Trying to nail down the Martin Tower developer

Latest in a series of posts on Martin Tower

Bethlehem is not where we were in 1994. This City is now in a position of strength.
Councilwoman Van Wirt

I am not overwhelmingly encouraged by what I’ve seen thus far.
President Waldron

What is it that you are able to do if I was the developer and I said I don’t
want to do these things?
Councilman Reynolds

It’s our role as Council to . . . help represent the community to say that these things are important based on conversations with members of the public that
have been ongoing for years.
President Waldron

ref: The Martin Tower site — almost two years later
ref: Martin Tower addendum
ref: Martin Tower developers request parking limitation exception at Planning this afternoon
ref: The tweaking of the Martin Tower site plan begins
ref: Martin Tower site: “we want it done the right way”
ref: Martin Tower proposal significantly interrogated at Council

Martin Tower’s on the City Council agenda for Tuesday night.

The developers are proposing a Zoning text amendment relative to parking and traffic flow that Gadfly, as you might remember, thought of relatively minor significance from the way it earlier flew through the Planning Commission.

Not so.

Several Council members at the public hearing on April 20 addressed the specific proposal on the table, but the more important thing that happened was that said proposal opened the door to a more general discussion of the Martin Tower project.

The proposed buildings on the old Martin Tower site face 8th Avenue in deference to the end users’ (e.g., St. Luke’s) desire for greater visibility. The original design proposes one traffic lane and one parking lane across the front. The amendment would permit the developer latitude to increase that area however he liked. The City Planning Bureau is not in favor of the amendment. Nor the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission.

At the earlier Planning Commission (not Planning Bureau) meeting, the developers said that this narrow and relatively insignificant (in their eyes) proposal was the first of a series of tweaks they would be proposing now that we are coming out of the pandemic (O, god, please!) and construction on the project is about ready to begin.

At the public hearing on the amendment April 20, some Councilpeople questioned this specific amendment on the table, but some were obviously looking for more general information on the project as well as wary of giving the developer too much freedom.

For instance, President Waldron almost immediately called attention to the significance of the night’s discussion, explaining that “This may be one of Council’s only opportunities to weigh in on the project and gain feedback from the public as far as what’s going to happen on such an important large parcel in the heart of Bethlehem.”

President Waldron was signifying that Council wanted eyes on the project because the eyes of the public were on them. He made the interesting point that there were two end users involved here that needed to be pleased, end users like St. Luke’s on the business side and end users like us the residents of Bethlehem on the public policy side.

In a previous post Gadfly used the term “interrogation” to describe Council’s mood at that April 20 Public Hearing, a mood no better exemplified than in the muscular tone of Councilwoman Van Wirt’s virtual lecture to both City Hall and the developer. Give a listen:

 

“Whenever I come across a privately requested zoning text amendment, my guard goes up. . . . Bethlehem is not where we were in 1994. This City is now in a position of strength. And I feel that there is a Golden mean that we have to find where we have appropriate development that respects our zoning code, that respects our walkability, and our need to de-emphasize motor travel and transportation, and especially strive to decrease the sea of asphalt that we see on our roads. We want development to happen at Martin Tower but not at the expense of our zoning and our quality of life. I feel that we must try harder. I feel that when developers come to our administration and our Department of Community and Economic Development that every single effort will be made to insure that new development respects our historical districts, our zoning codes, our walkability, but also will negotiate with the developer prior to coming for any requests to obtain the very best deal and maximum benefit for the citizens and not the developer. This is what I expect of the Administration and City Council, I believe, will hold to these standards, and I feel that there really is a good solution here, and it’s called good design. And I think that’s what we need to be asking of our developers before they come and ask for exemptions from our zoning codes.”

The discussion got really interesting when Councilman Reynolds — naming big picture topics like timeline, the look of the project, the design — said there were “lots of questions” about the project. Indeed, he coaxed a list of City priorities for the project out of the Mayor, a list that included shared parking, reduced impervious coverage, attention to a walkable community, replacement of trees, the view, handling of stormwater, enhancement of the trail network, green space, recreation space, decertifying Criz acreage, and affordable housing. Listen in:

All good stuff. Followers will recognize items on this list. We’ve all made lists. One of Gadfly’s is here. Scott Slingerland’s is here.

So we could make a list of the lists.

And Councilman Reynolds, channeling us no doubt, then asked the City where “we” were on securing the achievement of those items and, more to the point, “what is it that you are able to do if I was the developer and I said I don’t want to do these things?”

Big question.

Good question.

Can we trust the developer to have good ears?

What recourse do we have if he doesn’t?

Councilman Reynolds wasn’t satisfied with the vagueness of the response. He had to ask the question twice.

Solictor Spirk was incorporated into the discussion.

The end result of which was that though Council could stipulate a list of priorities for the developer to achieve, Council could not enforce such a list.

Drat.

But the City might well do it.

Someone turned on the fog machine.

Would the City sit down with the developer and nail down these priorities?

Yes, if the developer was willing.

Gadfly listened, but he heard no response from the developer.

President Waldron — “not overwhelmingly encouraged by what I’ve seen thus far” — and doing yeoman work for us, tried to arrange not only a meeting between the City and the developer to agree on priorities but also the production of a written agreement as the end result of such meeting.

A written agreement. Some basis for some accountability.

That daring suggestion/request hung in the air as the Public Hearing ended.

What will happen Tuesday night if such written agreement is produced?

Perhaps more importantly, what will happen if it is not?

The history of the Martin Tower saga refuses to be written yet.

Gadfly council forum #7: the state of the city

Latest in a series of posts on the Gadfly Forum

The Council candidates comparison chart

Candidates: Callahan, Crampsie Smith, Kwiatek, Leon, Wilhelm

The prompt:

The Mayor delivered the annual State of the City address April 16.

For this Forum response, Gadfly asked the candidates to think of the state of the city, the Mayor’s state of the city address, the content of that address, criticism of or additions to the address, the way in which that address is given, focusing more resident attention on it, and options or supplements to it.

Big open range again for the candidates to roam in.

Listen to Gadfly’s full prompt here.

———–

Kiera Wilhelm

Ed, I can’t believe we’re only three weeks away from the May 18 primary election. The time has flown by. Your latest question, as you know, touches

on a very important foundation of my campaign: warmly inviting residents to be informed, and participate. Communicating with constituents through your blog has been an important part of that.

My February press release announcing my candidacy stated it:

Ms. Wilhelm says she will prioritize more frequent, more accessible communication with the citizens of Bethlehem—via an enhanced and easy-to-navigate digital hub, a more robust social media presence, and, when it is safe, in-person conversations in the neighborhoods where people live and work. “I believe that better, warmer communication between a government and its citizens can lead to increased civic participation—an engaged community of residents who, having been thoughtfully informed and actively invited to participate, do,” she said. “This can mean anything from increased voter participation, to more trees planted, to volunteering, community gardens, more public art, and so much more. Civic participation contributes to the health and well-being of individual citizens, and to the community as a whole.”

Looking back, my path to city Council has been paved with “invitations“—even (mostly?) inadvertent ones. When I returned to Bethlehem in 2013, my core group of friends included (and still does!) people who were involved in this city in a number of ways: performing artists, small business owners, generally engaged and concerned citizens. In the last four and a half years as Director of Fig, I became further entrenched in not only the small business community but the community at large. Being out and about, learning and telling the stories of hard-working people dedicated to serving the city in a number of ways, informed and enlightened me. It made me want to learn more, do more. My connections presented opportunities to become more involved, in a number of arts, education, and other community organizations. And now here I am.

