…boy you really fooled us – but that’s okay, we know the truth now and we will never again trust you. NEVER!

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Does Anything And Everthing Mean Break The Law?

Stoffa said "anything and everything" Really? Does that mean that it is okay to break the law? Hmmm.

Perhaps THE PEOPLE should do anything and everything to get rid of these shenanigans.

Watch the 69 news report:

Will There Really Be No Changes If Gracedale Is Sold?

Angle says the unions are not willing to negotiate givebacks, when in fact the truth is that the County Administration has not been willing to negotiate with the unions since October of 2010, not the other way around.

They tell us nothing will change if Gracedale is sold - well,  if there could be an ounce of truth in that statement then why wouldn't the administration negotiate with the unions? And why are they allowing TL Global to dictate to the County when the likelihood is that Gracedale will not be sold anyway? And if gracedale is not sold then what?

A major flaw in NorCo is how poorly Stoffa is managing our business...he is not just running Gracedale into the ground - but the entire County.

See Express Times Report:

Hold Them Accountable Under The Bus

$14,786 of taxpayer dollars wasted...why? - because they refused to listen to or hear the people they are supposed to serve.

Angle is such a diabolical man that he seems to always put someone else in harms way, so that if any law(s) are in fact broken at any given point in time, it won't be Angle seeing orange. Current events has him throwing his puppets O'Hare and Stoffa under the bus. Now we have to ask WHY would they allow him to do so? And HOW do they benefit by allowing him to do so?

Stoffa says that there was a hand off like in football, what he did not anticipate was being tackled by this story which sheds light on his possible misappropriation of taxpayer funds. He then throws County Council under the bus.

John Cusick taking responsibility earns him respect from the Coalition, and he then throws the right people (the Administration) under the bus.

More details - Mcall report:,0,1171635.story

Saturday, April 16, 2011

Facts and Figures about the Sale of Gracedale

·   Between 2005 and 2010 Gracedale has returned $2.36 million to the county in PROFIT (This includes losses in 2009 of $4.62 million and 2010 losses of $2.46 million.  Over that same time period it was predicted Gracedale would lose $45.02 million.
·   The PROFIT was taken by Northampton County and used to balance the budget shortfalls.
·   The Gracedale Operational Assessment Report (Gracedale Study) was conducted by a company that buys and sells nursing homes as part of their business.
·   The company that conducted the Gracedale Study also ”informally” polled members of council to ask what they wanted to do with the property.
·   TL Global was selected and bid $35 million (the administration believes this number will ultimately be lower) the tax payers will have to pay:
$4 million payment to CCAP for an outstanding loan
$2.4 million in costs allocated back the county
$2 million to buyout sick and vacation time
$1 to 2 million in fees and other expenses
$300,000 in legal cost to Eckert Seamans (probably more depending on final bills for lawsuits filed)

·   This leaves ONLY $24.3 million in net profit.
·   The county still remains with a budget shortfall for the foreseeable future.
·   Adding in the additional $2.4 million in cost ongoing from Gracedale that makes $6.4 million in deficits each year.
·   This means that by 2013 or 2014 the county will be faced with the same problem and this time Gracedale will not be there to bail us out.
·   The Gracedale pension has suffered losses which are not the fault of its employees. No Gracedale employees have a say or vote on the Northampton County Pension Board.
·   Simple Management efficiencies could help make Gracedale profitable again. Small investments in advertising from savings suggested by a management consultant will lead to an increased census, the return to profitability and good paying JOBS for the residence of Northampton County.
·   Gracedale will not cost the taxpayers a 20% tax increase. A 20% tax increase would raise the county $16 million in revenue. Gracedale’s alleged shortfall is only $6 million. This OVER TAXES county residents by $80 million dollars over a 5 year period for no reason.
·   The tax payers have recently invested millions in building upgrades and window replacement cost, which not will not be recovered if the building is sold in this depressed real estate market.

Independents Can VOTE in May for Gracedale!

Can Anyone Believe This

Anonymous said...
I grabbed this from Lehigh Valley Ramblings. How can we expect someone who would write this trash to have respect for the patients at Gracedale?
This was written with Ron Angles blessing by Ohare.
What does this have to do with the Gracedale situation.
This needs to be brought to the attention of the voters who would listen to their nonsensical reasoning for selling.
Last night was wilder. This time, it was a stigmata. That's right, Padre.

Jack D'Alessandro got up to speak about that cRaZy Business Matters broadcast, but Council Prez Johns Cusick kept shutting him down. Before doing so, Cusick harumphing that the entire show was a "travesty," like a good little country club Republican. Then D'Allesandro switched gears and wanted to complain about Abe Atiyeh, who has been negotiating with the County over a DUI facility in West Easton. Cuisick cut him short there, too. That's when the blood came.

"Is that blood coming out of your face?" asked Council Prez John Cusick.

