Latest in a series of posts on Ethics and City Government

What do we know about where this controversy began?

In his November 25 press conference statement, Councilman Callahan states that for him this issue of possible unethical behavior by Alicia Miller Karner “came to [his] attention” in June of this year, June 2019 (he verbally corrected “June of last year” in oral delivery at the press conference) when 3 Department of Community and Economic Development employees — “2 current and 1 prior employee” — told him of AMK’s encouragement to “slow, delay, and stall all permits” to bolster her case for more staff.

(Gadfly thinks BGC might have said he was hearing complaints from developers too, so maybe there might be outside corroborative evidence as well.)

These people came to BGC in June 2019. He did not solicit them. It is not clear whether the contact was individual or group. It is not clear whether the contact was personal contact, phone, or email. It is not clear whether BGC had extended conversation with any of them in which he could determine how strong their claims were or that he was simply put on notice. It is not clear whether the contact was concerted, whether there was association among the employees, or whether the contacts were unrelated individual acts.

BGC apparently did not do any investigation of his own.

It is not clear what it is about the particular timing — June 2019 — that precipitated the simultaneity, the clustering of the contacts.

It is clear, however, that something was in the air in June 2019, for the Lehigh Valley Ramblings blog called attention to a “spike” in Zoning Hearing Board appeals because AMK was instructing staff to delay so she could request more staff. The blogger says, “When you hear it from three different people, it does not [strain credulity].”

So the same 3 employees seemed to contact the same 2 people at the same exact time to air their same complaint.

What would make the employees make such a complaint? Why is it such a big deal that it triggered what might seem a moral response? Perhaps their sense of general fair play, their conscience, their sense of professionalism. Perhaps, on the other hand, animus for some reason against AMK.

Why would the employees go “outside” City Hall to make their complaint (all indications so far are that they did not do so inside City Hall) to a blogger and a Councilman? Perhaps fear for their jobs. Perhaps fear of retribution. Perhaps because there is no system or procedure within City Hall for a person to bring forward such issues in a protected way.

Why would the employees go specifically to these two people — for instance, why not one of the other Councilpersons? Perhaps because the blogger has the reputation for dealing in inside information, has published this kind of whistleblowing, and has outed some situations successfully. Perhaps because BGC has a reputation for siding with the common person/underdog, for being a voice for them.

Who are these employees? We know one of them — Suzanne Borzak, former Zoning Officer — the person not a current employee, who was fired for officially vague reasons (personnel matters would, of course, be confidential) by AMK in January 2019, 6 months before the employee contacts about the stalling tactics with Lehigh Valley Ramblings and BCG.

“Bethlehem/s Popular Zoning Officer Forced to Resign, Lehigh Valley Ramblings, January 11, 2019.

Why in June of 2019, 6 months after dismissal, would Borzak be involved? Perhaps still hurting from being terminated. Perhaps from a sense of doing no wrong. Perhaps because the issue of stalling was a reason for her termination. Perhaps because of her professionalism. Perhaps, on the other hand, animus against AMK for firing her.

So what are you thinking about in regard to this initial phase of the issue? What do you think of the Gadfly’s “perhaps’s”?

Gadfly — ever the problem solver — goes first to the need for employees to go “outside” City Hall with a complaint. Is there no trustworthy “inside” mechanism or system to handle such matters? No suggestion box? No ombudsman? No “whistleblower” procedure? If not, does this issue indicate the need for one in which there is the possibility that some satisfaction, some mediation, or some reconciliation occurs before the issue blows up in public?

to be continued . . .

Latest in a series of posts on Ethics and City Government

Early Sunday morning as Gadfly writes.

Followers may still be in holiday haze. And the Eagles play a crucial game (aren’t they all?) today.

Not a good day to get serious perhaps.

Gadfly apologizes for the interruption.

But City Council meets Tuesday. When another shoe might drop. So Gadfly would like to try to get his head and wings around the suggestion by Councilman Callahan of possible ethics violations by the head of the Department of Community and  Economic Development before then.

To refresh yourself on this issue click Ethics on the Gadfly righthand sidebar.

Remember that Councilman Callahan has suggested that the Director of Community and Economic Development Alicia Miller Karner may have engaged in unethical behavior(s) that Mayor Donchez has been unwilling to investigate.

(Gadfly is being careful here. Councilman Callahan is asking for an investigation. He has not said he has definitive proof. He has asked the Mayor to investigate and take action if it is warranted.)

This is a serious issue.

Gadfly has said in an earlier post that the reputations of Councilman Callahan, Mayor Donchez, and Director of Community and Economic Development Karner are out on a limb.

Gadfly thinks especially of AMK. Even the barest suggestion of unethical behavior, much less a formal charge or confirmation of such, could be potentially personally and professionally devastating. It might, for instance, mean the end of a career.