City Hall has made important strides in becoming more accessible to residents, and I’m pleased about that. This year’s State of the City address was streamed live, and I watched it with interest. Its many positive messages were accompanied by colorful, engaging photos of places and faces I recognized: the Southside ambassadors; our new police chief, Michelle Kott; our incredible public health team; business owners and other members of the community. I loved seeing renderings of our new food co-op and other projects on the horizon. And I wondered how many others were watching. We can, and should, build on the efforts already made to ensure that City information is reaching as many of our citizens as possible.

Communication with stakeholders is crucial—people and institutions who are investing themselves in the growth of the City need to be kept informed and included. But it’s important to remember that the citizens of Bethlehem are stakeholders, too. As a member of Council (and a former teacher) I’m committed to striving to continually make information not only readily available and accessible but easy to understand. The language we use in communicating information is as important as how and how often we communicate (terms such as “LERTA” and “Enterprise Zone” may not be familiar to most residents, for example). Furthermore, we have so much to learn from the citizens of Bethlehem. Getting information not just to them but from them will inform our work as public servants in deeply valuable and meaningful ways. We can provide unintimidating opportunities for residents to share their perspectives. Not just at the City Hall rotunda but in the neighborhoods where they live and work.

Not everybody is given a natural path to information and engagement. I feel fortunate that my path led me here. As I was invited in, I want to invite others in, too. We all benefit when we hear from all voices, and I’m eager to be part of a City Council that welcomes and engages with those voices.

————

Hillary Kwiatek

When I heard the Gadfly’s question about the state of the city, I was reminded of one of the guidelines for effective dialogue that we use for

conversations across difference among faculty, students and staff at Lehigh: Notice Process and Content.

When viewed from this perspective, we see that the process of the presentation of the annual State of the City address to the chamber of commerce influences its content. A chamber of commerce audience is thought to be more interested in economic development than other areas of municipal government or broader issues such as racial justice or climate change. If this is the only time that a mayor reports on the “state of the city,” that address will fall well short of what our residents want and need to know about.

The economic development and vitality of our city are crucial aspects of the overall health of our city. And the annual address to the chamber of commerce, which includes member businesses of every size, is an absolutely valid exercise. And, at the same time, I think it points to a need for a much more robust and inclusive communication plan for our city going forward.

As part of Councilman Reynolds’ “Bethlehem 2017” initiative, which also included the Open Data ordinance and Climate Action Plan, I served on a working group focused on communications and engagement between the city and our residents. This group, “Connecting Bethlehem,” launched a survey in 2019 to learn more about how the people who live, learn and work in Bethlehem find information about the city; their level of awareness about the city’s communication channels; and their satisfaction with the amount and quality of communication coming from the city.

We received nearly 1,400 replies to our survey. The data showed that while people felt largely positive about the effectiveness and value of the city’s communications, they also found the many channels available, from hotlines to social media, disorganized and confusing. Respondents indicated there were too many places to find information in some cases, and not enough in others. Community members were seeking a unified voice that they could rely on for consistent messaging about the aspects of municipal government that mattered to them.

One more note on the survey. It was important to us that the survey be offered in both English and Spanish, and Councilwoman Negron kindly translated the survey for the working group. We launched the English and Spanish versions together; however, in the end we received only a handful of responses to the Spanish language survey. We saw that as evidence that even our communications efforts to gather information about communications weren’t reaching a large part of our community, at least partially due to a digital divide. This led us to recommend that the city continue to communicate in both print and digital formats.

Finally, the state of the city shouldn’t only be addressed once a year in one place. There should be continual two-way communication between residents and its government.

I believe that City Council members have a role to play in city/community communications. Council members can serve as a connection between residents and the government, and I believe they can create greater engagement from residents by explaining how the city’s many ordinances and approval processes work. I would point to Dr. Van Wirt as an exemplary councilwoman in this respect (among others!).

As a councilwoman, I would see this as a key responsibility of the role and would strive to be as accessible as possible. For example, I want City Council to conduct town halls and other meetings in neighborhoods throughout our community at times and places that are convenient to residents on topics such as the Climate Action Plan, economic development, public safety and more.

If I am fortunate enough to be elected, I will work with the administration to build on the Connecting Bethlehem survey findings to develop robust, inclusive, and unified communications that reach all of our diverse communities.

————

Bryan Callahan

————

Rachel Leon

Once again, I thank you for your thought provoking prompts Sir Gadfly. I enjoy the time we are given to sit with these prompts.

This week’s prompt reminded me of the TED Talk given by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie on the dangers of a single story. She highlights the pitfalls of

only viewing a situation from one point of view. She ends by saying “when we reject the single story, when we realize that there is never a single story about any place, we regain a kind of paradise.” I was also reminded of one of my favorite quotes by James Baldwin when he states, “I love America more that any other country in the world, and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually.”

I love Bethlehem more than any other city in the world and for that reason I feel it is my responsibility to be realistic in my description of the state of Bethlehem. When Bethlehem is only spoken about in terms of economic development, we are given a single story of the state of Bethlehem. A story that is financially focused and not family focused. I’m not naïve to the needs of economic stability in a city. I support responsible development and believe in the small businesses that continue to make Bethlehem a totally unique place. However, it is important to be able to point out obvious issues that we are facing as a city. A critique of a specific initiative or practice that residents notice is not a condemnation of the City. It is a call to pay attention, so that a situation does not progress to a point that we are unable to return from. I can say that I appreciate Lehigh’s commitment to investing in the business district in South Bethlehem. I can also say that the trend of student housing in South Bethlehem has made it increasingly difficult for families to find affordable housing in an area that has always been affordable to our residents. I can commend the revitalization of the Memorial Pool and still express concern as to when Yosko Pool will be prioritized. The complex at Third and New is a point of pride for some but a reminder of concerns left unaddressed to others.

When the state of the city is spoken about, I would love to hear the good and the bad. Where are we now? Where are we going? What have we lost sight of along the way, and how do we intend to make it right? The state of the city should express the true diversity of the city, because if it doesn’t, we risk perpetuating the dangers of a single story.

————-

Grace Crampsie Smith

————

Residents are welcome to fashion reflections on candidate comments, sending them to ejg1@lehigh.edu. On Gadfly we seek the good conversation that builds community, so please be courteous at all times. Gadfly retains the right to abridge and to edit your reflections and to decline posts that are repetitive or that contain personal attacks. Gadfly will publish resident reflections on the week’s Forum at noon on Friday.

Mayoral candidates Grubb and Reynolds on the most pressing issue facing the City

Latest in a series of posts on candidates for election 

selections from Christina Tatu, “Q&A with Bethlehem’s Democratic candidates for mayor.” Morning Call, April 22, 2021.

Q. What do you think is the most pressing issue facing the city and how would you address it?

Grubb: Gentrification. It is becoming more and more difficult for longtime and lower income residents to remain a part of the community. Addressing affordable housing is the first step to rectifying this. If a diverse population can’t afford to rent or own a home in Bethlehem, its character will suffer as a result. Diversity is a strength, and losing that strength will negatively impact the pool of qualified people to fill employment opportunities in the city.

Reynolds: The pandemic has upended our community in many ways and we need to emerge as a stronger, fairer and more vibrant city. Families, small businesses, nonprofits and our institutions have all made incredible sacrifices during the past year. We need to assist our residents most affected by the pandemic as well as invest in building a more resilient community.

Our response must be directed towards both short-term relief and longer-term planning in Bethlehem. We must continue to attract jobs and new investment to our city. Private economic investment in our community is needed to fund our basic city services and keep taxes as low as possible. Every job that is created in our community makes it easier for City Hall to continue to deliver high quality public safety services, pave our streets and invest in our neighborhoods.