Sure enough, little drops of blood were falling here and there as D'Allesandro tried to bray away. Eventually, somebody brought him some cotton for his stigmata.

I have to say, this is a first. I never saw anyone bleed during Courtesy of the Floor before, although it is Lent. Maybe D'Alessandro is related to Padre Pio.

The Fake Rev, who has never resisted an opportunity to use a podium, also wanted to discuss Business Matters.

"On March 23, 2008 [I think he meant 2011], a member of this Council threatened my life and the life [sic] of other members of the coalition, and I take that as a very serious matter. ... If I did to you, what he did to me, you would have the Sheriff come in here and arrest me.

"I didn't go the police. I could have. I didn't go to the police because there was a court matter that was much more important to me than that."

You'll be relieved to know that the Fake Rev doesn't "want to scandalize this." He has five or six witnesses to this death threat, too.

Let's see. March 23, 2011 just happens to be the date that the Business Matters show was taped. I could understand that waiting for a Commonwealth Court decision on Gracedale is far more important than a death threat.

Must have been Satan.

Stigmatas. Death threats. Just another night at Northampton County Council.

Friday, April 15, 2011

Assistance Coordinator Appointed

ANNOUNCEMENT - Peggy DeLasandro has been appointed by COAF to help coordinate our volunteer campaign effort.

You can contact Peggy at: 610-554-8833 to discuss how you may be able to assist the Coalition in our information education campaign.

We need assistance on election day to man the polls. We are also asking anyone who can spare some time to please get involve with our group, we are at a critical point in our referendum effort, and need all the help we can get.

Our main goal is to inform and educate the voters on the TRUTH as it relates to Gracedale. 

Thank you for any assistance you can provide.

And remember - Independents can vote on the referendum question in May.

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Congratulations Are In Order - LARRY OTTER

The Coalition of Alzheimer's Families would like to take this opportunity to congratulate and thank Larry Otter, our spirited attorney who trophied the desperado trio.

We will call on you again should taxpayer dollars be used inappropriately to campaign against Gracedale.

Lastly...we certainly recommend him to anyone in need of an attorney specializing in election law...we think he's the BEST.

Learn more about Larry:

Once again, THANK YOU Larry.

Independents Can VOTE in May for Gracedale!

Has Anyone Seen The Defeated Ex-President?

The head forlorn has kind of disappeared for the moment. Perhaps he is embarrassed and ashamed, nah, although he should be.

As we allow the current events to sink in, we have to ask why has all of this nonsense taken place.

Let us consider - is one of the roots of all evil. ENVY, maybe...Gluttony, possibly...LUST, conceivably...ANGER, getting warmer...GREED, bingo, this is certainly a rational reason...SLOTH, hmmm.

MONEY, DING DING DING, jackpot...the love of which we know is the root of all evil.

Wow - all of the above sounds just like the ex-president, the deflated executive, and the not so terrifying goon. Yes, it does sound like the desperate trio, no...we mean desperado trio, we have seen them boldly waste taxpayers money, violently address the taxpayers, and criminally...well, we'll just leave that one up to any possible investigations that may be under way.

Independents Can VOTE in May for Gracedale!

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

A Day Of Thanks

First, I thank my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ for delivering on his promises to me.

I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the Coalition of Alzheimer's Families for bestowing upon me the honor of serving as spokesperson for the support group. It has been a responsibility that at times has been very difficult, but mostly it has been fulfilling. I have never served with a greater group of people in my life, and I can sincerely say their resolute attitude is not often seen in our society. Serving with them on this meaningful cause has ultimately been more gratifying for me than any other task I have ever undertaken.

On behalf of COAF, I would like to thank everyone who has assisted us even in the smallest of ways in what some have called a herculean effort, we could not have achieved any of our goals without your support. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

What we as a people in Northampton County, PA united by a meaningful cause have accomplished is truly historical. I personally believe that I live in the greatest county in the state, if not the country. The minority that want to sell Gracedale may say that we are a “lynch mob”, but the majority who oppose the sale know better. There is a reason that we have succeeded time and time again, because we have done the right things - the right way.

Unlike our opposition, as responsible and concerned citizens we have always played by the rules, standing firm on the rock of truth, and as such today we reap the rewards. This moment in our history will truly be a great educator for our posterity, who will learn by this tremendous action that TRUTH trumps LIES any day of the week. They will understand that “good guys finish last” is nothing more than a myth created by lesser men who want to control so that they may benefit. TRUTH however, is the lamp that lights our way, and if we seek TRUTH we will find our way.

Lastly, consider just how many agree with our position, including our judicial system, and how few the other…a million flies can’t be wrong. But sadly the work is not done. The “ruthless three” will stop at nothing to derail our train of compassion. We The People cannot, and will not allow this desperate trio to trip us on our final leg of the race…NO, we must dig deep within and muster the last ounce of energy to propel us through the finish line. Then, and only then, (in the words of Jesus hanging on the cross) it is finished.