But he should have added that the reputation of Bethlehem itself is out on a limb.

That’s the main reason we should be paying attention.

And he’s not trying to be sensationalistic or to overstate the case.

When in a time in which we have seen officials go to jail in ugly corruption cases in nearby Allentown and Reading a City Council member takes the microphone and goes before the cameras (Gadfly’s!) to suggest local corruption, we’d better straighten up and take notice.

Gadfly has also said in an earlier post that there seem to be three issues here. Let’s separate them out.

• possible unethical behavior by AMK regarding a Bethlehem Parking Authority decision on the Polk Street Garage
• possible unethical behavior by AMK stalling permit approvals in order to justify staff additions in her department
• breaches of decorum by BGC at City Council meetings

Gadfly spent last Tuesday laying a foundation for thought about this controversy with a series of posts, and a few of you have posted reactions, while others have emailed briefer comments (more on those later).

Gadfly is a slow thinker. Some of you have complained about that in the past. He has what he has self-described as a conveyor belt kind of mind (he grew up in the factory era, his grandkids are in the warehouse era!). He like to order things, process them, and then take a position.

So he’s going to start the conveyor belt now and share thoughts with you over a series of posts between now and Tuesday as he organizes events in chronological order and starts to form his views.

As usual, Gadfly invites you to think along with him — modifying, correcting, expanding his thinking as he goes.

Latest in a series of posts on Ethics and City Government

Tip o’ the hat to a follower who pointed out that Councilman Callahan added a comment addressed to the Mayor to this online news story.

“Bethlehem mayor responds to councilman’s call for probe into city department,” 69 News, November 26, 2019.

Mayor Donchez,

I discussed this issue with you verbally and made you aware of the situation and what I had heard several months ago. There was NO response back. Nothing.
Note: At this point it was confidential and strictly between us.

I then asked you to go into Executive Session in the Summer, so that the matter could be dealt with in private with the full Council and both Solicitors present. You Denied it!
Note: It was still confidential and I was trying to address it so that it remained Confidential in Executive Session. You Denied it, not I !

I then sent you a letter on October 17th explaining what I had told you verbally in the Summer. I explained in the letter all of the facts that I know other than the names of the individuals. It is not my job to “out” them. It is your department and your employees. I suggested that your BA Mr. Evans and your Solicitor Mr. Leeson just simply interview the employees in the Dept. to find out the truth.

Your reply back to me in your letter clearly indicated that you were not looking into the issue. You stated to me, ” Your memo of October 21 does not provide sufficient cause to conduct the investigation requested” .

You asked me to produce documents, names, particulars, …….and indicia of corroboration.

Mayor, you know that I, or anyone else on Council has the authority to investigate or interview your department employees or Dept. Head!
Note: At this point it was still Confidential other than President Waldron, Solicitor Spirk on Councils side and Solicitor Leeson, Business Administrator Evans and yourself on the Administration side.

Only after your comments to Council on Nov. 19th that I had somehow “attacked” Ms. Karner, from my council seat, by simply asking a pointed but fair question, it was only then that this issue became public.

Your comments tried to insinuate that my questioning of Ms. Karner was totally meritless, unfounded, unwarranted and out of the blue…..while you knew better!

On November 20, You then sent me a memo asking for me to now come in for a interview with Mr. Leeson and Mr. Evans only because I explained to Mr. Evans that after your comments to Council on Nov. 19th , that I shared all the information that I had with the press. It was then and only then that you wanted to now discuss the issues that I had raised and that I had tried to keep confidential for many months.

I offered you 3 different opportunities to look into the seriousness of the issues that I made you aware of. We would not be in the situation that we are currently in had you simply looked into the allegations months ago when you were first notified. You denied any action all 3 times.

Stop hiding behind your lawyers and advisors and …….Do your job ……..and simply ask the employees in the questioned dept. if there is any truth to the issues that were brought to not only my attention but were also reported by Lehigh Valley Ramblings Blogger Bernie Ohare back in June.

The residents of Bethlehem deserve to know the truth and you are the only one who can guarantee their protection form retribution for telling the truth.

Councilman Bryan Callahan

The Mayor said that he would have a further statement after reviewing Councilman Callahan’s press conference, at which he had a stenographer making an exact transcription. Somebody tell the Mayor that we have a full video of the press conference here on Gadfly.

Latest in a series of posts on Ethics and City Government

Dana Grubb is a lifelong resident of the City of Bethlehem who worked 27 years for the City of Bethlehem in the department of community and economic development, as sealer of weights and measures, housing rehabilitation finance specialist, grants administrator, acting director of community and economic development, and deputy director of community development.