Hardball (3)

Latest in a series of posts on candidates for election

ref: Hardball (1)
ref: Hardball (2)

from Greg Zahm

First, in response to the Grubb campaign Mailer of last week, how many can say they have served the city equally to either Dana Grubb or Willie Reynolds? I have served as a teacher for 16 years in this my home town (eight more between NYC and Easton) – much less than many have given to Bethlehem, and also not in a city-wide capacity. Children’s education and small-scale intervention in their lives have been quite enough responsibility. Having said these things, our city – all of it – needs our help.

I can say unequivocally that I do not like the tenor of Dana Grubb’s “hardball” mailer – some of what he’s saying and much of the way he’s saying what he’s saying: “It’s no one’s “turn” to be Mayor: It should be the CHOICE of the people!”

Mr. Grubb, it is already the people’s choice. This statement is manipulative.. It’s “said” publicly (rather than behind the scenes), but in a forum where many reading it cannot interact with others to digest it with thorough and informed consideration.

And, while I want to admire the spirit of “It’s time to break the cycle of “graduating” members of City Council to the Office of Mayor” – of COURSE not – where is the substantiation of this implication? I find it cheap and offensive. CAN it be substantiated? And, is the bigger implication intended that “anyone who really matters” should simply agree?  Alas, it too is public . . . and done.

And now, there is Willie Reynolds’ mailer (of Friday, April 30) comparing Mr. Grubb to the most recent ex-president, due to one – albeit concerning, but investigated, explained, and resolved – event.  (And is the picture supposed to be derogatory? Meh.)

How many more physical altercations has Mr. Grubb had? Has he been charged for any? (Has Mr. Reynolds?) I have heard of none. On what facts does Mr. Reynolds challenge Mr. Grubb in the mailer? One.  I agree that the last four years have essentially been the absence of federal leadership. That, however, does not translate so easily to Mr Grubb. Arguably, this is equally if not more disappointing than Mr. Grubb’s innuendo.

Now, to the “facts” of Mr. Grubb’s mailer.

No resident wants to see personal taxes raised – EVER. Amid a pandemic? Yes, that IS very concerning.

What explanation was given by Council and Mayor Donchez for not finding another solution? (Perhaps I did not attend enough to gather that answer.)

Would you say it was a lack of vision and leadership? Failure to apply sufficiently for grants (an area of your apparent expertise), as, Mr. Grubb, you implied at the Church of the Manger forum? And/or was it a lack of compassion – all the way around, including at the State and Federal levels?

But, what did YOU propose to solve the revenue shortfall, Mr. Grubb? Did you come forward at the time and share your wisdom? Or, what do you have to say NOW about what should have been the solution then?  (Grants, cutting personnel AND expanding the tax base?) I hear you criticizing, but WHERE WAS YOUR LEADERSHIP?  Then again, I only occasionally attend Council meetings.  (Having that experience, I think I can accurately state that most residents do not attend at all.)

I did attend the Church of the Manger event Monday. Based on your statements there, should it be assumed that you, Mr. Grubb, would have already acquired the millions in grants to weather this current terrible storm, or would you have re-organized City Hall AND cut more staffing – that Mr. Reynolds suggests is already at an all-time low?

And speaking of “storms”– sort of, was Climate Change – and other/related anthropogenic disasters such as the current mass extinction – not important enough to make the mailer? Improving parks has made it to the top of your list, but what about the current and predicted impacts of environmental inequities on poor and minority communities/residents? Have you really addressed this? Do I digress?

Back to Mr. Reynolds. Unhappily, I am very familiar with the avoidance of answering questions over the past year by Council – including mayoral candidate Mr. Reynolds — and current Mayor Donchez.

I asked council (and the Mayor) multiple times during meetings since last summer and via email why they were failing to hold EVEN ONE MINUTE of discussion on the topic of reevaluating the police budget, an issue critical to many residents.  Doing so then was – and STILL IS NOW – their responsibility to the residents!

When Mr. Reynolds agreed to discuss this question with me after the Church of the Manger event he said the reason it wasn’t discussed by council or the Mayor was because . . . no one wanted to discuss it. City Council and Mayor Donchez, according to Mr. Reynolds, did not WANT to discuss this significant demand made by much of the public.  (Mr. Reynolds, you still have not explained why you never responded to my question and emails.)

I reminded Mr. Reynolds then – as I do readers, now – that “Accountability” and “Advocacy” on behalf of ALL residents, an “Open Bethlehem,” and a “Responsive City Government” are the highlights of his mayoral platform on the web.

So, the public’s demand for budget reevaluation – and my inquiries/correspondences about simply discussing the demands of so many residents – REMAIN unmet and unanswered, MONTHS later!

Council and the Mayor failed to advocate for MUCH of the public on this issue, but not for ALL of the public.

Some residents (lead by the Bethlehem “Good” Neighbors Alliance) berated any councilperson as a “radical leftist” and as literally wanting to overthrow the government for even considering doing their job of discussing the police budget.

The result?  Council – and our Mayor – failed to hold ANY discussion, yielding to threatening and fear-mongering of one loud minority.  NOT ONE motion to discuss was made in council.

In retrospect, after the Jan 6 attack on the US Capital, perhaps they felt legitimate fear.

Nonetheless, the problem seems to be that we have skilled politicians when we need more leadership.

Shouldn’t leaders, when elected, represent ALL and hold the difficult discussions, ESPECIALLY with those who voted against them or who disapproved of their actions? And, as human beings, acknowledge their mistakes? Even as late as now? (Or explain why it wasn’t a mistake?)

Is a politician one who avoids difficult situations and represents those who did – or would – give them their vote, and calls it leadership? And, once elected, is staying elected the goal?  (I think I am channeling Mr. Grubb.) This IS a legitimate concern.

Are my complaints “sour grapes”?  Well, these grapes are bitter at the lack of representation that occurred – and continues, but also for the apparent lack of courage and Leadership that remains.

And then a campaign taking money from developers? Has “Even the appearance of impropriety” gone out the window?  This is clearly a conflict of interest.

And, that ethics ordinance? Delayed? Forgotten? Or buried?  Is that an example of advocating for residents?  Is it not apparent after the last year – four years? – that it is critical?

I repeatedly remind myself of the service given by those in leadership positions, certainly by both of these men. We are all flawed. Mr. Grubb has explained his role in the fight that lead to his forced retirement. He’s owned that – not run from it, and I believe that reflects character. The lack of representation described above, and its continued avoidance are disqualifying to me. I NEED to hear publicly – all of our Bethlehem family deserves to hear – that that has been acknowledged AND DISCUSSED publicly, in order to continue considering Willie Reynolds as a candidate.

Mr. Reynolds, you are still somewhat unknown to me. I spoke to you after the Church of the Manger Forum and shared my concerns in person and honestly – after the many digital attempts. Answer ALL of your constituents’ concerns, as a councilperson.  You, like the current Mayor, work for each of them.

Mr. Grubb, you are largely unknown to me. As one asking to lead, you have not addressed – certainly not with clarity and depth – a number of the above issues.