Please understand that we cannot take even a short much needed break, for it may allow our adversary to pass us…No, we MUST push on, for we can now see the finish line.

God Bless our great Democracy...and America

Rev. Mario Martinez

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Business Matters? Part - 3 Who Cares - WE WON?

Yes, We The People have done it - WE WON the Stoffa appeal.

WFMZ69 News:

Morning Call:,0,4523152.story

Express TImes:
More to come - Stay Tuned

What About Business Matters? Part - 2 Who Do You Serve?


When Bernie was asked by Iannelli about capital expenditures necessary at Gracdale, he stated "that's correct, the law firm that has been hired  to sell Gracedale has said that there is 80 million dollars in expenditures, we're talking about major expenditures - it's a money pit". Iannelli goes to Rev. Martinez who tries to share his view but is quickly and rudely interrupted by O'Hare when O'Hare heard the Rev use the words - widows and orphans - It appeared that he does not see the residents of Gracedale in the same light. Rev Martinez elaborated that the issue at hand is that 23k people signed our petitions and they should be allowed to vote on this issue...that's what this is all about. O'Hare of course disagreed and began a campaign of name calling, telling the Martinez that he is a phony reverend - Martinez responded by saying "that's your opinion, BO countered by saying that Martinez got his credential from a crackerjack box - the reverend firmly said "I serve God, who do you serve Satan?" Bernie was again asked by Iannelli to simmer down.

Iannelli then asked BO what was his motivation - BO responded by say that he does not like it when people form a mob - a lynch mob and try to take over their government - then he began calling Rev. Martinez names again. He insinuated that the Rev and the Coalition are liars, and Martinez countered by saying "Bernie the biggest liar here is you, followed by Angle."

We would like to point out that at this juncture Bernie pointed to the audience and you can easily see that he could not hold his hand steady, either nervous or effects of his dipsomania.

Rev. Martinez told Bernie that he is just a puppet for Angle, and Angle said anyone who knows Bernie knows he's no ones puppet - the audience disagreed. Rev. Martinez then took a strong position that BO and Angle should tell the truth, "why don't you tell the truth? - that Gracedale does not have to be sold. Why don't you leave the money in Gracedale when Gracedale makes some money? What about the 10 million dollars that Gracedale made that was spent on the courthouse? The Audience agreed by clapping.

Angle was asked a question by Iannelli, but before he could complete his answer Bernie came to the rescue, again calling the Rev. names and telling him he is a phony preacher - Martinez said to BO "your a legend in your own mind". BO had a revelation and stated that the Rev. applied for his ordination papers in 2007, then asked "do you know when he got them? in 2007.

We would like to point out that this really does not matter, however, O'hare lied yet again because the Rev. actually received his credentials in 2008 not 2007. In the grand scheme of things, how exactly does Rev. Martinez's credential play a part in this Gracedale saga?

The Rev. asked Bernie "so what does that matter?" then Martinez asked the million dollar question "Is this show about me or about Gracedale?" Iannelli told Bernie he (Martinez) makes a good point.

Iannelli also appeared baffled referring to Jerry Green as Steve, and when Jerry said to Tony "what is the question" Tony did not have a clue and everyone laughed.

Jerry Green went on to say that he believes his union has acted in good faith on many occasions dealing with the administration. He stated that back in 2008 Stoffa reneged relating to contract agreements. Subsequently, we renegotiated the contract where we took a big cut. I think we did our part.

Tony brought up Stoffa’s plan of doing Home Care and while he was trying to make a decent argument for Stoffa and the other two, he failed to say that not all residents of Gracedale, or any other nursing home facility are candidates for home care, certainly not Alzheimer’s and dementia residents.

Jerry went on to explain that CC has made mistakes in the past, and suggested that the issues at hand did not develop overnight. 11 out of the past 14 years the facility has made money and now all of a sudden it’s a problem, we deal with this in the private sector all the time.

To be continued…

Friday, April 8, 2011

What About Business Matters? Part - 1 - In The Beginning

At First, we were grateful that Tony Iannelli considered us to go on his so called reputable show - Business Matters - only to discover that perhaps The Coalition of Alzheimer’s Families was set-up to take a fall.

We don't want to believe that Mr. Iannelli would stoop to the level of Angle and O'Hare, but if you consider the way the show started with Mr. Iannelli speaking first to Bernie O'Hare - What? Yes, that is correct...he started his reputable show with Bernie O'Hare, that makes one wonder.

And who is O'Hare, well we won't get into specifics but we will tell you that he holds no public office and if you watched the show you saw that he was not capable of holding his hand or his leg steady, not for even a second.

