Group fighting for Lackawanna County solitary confinement ballot question may have to regather signatures
Oct. 21—SCRANTON — A group fighting for a referendum that would limit solitary confinement at Lackawanna County Prison might have to regather thousands of signatures even if it wins its challenge of the county election board's rejection of the ballot question.
PA Stands Up faces the quagmire because there's no practical way to get the question on the Nov. 8 general election ballot, which has already been printed and sent to thousands of voters who requested mail-in or absentee ballots.
The group now seeks to place the question on the May 2023 primary ballot, but that would invalidate the 13,665 signatures it gathered because the petitions voters signed stated it would appear on the general election ballot, county solicitor Frank Ruggiero said.
"The election code precludes ... those petitions that were submitted for a November general election from being used in a subsequent May primary election," Ruggiero said following a hearing Friday before President Judge Trish Corbett, Judge Margaret Bisignani Moyle and Senior Judge Carmen Minora. The judges are are tasked with deciding PA Stand Up's Sept. 21 lawsuit that challenges the elections board's Aug. 31 vote.
Jaclyn Kurin, attorney for PA Stands Up, said she believes the judges have the authority to waive the election code regulations and accept the already gathered signatures. She argued that is the only just result because her clients otherwise would be harmed through no fault of their own.
"They complied with all the requirements of the statute," Kurin said. "They should not be disenfranchised because of the wrongdoing of the board of elections."
Volunteers spent months gathering the 13,665 signatures, exceeding the 8,396 signatures required for the referendum, which seeks to alter the county's home rule charter to limit the conditions and circumstances under which prisoners are held in solitary confinement.
The election board rejected the petition based on Ruggiero's opinion that, even if voters passed the measure, it would not be binding because a state statute says matters of safety and discipline are vested with the prison board, not the county. The board is not authorized to place a nonbinding referendum on the ballot, he said.
At Friday's hearing, Kurin disputed Ruggiero's legal analysis, saying he based it on a statute that gave prison boards exclusive control over prison operations. That statute was repealed in 2009, meaning some power is vested with the county.
Ruggiero argued the statute still applies to matters relating to safety and discipline. If the court were to find control over those matters is vested with the county it would open the door to future referendums on virtually any issue.
"Where would the petitions stop?" he asked the judges. "Maybe there would be a petition that we should not have cells."
The judges took the matter under advisement and will rule at a later date.
Speaking after the hearing, Kurin said if the judges grant the injunction they would have to determine if they have the legal authority to declare the existing signatures are still valid. She and Ruggiero said the issue presents a unique legal question because there do not appear to be any prior appellate court rulings that are directly on point.
Should they rule the signatures are not valid, PA Stands Up could appeal. If it has no other choice, the group would recirculate the petitions, said Ashleigh Strange, communications director for the group.
"People already approved of the cause, but if we have to do it again, we will," Strange said.
Contact the writer: tbesecker@timesshamrock.com; 570-348-9137; @tmbeseckerTT on Twitter.