Truly,

Greg Zahm

Hopeful Human, Advocate for All Species, Teacher, Parent, Husband, Brother, Son (of a Native Son), AND one who aspires to leaving a place better than he finds it (thanks first to my childhood baseball coaches Mr. D. Horst and Mr. B. Kresge)

Two interesting things about candidate Reynolds and the CAP

Latest in a series of posts on candidates for election

Breena Holland is an Associate Professor at Lehigh University in the Department of Political Science and the Environmental Initiative. She is a past director of Lehigh University’s South Side Initiative.

ref: The Mayoral candidates April 6 at LV4ALL:  the environment and Martin Tower

Gadfly,

I note two interesting things about WR’s response. First, he is taking a lot of credit for doing his job, which is to respond to the significant citizen interest in a climate action plan (CAP). While he deserves some credit for helping to get money for other people to write the CAP, it is a bit self-aggrandizing for him to claim that HE is the developer of it. He’s the public face of a citizen effort, and as a consequence of that, he is benefiting from significant political support coming from the environmental community in Bethlehem that this public role assured him. Of course, we don’t actually have any concrete action on climate change after many years of planning and talking and support building, so whether he will be successful in getting anything significant done on climate remains to be seen. Second, as a quasi-governmental advisory council without a partisan political affiliation, I’m shocked that Mr. Reynolds would publicly proclaim the support of members of the EAC that he voted to appoint. It’s fine for appointed officials to support political candidates as private citizens, but for Reynolds to affiliate his candidacy with the support of people he approved for public positions smacks of impropriety. It undermines the legitimacy of the EAC because it gives the appearance that he approved the appointment of people because he already knew he could later claim their support in a political campaign. This is precisely why we need the Ethics Ordinance that Reynolds so effectively torpedoed.

Breena

Mayoral candidate Dana Grubb: the City must have “a comprehensive code of ethics”

Latest in a series of posts on candidates for election

Dana Grubb for Mayor

click here for video

Candidate Grubb at City Hall:

  • worked 27 years in various capacities in the Department of Community and Economic Development
  • critical for the City to have a comprehensive code of ethics
  • proposed several years ago but rejected by several Council members including opponent Reynolds
  • need transparency, honesty, integrity in a system built on checks and balances
  • must deflect solicitations for special favors
  • no campaign donations from Bethlehem major developers (deep pockets)
  • also no endorsements from City and elected officials (you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours)
  • will act solely in best interest of residents

Let’s believe in a better Bethlehem.

Key Southside grocery site will live on

The latest in a series of posts on the Southside

Kudos to the Mayor, the Administration, Council members, and residents who sprang into action when Ahart’s folded.

———–

selections from Christina Tatu, “Ahart’s Market in Bethlehem sold for $2.3 million with plan to keep it a grocery store.” Morning Call, April 30, 2021.

A buyer has closed on the former Ahart’s Market in south Bethlehem, paying for $2.3 million for the property with the intent of keeping it a grocery store, a listing agent and Bethlehem officials confirmed Friday evening.

The market, long considered a staple in south Bethlehem at 410 Montclair Ave., closed after 20 years last month. Steve Clipman, a real estate broker with TRUE Commercial in Lancaster, which listed Ahart’s, said a new buyer closed on the property Thursday, buying it for $2.3 million. It will take about six months before a grocery store is opened there again.

The Bethlehem location was critical, however, for an area that is considered a food desert, without ready access to fresh fruit and vegetables. City officials sprung into action working to identify a buyer for the property who would keep it a grocery store.

The 24,535-square-foot-building will undergo extensive renovations.

The property was only listed for two months before Thursday’s sale and attracted plenty of attention, he said.

Mayor Robert Donchez confirmed the sale Friday evening, though he also declined to identify the buyer. City officials have been in contact with the buyer for several weeks and they hope to make an official announcement soon, he said.

“I impressed upon this individual that it was very important to keep the facility as a full-fledged grocery store that serves a large clientele in Southside Bethlehem and Fountain Hill,” Donchez said. “He was very receptive. Over the last three weeks, our conversations were always positive and we knew they were getting very close to finalizing.”

Friday evening, Donchez said he was elated the deal finally went through and he looks forward to making an announcement.

“I grew up on the Southside and my mother shopped at that store until the day she died,” he said. “It’s one of the anchors of the Southside community.”

In the meantime, as residents await the re-opening of the market, the nonprofit Kellyn Foundation, based out of Tatamy, will operate a “Real Food Mobile Market” in Ahart’s parking lot every Saturday from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m.

The first mobile market is planned for this Saturday and will likely operate until the store re-opens, said Eric Ruth, head of the Tatamy-based Kellyn Foundation.

The nonprofit has a mission of bringing fresh and nutritious food to areas lacking reliable access. The mobile market will be filled with locally grown produce as well as healthy prepared foods, like plant-based cuisine, salads and breads.

City officials also partnered with Kellyn, providing $55,000 in Community Development Block Grant COVID funds to start a coupon program for eligible residents. Under that program, qualifying residents of the city can fill out an application to get a $20 coupon they can use weekly at the mobile market, explained Alicia Miller Karner, Bethlehem’s Director of Community and Economic Development.

The Mayoral candidates April 6 at LV4ALL: the environment and Martin Tower

Latest in a series of posts on candidates for election

“How would you balance environmental protection concerns such as those brought up by the Environmental Action Committee with rezoning and development in Bethlehem into such things as Martin Tower?

Candidate Grubb:

  • The EAC made recommendations when Martin Tower was before Council
  • such as impact on Monocacy Creek, pollution
  • they weren’t listened to
  • developers given carte blance
  • which opponent Reynolds supported
  • with so much impermeable surface you can’t ignore the environmental impact
  • you gotta play hardball with developers
  • has experience doing that
  • gotta let them know the environment is important to the residents
  • would take a hard stance with developers

Candidate Reynolds:

  • Administration not Council brought forward the re-zoning proposal
  • Council created compromise that reduced the amount of retail by 75%
  • compromise balance commercial, residential, and retail
  • redevelopment is a balance of those three in a sustainable way
  • nobody’s talking about the Climate Action Plan I developed and that is just going to be released
  • EAC has been 100% supportive of CAP
  • members are supporting my campaign
  • roadmap to sustainability that touches every project including Martin Tower

Bethlehem’s Year of Floyd (2): Council deploys

Latest in a series of posts regarding the George Floyd anniversary

Gadfly is modestly proposing that City Council mark the anniversary of George Floyd’s death at a Public Safety meeting on May 25, 2021. A year gives us some distance on our efforts to act on the significance of his death and a perspective on the challenges it presented to the City. Gadfly continues here a quasi-history of the “Year of Floyd” as seen through his eyes and the pages of the blog. One man’s version. As always, Gadfly invites you to join in.

————–

The June 2 City Council meeting at which Chief Diluzio made his “George Floyd’s Death & Policing in America” presentation was 8 days after the murder of George Floyd. Bethlehem had seen a peaceful demonstration 3 days before. Peaceful but certainly angry.

Several Council members were there on May 30 to witness and no doubt to participate in the anger, and all members shared such messages addressed to Council calling for local action as “During the next budgetary assessment, the City of Bethlehem needs to defund policing and allocate this funding to Health services, Public Housing, and Education,” “We are contacting you again to demand immediate action,” “I am emailing to demand the restructuring of the Bethlehem city budget in a way that prioritizes social services for communities and drastically minimizes spending on police,” and “WILL YOU ask the “affected” what THEY need?”

The Mayor and the Chief had stated their relatively inactive positions, now what would Council do?

Would they, in Gadfly’s view, rise to the occasion, respond in kind to the uncoiling significance of Floyd’s murder and the demand for meaningful action?

Each Council member spoke at that June 2 meeting.

President Waldron’s focus was solely on the model non-escalating behavior by our police department in ensuring a peaceful protest and ensuring the First Amendment rights of the protestors. The police acted with such  “restraint” and “respect,” said President Waldron, that “not a single incident . . . happened within that large rally last Saturday.”

Councilman Callahan likewise echoed praise for the police doing “a heckuva job” but moved a bit beyond that to action, by which, however, he meant only sending “some type of resolution to the state . . . our state senators, our United States senators,” and by “going out and voting.”