Gadfly,

Some quick observations:

1. Bethlehem does need a comprehensive ethics ordinance. (Mr. Callahan opposed that)

2. I’ve heard the same accusations about the DCED director.

3. I’ve heard a number of complaints throughout the community about getting permits.

4. The DCED director should never have lobbied the parking authority board about the RFP choice, at least not privately.

5. The councilman is sure going about this the wrong way.

6. The councilman has been extremely disruptive and confrontational at meetings and blaming the ousting of the zoning officer for his actions/words is very disingenuous. [This City official was fired during the summer, and BC felt the action was wrong and tried to have open discussion about it.]

7. The ousted zoning officer WAS very highly respected throughout the city.

8. There are at least two appearances of conflicts in that RFP process and eventual award. (Mr. Callahan’s brother was involved in that process)

9. I do not believe that the Mayor tried to intimidate the councilman. I’ve known the Mayor since high school, and it is not his personality.

Dana

Latest in a series of posts on Ethics and City Government

Guess where Gadfly spent his lunch hour.

Ok, NOW Gadfly thinks you have all of the info on which to start forming ideas and opinions about Councilman Callahan’s suggestions of possible unethical behavior by the Director of Community Development and his approach to handling this matter.

Here for quicker reference is the text of Councilman Callahan’s press conference statement that we have on video a couple of posts back.

Callahan press conference statement

Please don’t neglect the video, however — a lot of relevant “information” can be picked up from tone and delivery.

And remember that there was a long “Q ‘n A” on video in that post as well, so be sure not to neglect that important portion of the press conference either.

So, indeed, let the good conversation begin.

Important issues here.

And the reputations of Councilman Callahan, Mayor Donchez, and Director of Community Development Karner are out on a limb.

Latest in a series of posts on Ethics and City Government

Gadfly hopes you are watching the videos of Councilman Callahan’s press conference yesterday provided in the previous post.

Gadfly does not have a digital copy of Councilman Callahan’s statement but is trying to obtain one.

Here are three additional documents that for now complete the information you need to have a full picture of this controversy.

Gadfly has laid the groundwork. Let the good conversation begin.

1) Email from Councilman Callahan to Mayor Donchez October 17, 2019

Mayor,

As I discussed with you a few weeks ago, I have heard of a number of concerns over the last year or so about the pace at which building permits are reviewed and approved in the Department of Community and Economic Development. Specifically, employees, both current and prior, indicated there is deliberate inaction encouraged in the Department by Director Karner to “slow,  delay and stall all permits with the end goal being the hiring of more permanent staff with benefits. I’ve been told that the issue was also reported by Bernie Ohare in the local blog “Lehigh Valley Ramblings”a few months ago. If true, this is most disappointing . I trust the individuals copied on this memo to keep this issue between us until the matter is looked into and resolved. I am asking that Mr. Lesson and Mr. Evans interview the current members of the department along with former employee Suzanne Borzak to determine if truly Ms. Karner did instruct her department to slow, delay and stall the permitting process for the stated reasons. I trust Mr. Leeson and Mr. Evans ability and judgement to do a fair investigation for the residents of the City of Bethlehem on this issue.

However, I think some issues may result in hiring people without the needed certifications.

Please confirm in writing any certifications we require to be a code inspector here in Bethlehem. Also , provide in writing the certifications of all the current building inspectors, including the chief building inspector in the department. Can you provide the written advertisement for all inspector positions used by the City , including for the Chief building inspector?

Does the chief building inspector meet the requirements required by City Ordinance 1701.02?  If the needed certifications are not in place , please provide a written explanation why such certifications were deemed unnecessary.

Can you please provide the names of all City Code inspectors that can sign off on a building plan?

Can you please provide the names and certifications of all code inspectors hired from 2014 until present?

Also, can you provide whether there are any openings in Code Inspections. If so, when is the anticipated hiring date? Does the positions have a specialty, ie., plumbing, electrical?

I’d appreciate the time this will take and simply ask for a response back within 30 days.

Thanks for your cooperation and in keeping Bethlehem moving forward.

Bryan Callahan

———–

2) “Bethlehem Zoning Appeals Have Spiked,” Lehigh Valley Ramblings, June 14, 2019.

Councilman Callahan included reference to this blog post in the media packet at the press conference.

Last year, Bethlehem’s Zoning Hearing Board entertained 34 appeals. This year, through June 12, the number is already 21. Why? Some of you may think there’s more development, but there’s another reason for this sudden increase. Last year, the City of Bethlehem had a zoning officer who actually worked with people and tried to come up with ways to make an appeal unnecessary. Not only did this make people more happy with the City, but property owners would be spared the $500 cost for an appeal.

Etc.

Councilman Callahan also included the 26 comments on this blog post, so be sure to look at them.