The question is why would Tony start with Bernie? Hmmm.
Bernie starts out asking - Why sell it? because right now it needs to be sold cause the county is losing 4.3 million dollars - What?...we thought it was 6 million, get your story straight.

He said that was one reason and Tony pressed him for more - I'll tell you right now the county is losing money. Really, then why did Councilwoman Peg Ferraro say openly in a recent council meeting that Gracedale only lost 2 million? We believe her before we will believe Angle or O’Hare, whom both have lost court cases relating to how poorly they tell the truth.

Then, get this…Angle of all people says “The number 1 thing is I’d like to see a polygraph test hooked up on some people (referring to people present in the studio) Rev. Martinez said “Starting with you” which stopped Angle dead in his tracks, causing him to look left at the Rev. in a menacing manner (watch the video) and causing everyone in the studio including Tony to laugh out loud. Then Tony asks Angle – do you want Bernie to jump in or, or? Angle spoke after that but watch his face…he is flustered. Then he gives Stoffa credit for being correct when we all know that in the past, especially dealing with the budget he claimed that Stoffa was yanking his chain…and Stoffa walked out…we all remember that don’t we?

Then he went on to say that the unions have said they would give back, but they haven’t gave anything back (man learn to talk before you speak), then he said the unions haven’t given back a nickel, at another point  he admits that no one twisted the unions arm to take the benefits that the Council agreed to give the unions. Yes of course he placed the blame on the democrats. Jerry Green tried to express his opinion only to be rudely interrupted by O’Hare talking about a big Rat – almost sounded like he was talking about Angle. Bernie was asked politely by Tony to behave himself.

…To Be Continued

The Time Is Near

The court began review of the Stoffa appeal Wednesday and we anticipate hearing a ruling in the very, very, near future, if not later today.

Once this decision comes in, anticipating that it will go in our favor, we must mobilize and commence the final stage...a campaign to inform The People of the truth that will help them in their referendum question decision.

We look forward to working with, and the assistance of hundreds if not more, who want to see the referendum question succeed.

The time is coming so please prepare and be ready.

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Hold Government Accountable

When we support and elect officials into office we do so with expectations that they will follow through on their promises. When they do, we call them honest, and when they don't we call them politicians.

The politicians of NorCo must understand that WE THE PEOPLE are done with individuals like Bruce Gilbert who make promises to gain support that get them elected to office, only to renege on their pledges. We're not picking on Mr. Gilbert, we are merely expressing that we did support his election based on promises he made during a meeting seeking our support...he failed us. Unless he does a 180, we will never support him again.

We want all candidates seeking support (especially ours) to understand that should we stand with you in a campaign, we will hold you accountable in office. Please be honest in your promises and your intent, and whatever you do, don't make promises you will not be able to keep, for that is the difference between an honest person and a politician. Remember the old adage -  "To err is human, but it takes a politician to really screw things up."

Be part of a productive solution, and not part of the problem.

VOTE to keep Gracedale in County hands, or
VOTE to sell it...but get out and vote.

Saturday, April 2, 2011

Friday, April 1, 2011

Time To Get Ready

Mr. Angle and his dipso O'Hare have attacked me, as well as the Coalition on more than one occasion when none of this is about me or the Coalition, it is about Gracedale and the residents whom dwell within.

They have intentionally and publicly persecuted me specifically, in the name of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ calling me among other things, a phony be it, I'm good with it because I believe in Mathew 5:10-12
10 Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
11 “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me.
12 Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

NorCo, a new time for action is near, a time for The People to prepare a campaign of truth relating to Gracedale that will illuminate the lies camouflaged by these desperate men so that all with eyes can see, always speaking truth so that all with ears can hear.

Soon, Mr. Angle and Mr. Stoffa won't be able to hide in their darkness, for the light of Jesus will expose them, and then they will reason that with God on our side, they cannot stand against us.

It is amazing to witness that all in Northampton County, especially in the slate-belt are coming to understand just how evil they are. The People are tired of this autocratic nonsense, and fearlessly desire what matters most, doing what is right come what may...
VOTE YES on the Gracedale question.