Frankly, Gadfly was most surprised, most disappointed by Councilman Colon — from a diverse Puerto Rican/African American family with a life experience no doubt different from almost every one else on Council — who was satisfied hearing that the police department was up to snuff, who’s “using this time to listen” (a term he repeats 4 times) and keeping “the dialog going” (what new in regard to racism could he expect to hear at this point in our history?), who sees change as “incremental,” and who seemingly sees very little role for Bethlehem in taking the lead in fostering change. Councilman Colon’s response simply seemed too low energy for Gadfly given the rather tumultuous events spreading around the country and, indeed, the world. (Councilman Colon is chair of the Public Safety Committee, and Gadfly will have occasion later to link this low key attitude to the operation of that committee.)

Thankfully, in Gadfly’s opinion, the remaining four Councilpeople significantly raised the level of conversation.

Councilwoman Van Wirt immediately smoked the Mayor and Chief for failing to indict systemic racism not only in Minneapolis but also here in Bethlehem as well. The Councilwoman charges them “to do something,” that is, “to look at our own city and address economic and social racism where it exists.” Bingo! Councilwoman Van Wirt reads a letter originally posted on Gadfly from resident Breena Holland — the hard-edged, no nonsense kind of letter we’re used to from her –in which she calls out the Mayor and Chief for words that “are not that meaningful unless they get turned into action.” If the Mayor and Chief “can pretend [racism] does not exist locally” and only “condemn what happened to George Floyd for the brutal inhumanity it displayed, . . . then they are part of the problem.”

Now we’re cookin’, feels the Gadfly.

If we — the imperial white “we” — are going to help the “other,” are going to actively help the other, what do we most need? Perhaps empathy is the key trait. The ever heart-felt Councilwoman Crampsie Smith does a clinic on empathy: “it is really important for us to reconcile with the fact that people of color are deeply and profoundly hurt and that hurt is manifesting itself as anger. Can we blame them? Absolutely not. I would not be in this position of councilmember if it were not for my dear friends of color. I am blessed every day to see the gifts, talents, and dignity of my wonderful students of color. My heart is broken for them and for our country. As a mother you live with many fears regarding your children’s well being. I thank God my twenty-year-old son is white, for his safety is greater than his friends of color. And that is truly wrong. My heart breaks for the parents of children of color, for I cannot fathom the fear they live with each and every day. Their fears are above and beyond what any parents’ fears ever should be.” So personal, so powerful. And where does the Councilwoman end up? With the magic words. Anti-racism. “We must insure that we are not not just against racism, but that we are anti-racist, we are inclusive, and we always strive to insure justice for all.”

Anti-racism. Bethlehem as an anti-racist city. Now we’re talkin’.

Gadfly remembers remarking during public comment one meeting that Councilman Reynolds is the loudest of the Councilmembers. With his commanding voice and machine-gun delivery, he can make you sweat. Councilman Reynolds picks up on the need for empathy, describing what he has learned from his students. He picks up on the need for anti-racism: “there’s also a difference between not doing something wrong and doing what’s right. And I think that’s part of the conversation we need to have in the city. . . . It is not even enough just to say that we can have peaceful demonstrations here. It’s gonna be enough when people that are in marginalized communities are able to look at us as our elected officials and look at things we’ve done and say, you know what, they made things better, they made things more inclusive, they gave power to people that didn’t have power before.” With the statements by the Mayor and the Chief as the implied point of reference, the Councilman says, “it’s just not enough to be against racism, but we need to pro-actively be anti-racist. ”

Anti-racism again. For most individuals and institutions, that means a complete 180-degree re-orientation in attitude and behavior. And a risky re-orientation at that.

We end our survey of Council responses at this June 2, 2020, meeting with a dose of reality. We end with Councilwoman Negron. We don’t need a resolution, she says. We don’t need a “magic pill.” We know the problem, we just ignore it. It’s simple. Simply do justice, something we all know. Simply do justice. Here’s the bitter truth. Here’s speaking truth to power. “Your brown and black constituents are being right now, every day treated in an unjust way. . . . the injustice exists. And there’s no way for anybody to say otherwise.” The Councilwoman herself feels at times “intimidated, afraid.” Then come the words “we” don’t want to hear: “Liberty and justice for all. Really? Justice for all. Justice for all as long as you have light skin, gold hair, and blue eyes. Because if you don’t, there’s no such a thing in here as justice for all.”

Words far from those of the Mayor and the Chief. Words that should move us to action.

Will they?

to be continued . . .

On the subject of hardball and negative campaigning

Latest in a series of posts on candidates for election

Candidate Grubb’s hardball mailer created quite a buzz, a buzz about negative campaigning. Now we have the Reynolds hardballer as well. Apoplexy abounds.

Here below we have Councilwoman Negron giving candidate Reynolds some space on the topic of his involvement with the ethics ordinance and Barbara Diamond defending candidate Grubb against the charge of negative campaigning.

Further comments on either side welcome and invited.

ref: Hardball (Grubb)
ref: Candidate Grubb critics don’t respond to the facts
ref: Hardball (Reynolds)

Gadfly,

Dr. Van Wirt and I continued the conversation to bring back our Ethic ordinance and Dr. Van Wirt did her due diligence and approached councilman Reynolds who said he would support the Ethics Ordinance. I think it took him a while, but he now understands our points and the problems of not having a single, comprehensive ordinance. There is a lot of work that we do behind the scenes that takes a lot of time, and we don’t bring the work to the public eye until it is totally ready. Councilman Colon and I met with a group of citizens for an entire year to create our Ethics Ordinance. I made a big mistake (because I didn’t know any better), and I didn’t present the ordinance to our council solicitor. He would have revised and better prepared it to follow the format typically used when presenting an ordinance. Once presented, he did change it, but that’s when I realized I should have done that first, and he could have helped me make additional  changes before presenting it to full council. That’s what Dr. Van Wirt was and is working on since 2019. The Pandemic forced her to stop that process. It has being a tough year for everyone, but for a frontline doctor, one can only imagine. Council will bring the Ethics ordinance back, councilman Reynolds is in full support that we do so, and will support the ordinance as well! People don’t know what they don’t know; however, I really wish my and Dr. Van Wirt’s opinions would be taken more seriously and with more respect. We are the ones fighting the good fight right in the trenches!

Olga Negron April 26

———–

Dear Gadfly,

In your Hardball post of April 25th, Mayoral Candidate Willie Reynolds and Councilwoman Crampsie-Smith accuse Mayoral Candidate Dana Grubb of negative campaigning in response to a campaign mailer that lists actions Mr. Reynolds has taken. It is legitimate to challenge your opponent on his record. Mr. Reynolds could have used the opportunity to refute what was listed on the mailer or provide some context or defense. It is revealing that he does neither of those things. He doesn’t address the facts on the mailer at all. Instead he denigrates Mr. Grubb by characterizing him as someone who is not proud of where Bethlehem is going and Ms. Crampsie-Smith characterizes him as acting with malevolence. To my mind, these personal attacks actually are negative campaigning.

Now behold the Reynolds campaign mailer that arrived in the mail today. This was most likely in production when Reynolds and Crampsie-Smith were complaining about Dana’s negative campaigning. This piece is exceedingly misleading insinuating that Dana is like Trump and by leaving out important information, which Dana explains in Gadfly’s March 11 post. Dana was assaulted by a coworker resulting in a broken nose; he did not retaliate. The coworker was someone Dana had reported to the Director of a Human Resources and the City Solicitor for unethical and potentially illegal behavior. Although both participants had to leave city government, Dana was approached by and assisted the FBI for 2 years with information about possible corruption in Bethlehem’s city government and development community.

It seems obvious that candidate Reynolds would rather attack his opponent with distortions than defend his own record. Voters want and deserve to know specifically what candidates who have held public office or served in city hall have actually done and how those actions have moved the city forward or point toward future decision-making.

