Tag Archives: Jennie Jenkins

June News Digest

May 31, 2017 | by TheBurg Editor

Papenfuse Re-nominated

Incumbent Eric Papenfuse secured the Democratic nomination for Harrisburg mayor last month by a wide margin, putting him in a strong position to serve a second term.

With all precincts reporting, Papenfuse tallied 2,663 votes versus 2,048 for his nearest challenger, former City Council President Gloria Martin-Roberts.

In his acceptance speech, Papenfuse said he was “troubled” that the city appeared so divided during the election and that turnout was low.

“I’m committed to uniting this divided city,” he said, speaking at his business, Midtown Scholar Bookstore.

He also said he would make a strong effort to pass a home rule charter for Harrisburg in a second term.

“Home rule is the path to the city’s sustainable future,” he said.

For her part, Martin-Roberts appeared disappointed in her second-place showing, as she gathered with about 30 supporters at the Harrisburg Elks Lodge.

“We ran a good, clean race,” she said. “We took the high road.”

Trailing the field were challengers Jennie Jenkins (506 votes), Lewis Butts (124 votes) and Anthony Harrell (74 votes).

No Republicans ran in the primary. Papenfuse still must win the general election on Nov. 7, but he stands a strong chance in a city that is overwhelmingly Democratic. In fact, he also secured the Republican nomination by collecting the most write-in votes on the GOP side.

Council Incumbents Victorious

Harrisburg City Council incumbents emerged with wins last month in the city’s Democratic primary, while the results were more mixed in school board races.

Ben Allatt, Wanda Williams and Shamaine Daniels each won nominations for four-year terms, as did challenger Ausha Green. No Republicans ran in the primary.

For city school board, Democratic incumbents Judd Pittman and Danielle Robinson won nominations for four-year terms, as did challengers Brian Carter and Carrie Fowler. Incumbent James Thompson lost nomination on the Democratic side but cross-filed, so will appear as a Republican candidate in the general election. Newcomer Percel Eiland ran unchallenged for the nomination for the board’s lone two-year seat.

In other races, incumbent city Treasurer Dan Miller and incumbent city Controller Charlie DeBrunner ran unopposed, thus securing the Democratic nomination. There was no Republican challenger for either office.

Several races for magisterial district justice were hotly contested.

Incumbent Barbara Pianka defeated newcomer Josh Feldman for the Democratic nomination for district 12-1-02. Both candidates cross-filed for the Republican nomination, and, though very close, Pianka also won that race.

In Harrisburg district 12-1-04, incumbent Justice David O’Leary narrowly defeated former Harrisburg Treasurer Tyrell Spradley for the Democratic nomination. No Republicans competed for the seat.

And, in an open seat for district 12-1-05, Hanif Johnson came out ahead in a crowded Democratic field, defeating Harrisburg Councilwoman Destini Hodges, former Councilman Kelly Summerford and newcomer Claude Phipps. Only Phipps cross-filed on the Republican side, so he secured that nomination.

All of the winners must compete in November’s general election.

Illegal Gun Roundup

The Harrisburg Bureau of Police announced last month it has taken 82 illegally owned guns off the street from January to May.

Community policing, with a focus on getting firearms from illegal owners, helped the bureau obtain the 82 guns, said Police Chief Thomas Carter. He credited his bureau’s leadership, professionalism and training for rounding up the illegally owned guns with minimal injury.

“There are two guns right there: the police officer’s gun and the bad guy’s gun,” he said. “Those are opportunities that things could go bad or someone could get seriously hurt or even killed.”

Capt. Deric Moody asked Harrisburg residents for their support.

“Please continue to help us,” he said. “At least 13 weapons came from citizens picking up the phone and saying, ‘Here’s what I know, here’s what I found.’”

The guns will be destroyed if they cannot be returned to their legal owner, police officials said.

More Affordable Housing

Officials broke ground last month on the construction of affordable housing units on Hummel Street in Allison Hill.

Three units will be completely gutted and renovated, while five units will be demolished to make way for new townhouses for purchase by low-income families, said Gary Lenker, executive director of Tri-County Housing Development Corp.

