Disenfranchising Allentown's Voters

You have asked us to review documents you received from the City Clerk, Mr. Michael P. Hanlon. Mr. Hanlon writes in his letter dated January 10, 2011 to you: Thus begins a nine page opinion to deny the voters of Allentown their rights

Colin McEvoy of The Express Times reports that the people's petition, opposing the lease of Allentown's water system, will not appear on the ballot in May. Apparently, the County did not receive the petitions by the required deadline. Initially, the signatures on the petitions had to be approved by Allentown's City Clerk. He was instructed by the city solicitor to employ stricter guidelines than had been previously employed on ballot questions. To my knowledge, the city was in control of the petitions after their approval. Although the solicitor claimed previously unknown knowledge on the rules concerning petition circulation, and placed obstacles in the way, it seems that for some reason he was less versed on the required timelines. If the failure to deliver the approved petitions to the county, in a timely fashion, ultimately rests with the city, or the petition organizers, remains unclear at this time. At any rate, it's apparent that over 4000 registered voters of Allentown are being disenfranchised in their right to challenge the water lease.

UPDATE: From I have have been able to cobble together this morning, the same procedure was followed as was utilized on the successful Rental Inspection Ballot Initiative of 1998.  It appears that the head  of the Election Office, Tim Benyo, ruled that the city procedures were not in conformity with state law.  One would think that the previous ballot initiatives would constitute a precedent.  Poresky and his petition committee should certainly legally challenge Mr. Benyo's interpretation.   I must also wonder why Mr. Benyo didn't inform the petitioners that they were not in compliance in a more timely fashion, allowing recourse on their behalf.  These obstacles,  now on both the city and county level,  have the appearance of being  politically orchestrated.

UPDATE 5:00PM:  I have managed to secure a copy of the legal opinion written by the County Solicitor.   In 1998 a local landlord challenged the Rental Inspection Ballot Initiative, and the City Charter procedure was upheld by the court.   The solicitor bases his opinion denying this ballot question on the fact that unlike 1998, this question deals with a  change in the city charter, not just an ordinance.   Apparently Mr. Benyo sought the opinion of the solicitor:  WHY?  Who or what motivated him to question Allentown's referendum procedure  now, on this question?  As a layman, the opinion justifying the rejection of the ballot question appears laborious and meager.  Hopefully, the petitioners will seek legal recourse.