God Bless America.
Rev. Mario Martinez

The O'Hare Ruling

In Re: Petition for Initiative to :
Prevent the Sale and/or Lease of :
Gracedale Filed With Northampton :
County Elections Commission on :
January 18, 2011 :
: No. 269 C.D. 2011
Appeal of: Bernard V. O’Hare III : Submitted: March 18, 2011
BY JUDGE PELLEGRINI Filed: April 1, 2011
Bernard V. O’Hare III (O’Hare) appeals from the order of the Court
of Common Pleas of Northampton County (trial court) denying his objection to the
Gracedale Ballot Initiative Petition because he did not meet his burden of proof
that the Gracedale Initiative Petition Committee (Committee) failed to obtain
signatures from 10% of the qualified voters in Northampton County in the last
election as required by Article XI Section 1103(C) of the Northampton County
Home Rule Charter. Finding no error in the trial court’s opinion, we affirm.
This case involves a dispute over the potential sale of the Gracedale
Nursing Home (Gracedale), which is currently owned and operated by
Northampton County (County). Over the past several years, Gracedale has
operated at a loss – specifically incurring losses of $4,743,799 in 2009 and
$2,875,297 in 2010 – with the County making operating transfers to Graceland
each year in order to make up the difference. Given Gracedale’s financial situation
as well as the County’s budgetary shortfalls, the Northampton County Council
(Council) began to consider the possible sale of Gracedale. On August 19, 2010,
Council passed Resolution 71-2010
(Resolution) directing County Executive John
Stoffa to pursue a sale of Gracedale to private entities.
County Council Resolution 71-2010 states:
WHEREAS, throughout the recent past, the amount
of County contribution required to operate
Gracedale has realized wide and varied fluctuations;
WHEREAS, current economic conditions and
budgetary constraints at the Federal, State and
County levels make the continued financial viability
of Gracedale precarious at best, particularly when
combined with changes in Federal legislation that
could affect Gracedale admissions and
Northampton County Council that it respectfully
directs the Northampton County Executive to
prepare and publish requests for proposals which
would provide for the alternate ownership of
Gracedale through the sale or lease of Gracedale.
Northampton County’s Home Rule Charter provides for direct citizen
participation in County government through initiative and referendum.
Specifically, Article XI, Section 1101 states “the registered voters of the county
shall have the power by initiative to enact and repeal ordinances, by referendum to
suspend and repeal ordinances, and by recall to remove officials from office.”
Article XI, Section 1102 of the County’s Home Rule Charter states that any 12
registered voters can commence the initiative procedure by forming a petition
committee. In order to place an initiative or referendum on a ballot, such a petition
committee must obtain signatures “by registered voters of the County equal in
number to at least 10% of the number of voters registered for the last election held
in the county.” Article XI, Section 1103(c).
On October 18, 2010, in response to Resolution 71-2010, 12
registered voters within the County created the Committee and commenced a
petition drive to place the following proposed ordinance on the May 17, 2011
primary ballot: “The county nursing home, known as Gracedale, shall not be sold
and/or leased by the County of Northampton for a period of five years from the
date of the approval of this ordinance.” On January 18, 2011, the Committee
submitted 507 signature petitions to the Northampton County Election
Commission (Commission) purportedly containing the signatures of 23,391
registered voters. The Commission initially rejected the Committee’s petition on
January 25, 2011.
That same day,
County registered elector O’Hare and Council
Member Ronald Angle (together, Objectors) filed a joint petition contesting certain
signatures and petitions contained in the Committee’s submission, alleging they
violated the Election Code and should, therefore, be invalidated. Objectors argued
that after subtracting the invalid, unverified signatures and petitions, the
Committee failed to meet the 10% threshold required by Article XI, Section
1103(c) of the Home Rule Charter. The Commission later reviewed the petitions
again and on January 31, 2011, it reversed its prior declaration and certified the
Initiative for submission to Council for further action.
Before the trial court, Objectors presented the testimony of Dee
Rumsey (Ms. Rumsey), the Chief Registrar with the Northampton County
Registration Division. Ms. Rumsey testified that the Commission directed her
office to begin verifying the 23,391 total signatures to determine if they were valid.
By the end of the hearing, she had verified 19,963 signatures of registered voters
with 959 signatures yet unexamined. (Hearing Testimony (H.T.) at 132).
Objectors then called the circulators of the Petitions. Maryann
Schmoyer (Ms. Schmoyer) was one of the 12 original signatories to the Initiative
Petition who circulated 48 petitions. (H.T. at 71, 84). Ms. Schmoyer testified that
she went to fire halls, church socials, and senior and community centers to obtain
Objectors’ petition may appear to be premature because the Commission had not yet
certified the Committee’s submission. However, Objectors filed their objections preemptively in
order to comply with Section 977 of the Pennsylvania Election Code (Election Code), Act of
June 3, 1937, P.L. 1333, as amended, 25 P.S. §2937, which requires that contests to nominating
petitions must be filed within seven days after the last day for filing nominating petitions.
signatures. (H.T. at 88). She would explain why she was there and what the