Barbara Diamond April 30

Hardball (2)

Latest in a series of posts on candidates for election

received today from the Friends of J. William Reynolds

 

The print is hard to read:

Suspended official told not to work at home — Morning Call — November 12, 2004 — page B3

Bethlehem officials have ordered Dana Grubb, one of the managers involved in a Nov. 4 fight at City Hall to stop taking files and documemts home and performing work-related duties while he is suspended with pay.

City to post police guard at meetings** After Nov. — Morning Call — January 18, 2005 – page B1

For years, Dana Grubb attended Bethlehem Health Board meetings as a deputy director of community development, but if he wants to attend another one, it will be under guard of a police officer.

The city is taking action in response to concerns raised by Health Director Judy Maloney, who was in her office Nov. 2 when just outside it Grubb and Harvey Joseph, the city’s former environmental health director, got into a fistfight. Both men were later forced to retire.

Grubb was the city grants administrator and deputy director of community development among other roles. He retired from the city in 2004 after he and Harvey Joseph, who was the environmental health director, got into a fistfight in City Hall. Then-Mayor John Callahan told them they could retire or be fired.

Mayoral candidate Grubb on the 2004 City Hall fight

Latest in a series of posts on candidates for election

Mayoral candidate Grubb’s response on the topic of a City Hall fight given at the North West/Kaywin Block Watch meeting April 26 at the Church of the Manger.

————–

In 2003, I received phone calls that a city employee who reported to me was taking bribes. I immediately went to the HR director and she called the assistant city solicitor into the meeting. I was told later that a criminal investigation was started.
The city was transitioning at that time from the Delgrosso administration to the Callahan administration, so the outgoing solicitor met with me, told me how he thought it should be pursued by the incoming administration, and outlined how he felt I should proceed. I don’t know if the person under investigation was aware of any of this, but I suspect he may have been, because my immediate supervisor, the DCED director, was his cousin.
When the new administration came in, I followed the advice I had been given. I felt that Bethlehem residents deserved to have something like this resolved because they deserved better; plus, it did not reflect well on city government.
The morning of the episode in question, I went up to the health bureau on an unrelated matter. When I arrived there the employee who was going to hit me in the face was seated in the reception area. He kept interfering with my interaction with the health bureau secretary, which did not involve him at all, and I finally told him to mind his own business.
At this point, that individual got up from his chair and came across the health bureau office, and got into my face/space. I sensed that he was going to get physical, and felt threatened. I reached out to move him out of my space by putting my hands on his shoulders and applying pressure. As I did that, he swung over my extended hands and arms as I was moving him back, and his fist connected with my nose.
I then grabbed him by the shoulders to hold onto him because he was swinging wildly, and even biting and scratching at me: I needed both to de-fuse the situation and defend myself. I ended up with scratch marks on my neck in addition to a fractured nose.
The entire encounter lasted about 15 seconds until a couple or three other co-workers pulled us apart. My right hand came off his left shoulder but he continued to attack getting within inches of biting me. I his left shoulder again, but a second or two later, the other workers had got my assailant under control.
I left the health bureau office and went back downstairs to my office to let my secretary know I was heading up to HR to report the incident, which I did.
It was at the advice of the HR director that I went to the hospital to be examined.
I never swung or hit my assailant, and he has admitted that to others.
Months before this occurred, I had reported a MC journalist to my superior because a number of us had noticed that he seemed to be under the influence of alcohol whenever he came to city hall: the odor of alcohol was easily detectable on him. I threatened to go Editor-in-Chief Susan Hunt if the matter wasn’t addressed. The MC was made aware of the situation, and it is entirely possible that my name became known to the reporter. He was later terminated by the MC after Councilwoman Jean Belinski complained to the paper about him misrepresenting her statements in his coverage of Council meetings. When my episode happened, he was still with the MC and wrote the articles about it, which were not only not factual, but sensationalized.

Reprinted from March 11: Mayoral candidate Grubb explains 2004 incident

Latest in a series of posts on candidates for election

This post first appeared in The Gadfly March 11, 2021.

————

Dana Grubb is a candidate for mayor of our city.

Dear Gadfly,

I’ve been hesitant to dive into the details and drag others into the issue, but after learning that a Republican candidate has announced for Mayor of Bethlehem, one who was involved in a confrontation in another state in the past himself, and that parallels are now being drawn by some groups between his incident and an incident in my own past, it is time for me to clear the air. I was not present for whatever happened to the Republican candidate and therefore cannot comment on it.

In 2004, I was acting on some citizen complaints about a coworker of mine who was accused of unethical and potentially illegal behavior. As an administrator to whom these complaints were directed, I had a responsibility to report them to both the Director of Human Resources and the City Solicitor. I did. The city government was transitioning into the new Callahan administration, and follow up on these complaints was either ignored or covered up. However, I felt such serious allegations needed to be pursued in order to discover the truth: the citizens of Bethlehem deserve no less. Outgoing City Solicitor Joseph ‘Jay’ Leeson had also advised me to continue.

Later in 2004, I was assaulted and punched in the face by this coworker, which resulted in my nose being fractured. I never retaliated, and the incident was over within seconds. Actions taken by others who witnessed all or part of the incident had nothing to do with the incident itself; comments about other workers being afraid and locking themselves in their offices to escape involvement were no doubt prompted by witnessing something that never should have happened in City Hall, but in which I was not the instigator—and in fact was the person who was assaulted.

My coworker and I were both held accountable and retired from city service.

Newspaper accounts in the Lehigh Valley regarding this matter were skewed and sensationalized by a City Hall beat reporter. I had previously brought complaints about him, which I had received, to the attention of my superior who handled it with the reporter. He stopped the behavior that had engendered the complaints, but apparently remained irate about my intervention, and therefore took this opportunity to have his revenge.

Others with absolutely no understanding or knowledge of this back story are attempting to drag my name through the mud by bringing up this incident, to benefit the Mayoral candidate of their choice. None of them were present the morning of the incident between me and my coworker, nor did they work in city hall. In answering queries I’ve had about this occurrence, I have always said that we were both held accountable, have learned from the experience, and have moved on. My resolve to institute a zero-tolerance policy for intimidation and bullying has only been strengthened by what I learned from this experience. As someone who was attacked for acting on principle, I have a better understanding of the various ways bullying and intimidation may be accomplished, as well as a better understanding of a victim’s situation.

After this incident and my retirement, I was approached by the Federal Bureau of Investigation to be an informant and provide as much information and knowledge about possible corruption in Bethlehem city government and the development community in general. I did that for over two years.  I recently learned that the investigation into the Allentown Mayor’s conviction on pay-to-play charges had provided evidence that the same thing had been happening in Bethlehem.

I did not, do not, and will not accept unethical or illegal behavior from anyone involved in Bethlehem’s governance. People who know me and have worked with me are aware of that, and many have endorsed my candidacy for Mayor because they are certain that I will stand by my principles, even if it makes me unpopular in certain sectors. My integrity is not for sale to anyone and that may be why those engaged in such behaviors are so eager to point the finger at me. If people applauded those who stand up against wrong doing in any form, it would help to foster a much needed culture of ethics in city government.

Dana

The Mayoral candidates April 6 at LV4All: question to Grubb on the City Hall fight

Latest in a series of posts on candidates for election

“Dana, according to the Morning Call, you had a disagreement with a female City employee and started a fight in City Hall that led to a firing. Can you discuss this incident and what transpired thereof?”