————

3) Email from Councilman Callahan to Mayor Donchez November 21, 2019

(City Business Administrator Eric Evans called Councilman Callahan November 20 to set up a meeting with City officials, but Councilman Callahan declined that meeting.)

Mayor,

It was very obvious and clear to me after reading your first sentence that you had no intention of interviewing the participants,   “Your memo of October 21 does not provide sufficient cause to conduct the investigation requested”, you had no interest in even looking into the subject!!

You then stated that, based on their advice (not your own sense of right and wrong) that if I provided documents, names, particulars……and indicia of corroboration that you might reconsider.

The ironic thing is that just as I finished reading your letter, you then started reading a prepared statement to all of Council, and while my name was not mentioned, the comments were clearly directed at me. In your comments you questioned my tone of voice and that my questioning of the Dept. Head Ms. Karner, “was unprovoked, out of order, without cause and completely out of line”. You then stated that you would no longer require your department heads to attend council meetings if questioned or in your words “attacked”.

Mayor, I nor anyone else on Council has the right to conduct interviews of your cabinet members/Department Heads or the employees under your charge and direction.

I also can’t provide or guarantee, to the two current employees, protection if they speak the truth about what they were directed to do by Ms. Karner or from retribution from Ms. Karner, as like what happened to Ms. Borzak.

I simply told Mr. Evans in yesterday’s phone call that it’s your job to get to the bottom of what happened. Last night after I told Mr. Evans that I had shared the memos with the press, it was only then that you asked for me to come in to discuss what I knew. As I told Mr. Evans, after your comments and remarks directed at me at Council on Tuesday night……that ship has sailed. It’s your responsibility to interview those employees…..not mine.

That is what the 76,000 residents and taxpayers would expect?

For the stated reasons above, other than Ms. Karner, I have a great working relationship with every one of your Department Heads. In fact I often socialize outside of City business with several of them.

For the first six years that I have been on Council, we as a whole have worked together professionally and collegially. My current issues with some members of Council began early last Summer when Ms. Karner fired a great long term city employee (1 of the 3 employees who Ms. Karner directed to “delay, slow down and stall all permits”). She was regarded as one of the City of Bethlehem’s best employees who worked extremely hard, competently and professionally under  other Mayors and Dept Heads with absolutely no issues.

At that time I asked you to bring Council into executive session so we could, in private, discuss the matter. You denied my request. I then asked Council as a whole to move to executive session. Taking the lead from a Council member who is currying favor for a Mayoral endorsement from you in a year and a half , they did not agree to go into executive session.

From that point on I have become more vocal at Council and, I will admit, I have had a “tone”  that something isn’t right here.

I know and I do realize that I have a strong personality but you have to understand that since the loss of my wife 13 years ago to cancer I have become more passionate and intense……and yes I even speak with more energy, emotion and tone.

Time and life is short and I intend to spend, I hope, the next 20 years helping to fix and solve the problems and issues in our great city.

As Ted Kennedy said of his brother Robert during his eulogy many years ago, “he saw a wrong and tried to right it”.  Well , on a very much smaller scale in our little city…..that’s what I am going to do. That is exactly why I also spoke up so strongly about how wrong it is to charge children the same price as charging an adult at the golf driving range.

In every single recreational fee that the City charges (Tennis, Swimming Pools, Ice Rink, and 18 hole and seasonal rates) the driving range is the only recreational facility that does not have a youth rate vs. an adult rate.

Shouldn’t we be encouraging children to get outside and off of all the video games? Isn’t that what the recreational department is for?

I hope you will take this letter and do what is right for not only the employees in the Community Economic Department who want to work hard but also for the parents who wondered where the permit was for the pool that they wanted to put in for their kids at the beginning of last Summer, but couldn’t because they didn’t have the necessary permit, the Senior Citizen who waited for a permit for his deck or patio, the neighbor who waited for a permit for their addition and the contractor waiting for a permit so that he could start working on a job that he needs to pay his bills.

This is real life…..not a game!

We all love Bethlehem…….We are all on the same team!

Sincerely,

Councilman Bryan Callahan

———–

Yes, Gadfly has laid the groundwork. Let the good conversation begin.

Latest in a series of posts on Ethics and City Government

photo April Gamiz/The Morning Call

Use the detailed news stories at the end of this post by our beat reporters for good full context, but you know that Gadfly always urges you to go to the primary sources and form your own opinions and ideas, so he has provided here full video of the approximately hour-long press conference.

City Councilman Bryan Callahan, press conference, Town Hall,
Nov, 25, 2019, 4PM

Councilman Callahan’s prepared statement:

part 1 (9 mins.)
part 2 (3 mins.)
part 3 (3 mins.)

Q ‘n A with the media:

part 4 (10 mins.)
part 5 (10 mins.)
part 6 (11 mins.)
part 7 (10 mins.)
part 8 (2 mins.)

