Click here to subscribe today or Login.
With a packed crowd of elected Luzerne County tax collectors in the audience, a county council majority voted Tuesday to reject proposals to switch to in-house collection or reduce their pay.
The county’s 68 elected tax collectors will continue receiving $2.50 for each paid county tax bill during their next four-year term, starting in 2018, the council decided.
A compensation vote was on the agenda because their current pay agreement expires the end of this year, and any modifications must be enacted before prospective collectors start circulating and filing nomination petitions on Feb. 14 to appear on the May 16 primary ballot.
Councilman Rick Williams proposed a reduction to $1.50 per bill based on Harrisburg-based Public Financial Management’s 2015 financial recovery plan recommendation to pay elected collectors the same $1.50 granted to three home rule municipalities — Kingston, Kingston Township and Wilkes-Barre Township — to collect county taxes. That reduction would save an estimated $123,534 annually, the county administration concluded.
Speaking on behalf of elected collectors, Len Luba, husband of Hanover Township tax collector Mildred Luba, told the council the elected collectors provide valued customer service to residents of their municipalities and don’t receive taxpayer-funded health benefits or pensions.
The reduction to $1.50 would be unfair because municipal employees collect the county taxes in home rule municipalities in addition to handling other duties, he said.
Elected collectors interact with residents, answer their questions and have increased overall collection rates, Luba said, noting he considers it praise when some critics describe the elected collector system as “antiquated.”
Councilman Robert Schnee obtained majority support for his amended motion to keep the compensation at $2.50 per paid bill for elected collectors and $1.50 for home rule municipalities.
The lone no votes came from Williams, Eugene Kelleher and Linda McClosky Houck.
Schnee thanked the elected collectors for their hard work, and some of his colleagues also heaped on praise. Stephen A. Urban said he’s “100 percent” supportive of elected collectors because they help citizens and provide “face-to-face communication. Jane Walsh Waitkus said they are accessible, friendly, helpful and “bring government to the people.”
McClosky Houck had proposed reviving a switch to in-house collection, saying the option should be revisited every four years. The administration estimated collection by the county treasurer’s office would save $25,101 annually due to the addition of staff and a new mobile collection unit.
Kelleher said he wasn’t criticizing elected collectors but believes the “job could be better done in-house,” although he acknowledged he didn’t expect majority support.
Councilman Harry Haas also expressed support for in-house collection “to save costs wherever we can.”
Only four of 11 voted for in-house collection.
A majority also opposed Williams’ proposed ordinance to place a question on the May ballot asking voters if they want to amend the home rule charter to allow council discretion for appointments to boards and commissions when applicants have conflicts, such as working for a contractor that does business with the county.
Voters had approved a ballot question in November allowing such council discretion for authority appointments, but a question involving boards and commissions failed to pass. Williams said he believes voters were confused by the wording of the November ballot question and wants another opportunity to more clearly ask the question.
Several council members said they don’t believe it is appropriate to place the question on the ballot a second time.
Councilwoman Kathy Dobash, who attended the meeting by phone citing her work schedule, said the charter ban should not be lifted because it was intended to “stop corruptive practices.”