  • First of all, I didn’t have a disagreement with a female employee.
  • In 2003 I received a report that a co-worker was accepting bribes.
  • I reported it immediately to Human Resources and the City Solicitor.
  • A criminal investigation was begun, and on the advice of the outgoing City Solicitor, I followed through with incoming Mayor’s administration.
  • Nothing happened.
  • However, I felt it was important to protect Bethlehem residents from this kind of conduct.
  • Later in 2004 this employee and I we did get into a confrontation one morning, and he came across the room and got in my face.
  • Concerned about escalation, I attempted to move him out of my space, and he punched me in the face, fracturing my nose.
  • I did not retaliate, and it was over with probably in 15-20 seconds.
  • We were both charged with disorderly conduct.
  • The magistrate dismissed the charges.
  • However, we were both held accountable for our actions.
  • We both retired.
  • And, quite frankly, after I retired, The FBI actually came to me to act as an informant about ongoing conduct in City Hall.
  • So, I stood up for what I believed in.
  • Unfortunately, it didn’t end well for me or the other employee.
  • But I never hit him.

The Mayoral candidates April 6 at LV4ALL: question to Reynolds on contributions from developers

Latest in a series of posts on candidates for election

“Willie, you have accepted a $4000 donation and a $2000 donation from folk related to developers. Can you explain this and assure the people that it would not be a conflict of interest for you when discussing developments within the City?”

Candidate Reynolds:

  • I can tell you one of the things I want to start with is if you look at 2016, 2017, 2018, 2020, I literally raised zero dollars.
  • For a while my opponents here were talking about contributions I received 9, 10, 11 years ago.
  • They dropped talking about that, it was a decade ago, because they realized it didn’t sound as good.
  • I can also tell you that in politics I’ve learned that at some point you need to raise money.
  • And everybody remembers campaigns where my opponents sent out campaign mailers when I was 19 years old with my backwards hats on.
  • Those campaigns were run by a lot of the people currently making comments in the chat box and by my opponent right here.
  • But I can tell you that I’m proud of every vote that I ever made.
  • And a lot of the conversation here is about the fact that people are frustrated that Bethlehem is moving forward.
  • There’s a lot of hypocrisy here, and I can tell you that we need investment in our city.
  • And I think if you take a look at the economic development projects that have occurred in Bethlehem over the past 25 years, it is what has allowed Bethlehem to build back an economy that was struggling after Bethlehem Steel went down.
  • So I am very proud of my voting record.
  • In the last several years you’re going to look at the fact that, in the last 4-5 years I didn’t raise a dollar.
  • The best that my opponent has as far as a vision is complaining about something that happened in 2011.
  • I would say look at my colleagues, and if you take a look at Dr. Van Wirt and Councilman Colon and Counvilwoman Negron, they are all supporters of mine.
  • And they are also people my opponent went to for support and they said no because of his negativity and his vision.
  • So I am proud of who is supporting my campaign.
  • I am proud that we have support in the community, and I look forward to serving the residents.

 

Moderator to Grubb:

  • I’ll give you a 30-second rebuttal.

Candidate Grubb:

  • Just one point, I did not go to any elected officials looking for endorsements, at all.

Candidate Reynolds:

  • That’s a lie. But I’m going to let that go.

The Rights of nature movement

Latest in a series of posts on the environment

Rights of Nature Movement

Peter Crownfield shares his reading. If we aren’t reading, we aren’t learning and growing. Please share your reading.

———–

Hello everyone, Mike Ludwig here, this week, dozens of journalists and news publications, myself and Truthout included, signed a statement citing the thousands of scientists who say we are currently living through a climate emergency. Together, we have agreed to use the term “climate emergency” in news stories about climate change, so you will start seeing that term pop up at major news outlets that actually grasp the severity of the crisis. Of course, Truthout has been using the terms “climate crisis” and “climate emergency” for years now; we’ve been trying our best to warn people that it would get this bad.

Now, this podcast is not about politicians, it’s about the people who are doing something about the climate emergency from the ground up. On our last episode, we took a look at the direct action movement, which uses civil disobedience to block construction of oil and gas infrastructure and keep fossil fuels in the ground. We spoke with supporters of one of the longest running arial blockades in US history, which blocked construction of the mountain valley pipeline for some 900 days — if you missed it, I definitely recommend checking that out.

This time around we are looking at another current within the grassroots environmental and climate movement, the Rights of Nature Movement. Activists often argue about whether it’s possible to create meaningful change from within the existing legal and political system — but Rights of Nature, which is inspired by Indigenous thinking, has a novel
proposal — why not change the system itself, so nature is recognized to have legal, enforceable rights, much like a corporation or a human being?

continue . . .

Rights of Nature Movement

Weigh in on Southside planning

The latest in a series of posts on the Southside

Community Action Development Corporation of Bethlehem

Lot’s going on on the Southside — weigh in!

selections from Charles Malinchak, “South Bethlehem’s 6-year neighborhood development plan proceeds to finalization.” Morning Call, April 28, 2021.

The next six years could see a south Bethlehem with improved playgrounds, more activities on the Greenway and rehabilitated housing in a plan discussed Tuesday night by representatives of the Community Action Development Corporation of Bethlehem.

The plan is called the Neighborhood Partnership Program, which works with city officials and resident input to design a six-year revitalization program to guide development of not only buildings but also amenities to neighborhoods.

The virtual discussion was designed to gain further input from residents and business owners on the plan, which has been in the creation phase since last year.

Besides what was discussed, Yari Colon-Lopez, director of the Community Action Development Corp of Bethlehem said the plan already includes several proposed projects.

“Keep in mind that this will be a plan and theme for the next six years … and what we want to know is, Does this address the community’s concerns?” Colon-Lopez said.

The concerns already provided from residents through surveys are: affordable housing, improving youth engagement in the community, having more events or festivals, small business development and retaining those businesses.

She said another element expressed by residents is, “A general concern is change is happening and they [residents] may not have a voice in this change.”

Emily Folenta, senior planner for the Community Action Committee of the Lehigh Valley, said the plan will be available for public view on the CADCB website, but some examples contained  in the plan include:

    • Buying buildings to create landlords invested in the community.
    • Rehabilitating renter-occupied or private homes.
    • Improving playgrounds and other public places.
    • Expand the farmers market on the Greenway.
    • Arrange affordable family events on the Greenway and other public places.
    • Improve neighborhood walkability and lighting.
    • Improve streetscapes.
    • Develop a partnership with organizations to help resolve food insecurity.
    • Create youth education programs to develop workforce skills.
    • The public is encouraged to provide input to the plan on the CADCB website or in-person at its Bethlehem headquarters at 409 E. Fourth St., until May 4. The plan is expected to be finalized by May 12 or 13.

The Mayoral candidates April 6 at LV4All; the 2017 ethics ordinance

Latest in a series of posts on candidates for election

“As mayor of Bethlehem, would you support an ethics ordinance in our City similar to the one in 2017? And why or why did you not support that ordinance in 2017?

Candidate Reynolds:

  • 2017 ethics ordinance was about 50 pages long
  • advice of lawyers and D.A. was to break it up in pieces
  • passed two sections: ethics training and no gifts ban
  • always open to look at new things to strengthen the ordinnce
  • Councilpersons Colon and Negron proposed the ordinance in 2017
  • they felt the important parts were passed
  • they support his candidacy
  • open to whatever proposals come forward
  • must take it piece by piece
  • the advice in 2017 was that 50 pages was too long
  • best to break it up into pieces

Candidate Grubb:

  • would support the 2017 ethics ordinance
  • lot of lessons to be learned from what happened in Allentown
  • and with martin Tower
  • conflicts of Councilmen with sizeable contributions from developers
  • length of ordinance doesn’t matter
  • content is the key
  • Council dropped ball
  • two small pieces approved
  • nothing’s happened since
  • Reynolds has had a chance since 2017 to act but hasn’t
  • if elected, will resubmit a comprehensive ethics ordinance

Getting back to Christian Hall

Latest post in a series on Christian Hall

Full Monroe County D.A. press conference

ref: Case Study of police shooting of Christian Hall ripe for good discussion
ref: Have you done your Christian Hall homework yet?
ref: Breaking down the YouTube video of the Christian Hall shooting by the Pa. State Police
ref: “CJ is responsible for his own death”
ref: Past time for the City to have “The Talk”
ref: The de-escalation strategy of the Christian Hall event

Gadfly periodically amazes himself, amazes himself at the way he can beat a subject to death.