purpose of the petition was, let people read the petition, ask them if their voter
registration was up to date and if they lived in the County. (H.T. at 84). She then
would put a petition at each table, of which she admitted there could be 10 to 15 at
a time. (H.T. at 84-85). Ms. Schmoyer testified that she would walk around the
room while the petitions were circulating, ask if anyone had any questions, and
watch carefully as each person signed the petition. (H.T. at 85-87). On cross-
examination Ms. Schmoyer denied circulating any petitions at bars or clubs, as
alleged in the objections. (H.T. at 87).
Jack Dalessandro (Mr. Dalessandro) testified that he circulated two or
three petitions at a time at a voting site in Washington Township on Election Day.
(H.T. at 112). According to Mr. Dalessandro, he had a card table and chair set up
and watched as each individual signed the petitions. (H.T. at 112). Mr.
Dalessandro testified that the petitions never left his possession. (H.T. at 113).
William G. Coker, Jr. (Mr. Coker) testified that he saw several
petitions lying unattended in bars and social clubs. (H.T. at 90-91). On cross-
examination, Mr. Coker admitted that he could not specifically identify which
petitions he allegedly saw unattended at these bars and clubs. (H.T. at 92).
Clayton Creamer (Mr. Creamer) testified that signatures numbered 1
through 25 on petition number 242, of which he was the circulator, all came from
one apartment complex. (H.T. at 129-130). Mr. Creamer admitted that the
individual voters did not fill in their own address – they filled in their apartment
number and Mr. Creamer’s wife actually wrote in the apartment complex’s address
for all 25 signatures. (H.T. at 129-130).
Circulator Ellen J. Weiss (Ms. Weiss) testified that while she was the
named circulator on a number of petitions, she was not the actual circulator on all
of these petitions; she handed them out to others to actually obtain the signatures.
(H.T. at 144). Ms. Weiss admitted that she did not personally circulate petition
number 33, 35, 38, 41, 42, 56, 60, 61, 106, 179, 180, 206, 221, 265, 266, 298, 299,
302, 494, or 507, and that she only partially circulated petition number 40. (H.T. at
147-48, 150). Ms. Weiss testified that she was never given any real direction as to
how to handle the petitions, and she did not know that what she was doing was
incorrect. (H.T. at 145, 148).
Similarly, Dana Paisley (Mr. Paisley) testified that while he signed
several petitions as the circulator, he gave some of the petitions to others to
actually obtain the signatures. (H.T. at 152). Mr. Paisley testified that of the 1,188
signatures on his petitions, he was the actual circulator for only 399 signatures.
(H.T. at 153). Mr. Paisley personally circulated petitions 44, 51, 90, 95, 401, and
430, but he did not personally circulate petitions 57, 63, 65, 71, 84, 98, 103, 104,
110, 361, 410, 461, 462, or 463. (H.T. at 153-56).
The parties agreed that because Gerry Green was a resident of Lehigh County, he was
not a valid circulator. (H.T. at 105). Mr. Green was responsible for petitions numbered 478 and
481, which contained 107 and 11 signatures respectively. (H.T. at 104). Similarly, the parties
agreed that because Timothy Rehrig was a resident of Carbon County, he was not a valid
circulator. (H.T. at 107). Mr. Rehrig was responsible for petition number 44 which contained 74
signatures, petition number 480 which contained 3 signatures, and petition number 482 which
contained 105 signatures. (H.T. at 105). The parties agreed that Betty Fenstermacher was not a
(Footnote continued on next page…)
Objectors then argued that the trial court should start with 19,963, the
total number of registered voters as found by the Registrar, and subtract the
following: the 300 signatures obtained by Mr. Green and Mr. Rehrig; the 1,439
signatures obtained by Ms. Schmoyer; the 301 signatures obtained by Mr.
Dalessandro; the 53 signatures obtained by Mr. Creamer; the 99 signatures
obtained by Ms. Fenstermacher; and all 2,269 signatures obtained by Ms. Weiss
and all 1,188 signatures obtained by Mr. Paisley because they admitted they did
not follow the requirements of the Election Code. According to Objectors,
subtracting all of these numbers from the starting point of 19,963 would put the
Committee at 14,314 signatures, well under the 10% threshold.
The Committee conceded that the 452 signatures obtained by Mr.
Green, Mr. Creamer, and Ms. Fenstermacher were invalid. However, the
Committee argued that the signatures should be counted on the petitions that Ms.
Weiss and Mr. Paisley personally circulated and that the entirety of their signatures
should not be discounted due to their failure to follow the rules. The Committee
also argued that Objectors failed to reconcile the signatures that they challenged
with Ms. Rumsey’s list of signatures in order to determine whether or not there
was any overlap.
registered voter in the County and, therefore, the signatures she obtained as a circulator were
invalid. (H.T. at 157). In addition, Objectors withdrew objection number 10 relating to Ms.
Guzman and objection number 7 relating to Wendy Haggerty. (H.T. at 157).
The trial court found that Objectors failed to meet their burden of
proving that the Committee did not meet the 10% registered voter threshold
established by the Home Rule Charter. To meet their burden, Objectors had to
prove that 3,761 signatures were invalid. Stated another way, the Initiative would
need to have 19,631 valid signatures in order to meet the 10% threshold. The trial
court found that the record only established that 2,469 individual signatures were
invalid because those individuals were not properly registered. It held that 19,963
signatures were verified by the Chief Registrar’s uncontested testimony, and the