The $2.25 million project, administered by Tri-County, is supported by grants from HUD’s Community Development Block Grant program, Dauphin County’s gaming grant program and the nonprofit, Impact Harrisburg.

The affordable housing project on Hummel Street plays into the city’s coordinated focus on the MulDer Square neighborhood near Mulberry and Derry streets, said Harrisburg Mayor Eric Papenfuse. A total of $31 million for housing, streetscape and infrastructure development is slated to flow to that area, he said.

“[This is] a tidal wave that can change the community,” he said.

Steelton Skate Park

Construction started last month on a skate park in Steelton Municipal Park.

Dauphin County commissioners Jeff Haste, Mike Pries and George Hartwick joined Steelton Council President Jeffrey Wright and Borough Manager Doug Brown to break ground on the project.

This will be the first skate park in Dauphin County. The skate park will replace the tennis courts, which officials said were underutilized. Plans include a dozen concrete skating features, including a bowl, officials said.

Homes Sales Jump

The spring home-buying season got off to a strong start, with area home sales jumping 16.8 percent in April.

For the month, 863 homes sold in the region compared to 739 sales in April 2016, according to the Greater Harrisburg Association of Realtors. The median sales price increased to $174,160 from $160,000, and average days on the market fell to 68 from 83.

In Dauphin County, sales totaled 288 units versus 255 in the year-ago period, while the median price jumped to $158,900 versus $139,900, said GHAR. Cumberland County sales increased to 327 units from 249 in April 2016, and the median price rose to $189,900 from $175,000.

In Perry County, 34 homes sold versus 35 in the year-ago period, while the median price was $123,387, a drop from $133,500.

GHAR covers all of Dauphin, Cumberland and Perry counties and parts of York, Lebanon and Juniata counties.

So Noted

Excel Interior Concepts & Construction of Lemoyne has received three awards for residential remodeling projects completed in 2016, including two awards in the best kitchen renovation category and one in the best bathroom renovation category. The recognition from the Home Builders Association of Metropolitan Harrisburg came during the annual Pyramid Awards event.

Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission last month appointed Patrick C. Morrison as site administrator to the Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania in Strasburg. Morrison, formerly the museum’s education director, replaced Jeffrey Bliemeister.

Roman Colon has been named the 2017 Oliver LaGrone Scholar, given each year to a graduate of Harrisburg High School. With the $7,000 scholarship, Colon plans to attend Penn State Harrisburg to study civil engineering.

Sweets on Market, an ice cream shop in Strawberry Square along Market Street, celebrated its grand opening last month. Mayor Eric Papenfuse, Harristown CEO Brad Jones and John Fulponi from state Sen. John DiSanto’s office joined owner TJ Grewel for a ribbon cutting.

TheBurg picked up 14 awards last month at the annual Keystone Press Awards banquet sponsored by the PA News Media Association Foundation. These included first-place awards for column writing, business/consumer story, feature photo and graphic/photo illustration, as well as the prestigious “Sweepstakes” award for best performance in our category.

Changing Hands

Bellevue Rd., 1914: C. Johnson to K. Bailey, $60,000

Boas St., 213: T. Stark to B. Wagner, $96,000

Boas St., 426: Secretary of Housing & Urban Development to N. Spence, $65,000

Briggs St., 1506: C. Jackson & K. Roach to S. Swartz, $110,000

Chestnut St., 2411: J. Andrews Jr. to P. & A. Maple, $140,000

Emerald St., 220: C. Shokes to HBG Rents LLC, $35,000

Jefferson St., 2635: A. & E. Ballard & S. Cornish to F. Brannon & H. Cabrera, $42,000

Kensington St., 2311: CJR Rentals LLC to L. Johnson & J. Ardrey, $68,000

Market St., 1912 & 1519 N. 6th St.: Rogue Enterprises LLC to CPenn Patriot Properties Midtown, $87,621

Muench St., 220: WCI Partners LP to Q. Vandermeersch, $172,000

Muench St., 608: LSF9 Master Participation List to Buonarroti Trust, $30,000

2nd St., 3217: M. Ruff to N. & L. Swett, $90,000

3rd St., 2447: Triple J. Associates Ltd. To Keynet Business Network Inc., $60,000