Sara Satullo, “Bethlehem councilman says mayor tried to intimidate him after call for ethics probe.” lehighvalleylive.com, November 25, 2019.

Nicole Radzievich, “Bethlehem Mayor Robert Donchez delivers defense of aide targeted by councilman.” Morning Call, November 25, 2019.

Latest in a series of posts on Ethics and City Government

The action that precipitated Councilman Callahan’s announcement of a press conference on November 25 was this November 18 letter from the Mayor, indicating that the investigation of Ms. Karner that BC had requested a month prior had not been done..

Councilman Callahan’s press conference was scheduled at 4PM yesterday afternoon.

Earlier yesterday afternoon of November 25 — that is, before Councilman Callahan’s press conference — Mayor Donchez sent the following 3-page memo to City Council president Waldron.

The memo was sent early enough and distributed enough so that the media and presumably Councilman Callahan were aware of it at the press conference.

Mayor’s memo prior to Callahan press conference

There seem to be three issues here. Let’s separate them out.

• possible unethical behavior by AMK regarding the Bethlehem Parking Authority decision on the Polk Street Garage (raised by BC at the November 6 City Council meeting)
• possible unethical behavior by AMK stalling permit approvals in order to justify staff additions in her department
• breaches of decorum by BC at City Council meetings

The Mayor addressed just the first bullet in this memo, indicating that Councilman Callahan was confusing a “bid” and an “RFP” (Request for Proposal).

Since the BPA decision related to an “RFP” and not a “bid,” there was, according to the Mayor, no improper behavior by AMK.

Chewing on all of this so far?

Now let’s move to the Councilman Callahan press conference.

It’s probably neither here nor there, but remember that Gadfly had some indigestion over the Polk Street Garage decision by BPA.

Latest in a series of posts on Ethics and City Government

If you haven’t been paying attention, ’tis time to listen up.

A tempest has been brewing around Councilman Callahan for a period of time.

It blew up yesterday when he held a press conference at Town Hall.

There Councilman Callahan suggested that the Director of Community and Economic Development Alicia Miller Karner may have engaged in unethical behavior that Mayor Donchez has been unwilling to investigate.

Gadfly — always the professor — wants to make sure that you are up to speed on this important matter.

Let’s review how we got here.

Here in chronological order over the last three weeks or so are a series of Gadfly posts that will provide recent history of Councilman Callahan’s agitation and provide necessary background for his announcement in public yesterday.

• Councilman Callahan’s response to the proposed South Bethlehem Planning Study: On November 6, in discussion of a proposed study of the Southside, BC expressed “big concern” for Ms. Karner’s leadership, referring to “highly unethical” behavior, apparently in regard to a contract for the Polk Street Garage, the kind of behavior people went to jail for in Allentown.
• Discussion of the golf course budget drifts off the fairway: At a City budget hearing November 13, tempers flared between BC, the manager of the golf course, and some City Council members over a fee issue for kids at the golf course.
• Decorum d’issue at City Council last night: The  mayor made a formal statement at the November 19 City Council meeting about BC’s “unwarranted attack” on AMK during the November 6 meeting (without mentioning BC by name) and decried the lack of decorum at Council meetings — even threatening to boycott the meetings if such behaviors continued.
• Councilman Callahan charges “unethical behavior” / Mayor Donchez charges “unwarranted personal attack”: This post contains a full audio and video record of the the relevant portions of the November 19 City Council meeting. BC offers to disclose his information regarding AMK — “of such a serious nature that everybody on Council needs to know about it” — right then and there — but the Mayor says that from his perspective it is a personnel matter (and thus confidential).
• The Mayor’s speech at City Council November 19: Here is a printed copy of the Mayor’s formal statement at the November 19 City Council meeting, the video of which is in the post in the previous bullet.
• Councilman plans to address concerns about potential unethical practices in a City department: On November 22, Councilman Callahan announces a press conference for November 25 — yesterday — where we expect that we will get full details of the unethical behavior that he is asking to be investigated.

Ok, are you with him so far? Gadfly will spend the next several posts on this topic. There will be more than enough for you to chew on today.

Clear your calendar.

Buckle up.

Latest in a series of posts on City Government

Mayor/Council Speech 11-19-19

Councilman Callahan now publicly identifies the City Department of Community and Economic Development as the source of the concerns that he brought to the Mayor’s attention and which he does not feel have been resolved to his satisfaction.