959 signatures that she had not examined were deemed valid because Objectors did
not specifically challenge those signatures as required by Section 977 of the
Election Code, 25 P.S. §2937. Therefore, the trial court concluded that the
Committee’s Initiative was supported by 20,922 registered voters, more than
enough to meet the 10% threshold.
As to challenges to the Petition based on improper circulation of the
Petition, the trial court found Ms. Schmoyer and Mr. Dalessandro’s testimony to be
credible; they both fully complied with the requirements set forth in Section 909 of
the Election Code, 25 P.S. §2869, and the Petitions they circulated were valid..
The trial court found Mr. Coker’s testimony to be unreliable because it lacked
certainty. He was not able to specifically identify which petitions he saw
unattended; therefore, none of the petitions were found to be invalid because they
were “languishing in bars,” as alleged in the objections. (Trial Court Opinion at 8).
However, the trial court struck all of the signatures contained on
petitions circulated by Mr. Green, Mr. Rehrig and Ms. Fenstermacher because
these three circulators were not residents or registered voters of Northampton
County. These circulators obtained 117, 181, and 95 signatures respectively,
which added up to 393 invalid signatures. The trial court also found that Objectors
met their burden with respect to signatures 1 through 25 on petition number 242
because the petition circulator, Mr. Creamer, admitted that his wife filled out part
of the address requirement instead of the voters themselves. The trial court
rejected Objectors’ argument that all of the signatures collected by Ms. Weiss and
Mr. Paisley should be invalidated because they did not personally circulate some of
their own petitions. Instead, the trial court struck only the signatures to which the
circulators were unable to demonstrate full compliance with Sections 908 and 909
of the Election Code, 25 P.S. §2868 and 2869, which totaled 2,304 signatures.
Given these determinations, the trial court found that Objectors
established that 2,722 signatures
had to be stricken because the circulators could
not establish full compliance with Sections 908 and 909 of the Election Code.
However, by subtracting 2,722 from the total number of signatures submitted,
there remained 20,669 valid signatures
– again, well above the threshold of 19,631
verified signatures.
While if you added the list of unregistered signatures and lists of
improper circulation, that number would be sufficient to remove the referendum
The trial court’s equation would appear to be as follows: 393 + 25 + 2,304 = 2,722
invalid signatures.
The trial court’s equation here is as follows: 23,391 – 2,722 = 20,669 verified
from the ballot, the trial court noted that Objectors made no effort to reconcile the
individual invalid signatures derived from the Registrar’s review with the petitions
found invalid by the court. According to the trial court, it could not simply add the
two totals together in order to determine a total number of invalid signatures, as
suggested by Objectors, because there was no evidence to prove that the signatures
found invalid by the Registrar were not also contained in the list of signatures
found invalid by the court. The trial court noted that Objectors’ argument ignored
the presumption of validity in favor of every signature, a presumption which could
only be overcome by competent, extrinsic evidence. See In re Williams, 625 A.2d
1279, 1281 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1993) (citing Smith v. Brown, 590 A.2d 816 (Pa. Cmwlth.
1991)); In re Minotti, 574 A.2d 119, 123 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1990). Objectors had the
burden of proving each signature was invalid, and they failed to even attempt to
prove there was no duplication. This appeal followed.
O’Hare’s main argument on appeal is that the trial court erred by
concluding there was a duplication of efforts between the Registrar and the
Objectors and by failing to add together the total number of invalid signatures
established by the Registrar and the trial court. However, the trial court did not
When reviewing the order of a trial court concerning the validity of challenges to an
election petition, our standard of review is whether there was an abuse of discretion or an error of
law, and whether the findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence. In re Flaherty, 564
Pa. 671, 678, 770 A.2d 327, 331 (2001). We also note that the Election Code must be liberally
construed, and the party alleging defects in an election petition bears the burden of proving that
the petition is invalid. Id.
specifically find that there was any duplication; it merely stated that the possibility
existed and that “[t]o what extent there is duplication, one will never know.” (Trial
Court Opinion at 16). We agree with the trial court that we cannot possibly know
if some or even all of the invalid signatures were contained in both the Registrar’s
list and the list found invalid by the trial court’s examination of the petitions
because Objectors made absolutely no attempt to reconcile these figures. They
failed to conduct a page and line review of the submitted petitions despite the fact
that they presented the testimony of Ms. Rumsey, the Chief Registrar and the one
person with the requisite knowledge to conduct such a review.
What happens quite frequently in election cases is that a signature can
potentially be invalidated for numerous reasons – for example, the address the
voter provided on the petition did not match his voter registration card and the
circulator was not present when the voter actually signed the petition; or the voter
did not provide a date or street address and the circulator was not a resident of the