4th St., 1631: GWD Capitol Heights LP to K. Prince, $103,900

5th St., 2522: Rivas Property Investments LLC to I. Mirambeaux, $35,000

Front St., 1525, Unit 104: D. Waltz to D. & M. Liberatore, $123,000

Front St., 1525, Unit 501: C. Markley to C. Keefauver, $179,900

Front St., 1525, Unit 614: C. Fetterhoff Jr. to J. & D. Sciortino, $90,000

Front St., 1705: WCI Partners Inc. to Harrisburg Redevelopment Group LLC, $1,316,161

Peffer St., 224: D. Leaman to N. Dohner, $168,000

Penn St., 1624: M. Anderson & Y. Dilman to S. Hickey, $139,900

Regina St., 1440: M. Naranjo to CTD Group LLC, $30,000

Regina St., 1600: K. Yoder to J. Hendricks, $130,000

Reily St., 263: Nish Properties LLC to Cool2Zap Properties LLC, $180,000

Rudy Rd., 2492: US Bank NA to My Neighbor LLC, $33,600

Rumson Dr., 269: L. & J. Lewis to K. Bowman, $79,900

Showers St., 613: J. & B. Wildeman to L. Plummer, $160,000

3rd St., 11: Market View LP, Brickbox Enterprises Ltd. & Property Management Inc. to SOMA Associates LLC, $165,000

13th St., 1039 & 1300 Sycamore St.: Graybar Electric Co. to Brooks Property Holdings LLC, $720,000

17th St., 830: Greenleaf Investment Properties LLC to S. Flores, $35,000

21st St., 755: V. Tran to B. Zimmerman, $33,000

State St., 231, Unit 302: LUX 1 LP to E. Dice II, $107,000

Susquehanna St., 2306 & 2314: J. Cuevas & I. Padua to A. Salgado, $80,000

Swatara St., 2415: J. Saul to P. Mackie & M. Swanger, $160,000

Verbeke St., 213: J. & S. Bircher to J. & E. High, $135,000

Wiconisco St., 403: Willowscott Investments LLC to J. Negley, $113,800

Harrisburg property sales for April 2017, greater than $30,000. Source: Dauphin County. Data is assumed to be accurate.

Author: Lawrance Binda

Burg Blog: Some of Harrisburg

May 17, 2017 | by Lawrance Binda

Gloria Martin-Roberts talks to the media last night.

“I want to be mayor of all of Harrisburg.”

So said Gloria Martin-Roberts as she threw her hat into the ring last November, a phrase she repeated, in varying ways, umpteen times over the following months. In fact, you could say it was the theme of her campaign for mayor.

So, did she do that? The numbers say no.

Martin-Roberts did well where everyone expected her to do well—in Uptown and much of Allison Hill. However, she got clobbered in the so-called “river wards,” and that proved to be her Achilles’ heel in the election.

Let’s dig into some data.

Martin-Roberts did best on her home turf (no surprise) in Uptown Harrisburg. In the four precincts of sprawling Ward 10, she tallied 498 votes, nearly one-quarter of her total of 2,048. In contrast, incumbent Mayor Eric Papenfuse limped in with 314 votes, winning just one small precinct that borders the river. She also did well in wards 7 and 8, industrial and residential areas of northern Allison Hill.

Papenfuse, though, killed it down by the river. He won by more than 100 votes in Ward 4 (northern downtown), and wards 5, 6, 11 and 12 (all of Midtown from Forster to Maclay streets) and Ward 14 (Riverside/Italian Lake). His overwhelming margins in these wards swamped his challengers, proving to be far too much ground for Martin-Roberts to make up.

While, in her concession speech, Martin-Roberts blamed the media and, weirdly, the electorate for her loss, she really can only blame her own campaign’s flawed, Trump-like strategy—digging deep into her base, trying to squeeze every vote from a handful of precincts and wards.

It is certainly fine if, as a candidate, you base your campaign in certain parts of the city or certain demographics, but you can’t stop there. That’s basically what Martin-Roberts did, never really reaching out to voters outside of her core constituency, thus ceding wide swaths of Harrisburg to her opponents.

Her low-energy campaign also did not help, since trying to unseat an incumbent requires months of vigorous, sustained effort. Lastly, she did nothing to court new voters in Harrisburg, too often invoking that tired “us vs. them” attitude that means nothing to newcomers.