Take a look at his performance Breaking down the YouTube video of the Christian Hall shooting by the Pa. State Police.

Nothing like it in the annals of gadfly sleuthdom.

And the upshot was that even his slow-mo of slow-mo presentation couldn’t figure out The de-escalation strategy of the Christian Hall event.

Those posts must have blown his gasket, for he left the investigation of the Christian Hall incident completely up in the air a good three weeks ago.

In the meantime we have the shootings of Adam Toledo in Chicago, Ma’Khia Bryant in Columbus, Andrew Brown in Elizabeth City, Duante Wright in Brooklyn Center, and maybe I have missed some.

More on those other cases later, perhaps, but Gadfly wants to complete his walk-through on Christian Hall.

It’s been so long, those of you who want to think along with him may need to go back and review those past posts.

His is the “suicide by cop” case on Rt. 80 just north of us in Monroe County.

But Gadfly’d like to give you some more homework.

We have a video of the 73 min. D.A. press conference on March 30.

That 73 min. video breaks down in this way:

1:13:46 mins. (contains the 30-min. incident video that has been published separately and that we looked at)
Start at min. 5:07
D.A. introduction mins. 5:07-12:30
The 30-min. video runs from mins. 12:30-45:30
D.A. presentation mins. 45:30-1:00:15
Q & A with reporters mins. 1:00:15-1:13:46

For homework, Gadfly would like you to listen to the D.A. state his credential in this kind of case (approx mins 6-9) and his concluding presentation and Q&A (mins.45:30-1:13:46).

Do that, wouldya?, and we’ll come back and talk.

Mayoral candidate Dana Grubb: “Economic development projects must stand on their own merit”

Latest in a series of posts on candidates for election

Dana Grubb for Mayor

click here for video

Candidate Grubb at SteelStacks:

I am not accepting contributions from the 7 or 8 largest developers in Bethlehem. Economic development projects must stand on their own merit, not the size of a campaign check.

In 1999 I was one of the City administrators that negotiated tax-increment financing and the HUD section 108 loan which allowed many of the improvements you see over here today to happen. If you elect me Mayor in May, I will take the same negotiating skills into economic development projects today where we preserve history and development fits in our city.

Let’s believe in a better Bethlehem.

Good fences make . . .

“Good fences make good neighbors”

Gadfly spent the afternoon weeding, cutting, digging, sweating, wheezing, muttering. His postage stamp-sized yard has the misfortune to be flanked by neighbors who don’t weed. Weeds do not respect our fences. They feed on them. Sigh. Gadfly is Mr. Frost’s “old-stone savage.” He “walks the line” alone.

Did anything happen while he was away from his gadfly post?

Mending Wall

By Robert Frost
Something there is that doesn’t love a wall,
That sends the frozen-ground-swell under it,
And spills the upper boulders in the sun;
And makes gaps even two can pass abreast.
The work of hunters is another thing:
I have come after them and made repair
Where they have left not one stone on a stone,
But they would have the rabbit out of hiding,
To please the yelping dogs. The gaps I mean,
No one has seen them made or heard them made,
But at spring mending-time we find them there.
I let my neighbor know beyond the hill;
And on a day we meet to walk the line
And set the wall between us once again.
We keep the wall between us as we go.
To each the boulders that have fallen to each.
And some are loaves and some so nearly balls
We have to use a spell to make them balance:
‘Stay where you are until our backs are turned!’
We wear our fingers rough with handling them.
Oh, just another kind of out-door game,
One on a side. It comes to little more:
There where it is we do not need the wall:
He is all pine and I am apple orchard.
My apple trees will never get across
And eat the cones under his pines, I tell him.
He only says, ‘Good fences make good neighbors.’
Spring is the mischief in me, and I wonder
If I could put a notion in his head:
‘Why do they make good neighbors? Isn’t it
Where there are cows? But here there are no cows.
Before I built a wall I’d ask to know
What I was walling in or walling out,
And to whom I was like to give offense.
Something there is that doesn’t love a wall,
That wants it down.’ I could say ‘Elves’ to him,
But it’s not elves exactly, and I’d rather
He said it for himself. I see him there
Bringing a stone grasped firmly by the top
In each hand, like an old-stone savage armed.
He moves in darkness as it seems to me,
Not of woods only and the shade of trees.
He will not go behind his father’s saying,
And he likes having thought of it so well
He says again, ‘Good fences make good neighbors.’

Voting: the ballot questions

“Our democracy is only as strong as our will to be involved.”

Alison Steele is a Liberty High School alum who traveled the world looking for adventure and purpose before finding it in Pittsburgh.  She has made it her mission to help others make more informed decisions around how they interact with people and the planet. She publishes the Radical Moderate blog that Gadfly has often recommended to you.

The Gadfly household mail-in ballots arrived yesterday. Gadfly’s giving himself 10-14 days to think about his choices. He hopes you are loading up on info about the candidates like he is.

But here Alison takes on the question of the ballot questions, which, she reminds us, even independents can vote on in the primary.

Thank you, Alison. Gadfly must admit that he usually never gives such questions much thought, or does so only when it is very late in the game — like when he’s in the polling booth!

May 2021 Election Guide — Pa Primaries, Part 1

Ballot Question 1: Proposed Constitutional Amendment – Article III, Section 9

This question deals with the termination or extension of disaster emergency declarations and stems from the conflict between Governor Wolf and the state legislature this past year regarding COVID-19 emergency declarations (e.g. stay-at-home orders, school and business closures, etc.). The amendment would change existing law to give the General Assembly the power to terminate or extend a disaster emergency declaration made by the governor through a simple majority vote. . . .

continue on Alison’s blog . . .

Ballot Question 2: Proposed Constitutional Amendment – Article IV

This question deals with disaster emergency declaration and management, and it also stems from the conflicts between Governor Wolf and the state legislature over the COVID-19 response. This amendment would change the length of a disaster emergency declaration so it would expire after 21 days, regardless of the severity of the emergency. After the declaration has expired, the governor would not be able to declare a new disaster emergency unless the General Assembly passed a resolution allowing him to. . . .

continue on Alison’s blog . . .

May 2021 Election Guide — PA Primaries, Part 2

Ballot Question 3: Proposed Constitutional Amendment – Article I

This question deals with equality of rights based on race and ethnicity, and it was introduced in the wake of the instances of police brutality and resulting protests in 2020. The Pennsylvania constitution and federal laws currently provide broad protections against discrimination “against any person in exercise of any civil right.” This proposed amendment specifically focuses on protecting individuals from racial and ethnic discrimination by Pennsylvania governmental entities and solely on the basis of race and ethnicity. . . .

continue on Alison’s blog . . .

Ballot Question 4: Statewide Referendum – Act 2020-91

This question is not a constitutional amendment, but a statewide referendum, and it deals with making municipal fire and emergency medical services companies eligible for loans. It was introduced because the General Assembly determined there was a need for these emergency responder companies to update their facilities and equipment. At the moment, only volunteer fire and EMS companies are authorized to apply for loans from this program. . . .

continue on Alison’s blog . . .