PRESS ADVISORY

 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

November 22, 2019

Contact: Bryan Callahan 610-730-8658

 BETHLEHEM COUNCILMAN BRYAN CALLAHAN TO ADDRESS MAYOR DONCHEZ STATEMENT TO COUNCIL & CONCERNS RAISED REGARDING THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

 WHEN:   Monday, November 25, 2019

TIME:     4:00 PM

WHERE: Bethlehem City Hall Council Chambers

10 E Church St, Bethlehem, PA

Monday, November 25, 2019 at 4:00 PM in Bethlehem City Council Chambers, Councilman Callahan will address the public statement Mayor Donchez made at council directed toward Councilman Callahan, and will discuss the concerns the Councilman raised to the Mayor regarding the potential practices of the Department of Community and Economic Development, which impact citizens and business owners in Bethlehem, and are directly connected to the public statement by the Mayor.

It has always been Councilman Callahan’s position that Council and the City of Bethlehem has an obligation to the citizens they serve to be open and transparent.

Latest in a series of posts on City Government

Mayor Council Speech 111919

Latest in a series of posts on City Government

November 19 City Council meeting video

Bethlehem Mayor Robert Donchez on Tuesday said he would consider changing the 57-year tradition of cabinet members attending City Council meetings if there’s another “unwarranted personal attack” on a member of his administration like the one Councilman Bryan Callahan made at a recent council meeting. Reading from a four-page speech before City Council, Donchez did not mention Callahan by name or the details of the comments he found objectionable. The mayor made a reference to the Nov. 6 meeting when Callahan called the actions of a top mayor’s aide “unethical” and last Thursday’s budget hearing where Callahan had sometimes testy exchanges with council members during discussion on the city’s golf course.
Nicole Radzievich, Morning Call, November 20, 2019

 Gadfly always, always, always says go to the primary sources.

So he attempts to provide you here with a chronological list of the key moments you need to understand the Mayor’s (in Gadfly’s time) rather unprecedented statement — an indictment of Councilman Callahan’s recent behavior.

In addition to engaging in disruptive argumentative skirmishes with other members of Council in recent weeks (see Gadfly’s links above), Councilman Callahan believes a member of the Donchez administration should be investigated for unethical behavior, making what is in effect a  charge of professional homicide against an unnamed but easily identified department head in public — but without any details. All innuendo.

Serious stuff.

Follow the bouncing ball through the links below to moments of the November 19 City Council meeting. It will take you a little time, but well worth it.

1) Eddie Rodriquez (1 min.):

Yours truly has heard Eddie’s name mentioned as a diligent Gadfly-of-the-past. He has started to attend Council meetings again, thus catching the recent bad behavior, and — coincidentally — forcefully calling for its end during public comment at the top of the meeting, that is, before we knew what was coming.

• “I’d like to ask that the Board members here not debate amongst each other, not to be critical.”
• “You are supposed to be the prime example for all of us.”
• “I would like the chairman . . . you are the Sergeant of Arms . . . when you say that’s it, that’s it.”

2) Mayor Donchez (3 mins.):

The Mayor rarely speaks at Council. But here he is with fairly lengthy prepared statement, which Gadfly hopes to have a printed copy of to post soon. The Mayor cites insult to his administration, the Council’s loss of reputation, and the damage to the working relationship between the two. He dangles the possibility of a decidedly unwelcome next step if the behavior continues.

• “I participated in debates over many controversial issues . . . Debate was intense, with strong opinions, but personal attacks were not part of the process.”
• “I am more aware than anyone of the importance of the relationship between the administration and City Council.”
• “Bethlehem City Council has always been known for its decorum, professionalism, and respect for different points of view.”
• “We’ve been the model for many communities on how to conduct government business.”
• “Over the past several months there has been a major regression from that standard.”
• “I’m not talking about votes. I’m talking about provocative comments and personal attacks which seem to originate from a member of City Council.”
• “The departures are having a disproportionate negative impact on working relationships and Council’s reputation.”
• “Council members have been unfairly challenged to choose between engaging at the risk of escalation or to answer with silence.”
• “The personal attack [at a member of my administration] was unprovoked, out of order, without cause,  completely out of line.”
• “The members of my administration are professionals . . . I will not subject members of my administration of any more personal attacks.”
• “Decorum suffered again when a Council member did not get the answer he wanted.”
• “There are benefits [to the tradition of having the Mayor attend City Council meetings].”
• “In the future, if there is another unwarranted personal attack . . . I will consider changing that tradition.”
• “There have been some recent departures from decorum and professionalism that I feel obligated . . . to address.”

3) Councilman Callahan (5 mins.):

At last Thursday’s budget hearing, Councilman Callahan demonstrated the lack of decorum the Mayor spoke of, but here at the Council meeting he makes his golf course proposal in a calm, straightforward way, not one to distress decorum.

• “All I’m asking for is a children’s rate [at the golf driving range] like we do on every other recreational fee.”
• “The City of Bethlehem should be encouraging kids to stay outside an be active and stay off the streets.”
• proposes change from adult rate of $10/bucket to $5
• “This is a vote for kids.”
• “I’m for kids first.”
• “I’m fighting for kids to be active and off the streets.”