county. Absent a page and line examination of all of the invalidated signatures, it
is impossible to know whether or not there was any overlap. Given this fact and
the presumption under election law that a signature is valid, the trial court correctly
determined that it could not simply add the two figures together to determine a
total number of invalidated signatures.
Mr. O’Hare also argues on appeal that the trial court erred in
validating the signatures collected by Ms. Schmoyer because her actions in
circulating 10 to 15 petitions at a time proved that she could not make the five-
point determination regarding each signatory to her election petitions as required
by Section 909 of the Election Code. We disagree.
Section 909 of the Election Code provides, in pertinent part, as
Each sheet shall have appended thereto the
affidavit of the circulator of each sheet,
setting forth--(a) that he or she is a qualified
elector duly registered and enrolled as a
member of the designated party of the State,
or of the political district, as the case may
be, referred to in said petition . . . ; (b) his
residence . . . ; (c) that the signers thereto
signed with full knowledge of the contents
of the petition; (d) that their respective
residences are correctly stated therein; (e)
that they all reside in the county named in
the affidavit; (f) that each signed on the date
set opposite his name; and (g) that, to the
best of affiant's knowledge and belief, the
signers are qualified electors and duly
registered and enrolled members of the
designated party of the State, or of the
political district, as the case may be.
25 P.S. §2869. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania interpreted this section of the
Election Code in In re Flaherty, 564 Pa. 671, 770 A.2d 327 (2001), stating the
The language in Section 909, therefore,
unambiguously requires that the circulator
affirming the petition be aware of five
criteria about each individual signer: (1) the
signer signed the petition with full
knowledge of its contents; (2) the signer’s
address is correct; (3) the signer resides in
the county in the affidavit; (4) the signer
signed the petition on the date set forth; and
(5) to the best of the circulator’s knowledge
and belief, the signer was a qualified elector
and a member of the party claimed on the
petition. In order to know this information,
it seems clear that the circulator needs to be
present when each signer agrees to sign the
564 Pa. at 686, 770 A.2d at 336. Ms. Schmoyer testified that when she circulated
her petitions, she always addressed the crowd, explained who she was, why she
was there, what the petition contained, and asked if anyone had any questions. She
also testified that she specifically asked each signatory if their voter registration
was up to date and whether they resided in the County. Ms. Schmoyer testified
that she walked around the fire hall or gathering place and watched as each person
signed the petition. This testimony, which the trial court found to be credible,
amounts to substantial evidence to support the trial court’s decision that Ms.
Schmoyer met the five criteria required by Section 909 of the Election Code. In
addition, her credible testimony was that she was physically present when each
person agreed to sign the petition, as required by In re Flaherty.
Finally, Mr. O’Hare argues that the trial court should have invalidated
all of the signatures collected by Ms. Weiss and Mr. Paisley because they admitted
they did not personally circulate some of the petitions to which they attested they
were the circulators. However, the trial court found the testimony of Ms. Weiss
and Mr. Paisley to be credible. Both witnesses testified to which petitions they
personally circulated, and Objectors failed to present any evidence that these
circulators did not meet the five criteria outlined above in Section 909 of the
Election Code with respect to the petitions they personally circulated. Given the
presumption of validity and Objectors’ failure to present any evidence to rebut this
presumption, the trial court correctly determined that Objectors failed to meet their
burden regarding the validity of the petitions personally circulated by Ms. Weiss
and Mr. Paisley.
Because Objectors failed to meet their burden of proving that at least
3,761 signatures were invalid, the decision of the trial court is affirmed.
Judges Cohn Jubelirer and Simpson did participate in the decision in this case.
In Re: Petition for Initiative to :
Prevent the Sale and/or Lease of :
Gracedale Filed With Northampton :
County Elections Commission on :
January 18, 2011 :
Appeal of: Bernard V. O’Hare III : No. 269 C.D. 2011
AND NOW, this 1
day of April, 2011, the order of the Court of
Common Pleas of Northampton County, dated February 9, 2011, and docketed at
No. C-48-CV-2011-75, is hereby affirmed.

One Down - One To Go

Victory against O'Hare...

Bernie may think it is an April fool joke, but it's not... YOU LOST Again.

More to come

Vote - YES - For Gracedale

A VOTE against Angle

is a

VOTE for Gracedale

Good Day All

The blog has been quiet because as you all know there are two court cases pending, and on the advice of the COAF attorney, we are limited to say nothing until the cases are resolved - however, there is much to say so please stay connected to the blog because from one moment to the next we will commence the flow of information again.

Abraham Lincoln once said:
"You can deceive all of The People some of the time, and part of The People all the time, but not all The People all the time."

Deception of the people has been a norm over the years for the Stoffa/Angle team during their terms of office...but we are tired of the duplicity, and will stand for it no more! Prepare to VOTE!