4) Response to and discussion of the Mayor’s statement (6 mins.):

Councilman Callahan states that it is his duty and right to point out administrative wrongdoing to the Mayor, that there was mutual blame to the decorum lapse at the November 6 meeting, and that he and the residents of the City like and want debate out in the open. (Note Councilwoman Negron leaving as Councilman Callahan speaks.)

The Mayor states the desire for and value of debate, but it’s the “tone” that is the problem.

President Waldron notes the positive difference in Councilman Callahan’s “approach” (tone) tonight over his behavior at the budget hearing.

Councilman Callahan wonders why he’s being judged on tone; it’s just the way he speaks; and he says look at the video: others made comments before he did.

Councilman Reynolds (2 mins.):

Councilman Reynolds thanks the Mayor for his “strong statement” about how business should be handled and indicates that he and Council don’t have information on the unethical behavior Councilman Callahan has raised and he looks forward to conversation about it.

Councilman Callahan’s concluding remarks (2 mins.):

Councilman Callahan makes clear that he is not charging the Mayor or his entire administration with wrongdoing but a department head and not just for one thing “but a couple things.” He offers to disclose his information — “of such a serious nature that everybody on Council needs to know about it” — right then and there — but the Mayor says that from his perspective it is a personnel matter (and thus confidential).  Councilman Callahan speaks of a “private letter that is “very disappointing” — a letter the nature of which he does not describe, though one guesses it is from the City about their investigation of the matter.

We may be heading for a car wreck here. Maybe time for Gadfly to pull together various observations of Councilman Callahan over the past year or two.

to be continued . . .

Latest in a series of posts on City Government

So Gadfly always tells you that you can’t tell a meeting from its agenda.

Look what happened last night at City Council.

The Mayor and Councilman Callahan kind of getting in to it.

Chew on the news stories.

Gadfly will go deeper next time.

Sara Satullo, “Bethlehem mayor clashes with councilman over ‘unwarranted personal attack’.” lehighvalleylive.com, November 20, 2019.

Bethlehem’s mayor on Tuesday urged his city council to return to the decorum it’s typically known for and threatened changes if members of his cabinet are again subjected to “an unwarranted personal attack.”

While Mayor Bob Donchez never addressed Councilman Bryan Callahan by name, his comments were prompted by recent heated exchanges between Callahan and fellow council members and the mayor’s top staff members. After the meeting, the mayor said he did not name Callahan because everyone knew who he was talking about.

“I am not talking about votes. I am talking (about) provocative comments and personal attacks, which seem to originate from a member of city council,” Donchez said reading from a four-page speech during Tuesday night’s council meeting. “While, for the most part, meetings proceed normally, the departures are having a disproportionate negative impact on working relationships and council’s reputation.”

Callahan argued he wants to debate city issues in the open, not in a backroom, and said he felt it was his duty as a councilman to alert the mayor to potential wrongdoing.

“I don’t think any of us want to stifle debate,” the mayor said. “It’s the tone.”

The mayor felt he had to speak up on the heels of a Nov. 6 council meeting where Callahan accused city Director of Community and Economic Development Alicia Miller Karner of “unethical” behavior. It came after months of council meetings devolving during the new business portion of meetings where Callahan laid out his concerns and council President Adam Waldron sought to rein him in and urged him to respect his colleagues.

“The personal attack was unprovoked, out of order, without cause and completely out of line,” Donchez said Tuesday during the meeting. Donchez spent 18 years on council and is in his sixth year as mayor. “The members of my administration are professionals. They work hard for the city and value the working relationship they have with city council.”

Callahan’s allegation stems from Karner’s role on a city committee tasked with evaluating requests-for-proposals from developers interested in getting in on the Bethlehem Parking Authority’s new Polk Street parking garage.

The city committee recommended the authority select Nova Development and Allied Building Corporation’s proposal. But the authority board opted to go with a Peron Development and J.G. Petrucci Co. plan that offered $200,000 more for the land. In a memo, the city committee said the difference in purchase price was not the only financial aspect to consider and pointed to the large gap in contracted parking spaces. Callahan questioned whether Karner inappropriately lobbied the authority to select the Nova/Allied proposal.

Councilman Callahan’s brother and former city Mayor John Callahan is director of business development for Peron, owned by developer Michael Perrucci.

Following the meeting, Donchez said there was no merit to the accusation following a review by Business Manager Eric Evans and city Solicitor William P. Leeson. The mayor noted he recused himself from the investigation because his son works for Perrucci’s law firm.

If there is another “unwarranted attack” the mayor threatened to end the city’s 58-year tradition of having the mayor’s cabinet members attend council meetings to explain items on the agenda, answer questions and try to resolve citizens’ issues.

“I will not subject members of my administration to any more personal attacks in the future,” the mayor vowed.

At council’s Nov. 13 budget hearing, things got tense between Callahan, a city officials and members of council as the councilman accused the city of “sticking it” to kids using the driving range when charging them for a full of bucket of balls. He was urging discounted pricing for the golf balls similar to the discounted youth golf rounds.

Callahan again raised the same concern Tuesday evening during a budget vote on the golf course fund, but took a much more collegial approach, urging his colleagues to support his suggestion that there be a discounted youth rate.

“I would recommend this vote for the kids,” Callahan said.

Waldron told Callahan he appreciated the way he laid out his thoughts Tuesday evening and noted that the councilman would need to bring forward a separate resolution to change the fee.

Nicole Radzievich, “Bethlehem Mayor Robert Donchez criticizes councilman for ‘unwarranted personal attack’.” Morning Call, November 20, 2019.

Bethlehem Mayor Robert Donchez on Tuesday said he would consider changing the 57-year tradition of cabinet members attending City Council meetings if there’s another “unwarranted personal attack” on a member of his administration like the one Councilman Bryan Callahan made at a recent council meeting.

Reading from a four-page speech before City Council, Donchez did not mention Callahan by name or the details of the comments he found objectionable. The mayor made a reference to the Nov. 6 meeting when Callahan called the actions of a top mayor’s aide “unethical” and last Thursday’s budget hearing where Callahan had sometimes testy exchanges with council members during discussion on the city’s golf course.

Donchez said his comments were not prompted by differences in policy but the tone of “one member of council” whose attacks were “unprovoked, out of order, without cause and completely out of line.” “I will not subject members of my administration to any more personal attacks in the future,” he said.

Callahan said he would reserve his response to Donchez’s remarks and likely hold a news conference. He added that he has the right to point out a possible impropriety as he sees it and debate in the open rather than in back rooms.

“The fact that I like to debate in the open is a good thing,” Callahan said. “I think the residents want it.”

Donchez, mayor for six years and councilman for 18 years, said council has a reputation of preserving political decorum and professionalism even during the most heated debates, including over whether a casino should be built in Bethlehem, but there have been moments of departure in recent months.

“While, for the most part, the meetings proceed normally, the departures are having a disproportionate negative impact on working relationships and council’s reputation,” he said. “Council members have been unfairly challenged to choose between engaging at the risk of escalation or answer with silence.”

Councilman J. William Reynolds on Tuesday thanked the mayor for speaking up about what he agreed to be a breakdown in decorum at council meetings.

Over the last few months, Council President Adam Waldron has told Callahan he was being disrespectful to colleagues and called those moments at the meetings “cringe-worthy” and “embarrassing.” Council members Paige Van Wirt and Olga Negron have called points of order because Callahan was violating its rules on decorum, such as assigning motives to actions. Reynolds, a one-time political ally of Callahan’s and a possible rival in the next mayor election, has said Callahan has no working relationship with council members, a characterization Callahan objects to.

Callahan, a two-term councilman and chairman of council’s finance committee, has defended his behavior. He said his questions are legitimate, he has a right to air his opinions and other council members violate the rules of order and make snide remarks without being called on it.

Callahan tangled with Reynolds at an Aug. 20 meeting over a zoning hearing board appointment, accusing him of hypocritical behavior. On Nov. 6, he called actions of Alicia Miller Karner, city director of community and economic development, as “unethical” during a discussion that began with questions about a South Side planning study. After that comment, Waldron said he hoped Karner, who was sitting on the edge of her seat, would not “lower herself” to respond, and then she pushed back in her seat and did not respond.

Karner, who was not at Tuesday’s meeting, said in an interview Wednesday that she has acted ethically in her 22 years of public service, but it was hard to address Callahan’s criticism without details. She said she would be happy to clear up any misunderstandings Callahan may have heard from others.

And last Thursday, during a lengthy discussion about the city’s golf course, Callahan, council members and a golf official sometimes talked over each other as Callahan questioned why the city was “sticking it” to kids by charging them the full price for a bucket of balls. The city offers discounted prices for youth golf rounds and season passes, he pointed out. Callahan said he would rather a kid drive balls on the course than be up to no good somewhere else. A city official said it was industry standard, and Councilwoman Grace Crampsie Smith noted the city offers free and discounted golf through youth programs including the First Tee.

When Van Wirt asked to be recognized to pose a “budget question,” Callahan said he wasn’t finished and to “take a seat for a second.” A few minutes later, he called her rude when she asked to be recognized again before he was done with his questions. Later during that budget hearing, Waldron admonished Callahan for interrupting him and “just about everybody in this room.”

“No, she interrupted me,” Callahan had said Feb. 13, pointing at Van Wirt.