Interestingly, challenger Jennie Jenkins seemed to spread out her support best of the five candidates. She only received 506 votes, but they came from all over the place—a little here, a little there.

In the end, Martin-Roberts lost by more than 600 votes to Papenfuse, a substantial margin in the light-turnout election. If she had run to represent all of Harrisburg, as she repeatedly promised, she might have stood a chance. But she didn’t do that. She was basically invisible from Shipoke to Riverside, giving people in the growing, diverse neighborhoods along the river little reason to vote for her.

Author: Lawrance Binda

Burg Blog: Vote Here

May 16, 2017 | by Lawrance Binda

Campaign signs along Verbeke Street in Harrisburg.

And we vote.

Today, the people of Harrisburg go to the polls to conclude a once-anemic mayoral campaign that seemed to go from zero to 100 mph overnight.

It wasn’t long ago (last month) that I complained that the two assumed frontrunners, incumbent Mayor Eric Papenfuse and former City Council President Gloria Martin-Roberts, were largely invisible from most voters. Boy, did that change fast.

Over the past two weeks, we’ve had three mayoral debates, endless social media posts by candidates and their surrogates and a flood of last-minute, often-entertaining, sometimes-vicious direct mail.

It may not be the way I would have run a campaign, but what do I know? I’m just a desk jockey with an opinion and some readers.

So, what are some takeaways from the just-concluded mayoral primary campaign, and what might we think about as we go to the polls today?

Campaigns Matter
I don’t mean to sound like a broken record on this issue, since I’ve written about it repeatedly. However, a well-run, committed campaign can make up for a variety of candidate ills.

Papenfuse and Martin-Roberts ran similar campaigns in the sense that the general electorate had little idea from them that an election was approaching until maybe three weeks ago. Then the floodgates opened.

Since then, Papenfuse has relied on a strategy of using the power of incumbency (another ribbon-cutting!) and the power of money (how much direct mail can one man send?) to spread his message that Harrisburg has been well served under his leadership and wouldn’t be under Martin-Roberts. For her part, Martin-Roberts has stuck to her message that she would represent all of Harrisburg, a slap at Papenfuse that, while perhaps effective months ago, hasn’t done much to expand her base since. Policy-wise, the positions between these two candidates are not far apart.

Without question, challenger Jennie Jenkins has run the most dynamic campaign. Months ago, while the other campaigns were napping, she was out hustling for votes. As a result, I expect her to perform pretty well when the votes are tallied tonight, and she may even play a spoiler role in determining the next mayor of Harrisburg.

The Debates
Typically, I don’t regard candidate debates as having a big impact on a race since they’re often attended by the usual assortment of activists and super-voters who’ve already made up their minds. However, this race may be an exception.

All three mayoral debates were well attended and televised, which makes my little civic engagement heart go pitter-patter. But they also gave thousands of people exposure to the candidates in a way you simply can’t get from your 20^th piece of horrible direct mail.

Reasonable people may disagree with my analysis, but I thought that Papenfuse had three solid debates, with the final one at H*MAC his strongest, as, as the incumbent, he showed a mastery of policy and detail that none of the challengers could touch. Martin-Roberts seemed to go in the opposite direction performance-wise, congenial in the first debate but appearing upset and defensive in the last.

I thought that challenger Lewis Butts was consistently Lewis Butts, a big thinker, a dreamer, unorthodox in style and impractical in substance. Jenkins may have had the worst combined performance, not doing particularly well in any of the three. And she certainly had the worst single moment when she gave a halting, unsure response when asked, in the third debate, about her past tax-payment problems.

Over the course of the debates, I noticed the greatest growth from challenger Anthony Harrell. Most residents first encountered the newcomer at the initial debate. But he quickly established an identity as a no-nonsense, law-and-order type, perfecting that image by the third debate. His soldierly manner, full-throated support of gun rights and tendency to start answers with the phrase, “My fellow American patriots,” may not appeal to everyone, but it may appeal to enough conservative registered Democrats (yes, there are some) that he could do much better than I would have imagined a month ago.

The Attacks
I would date the start of this campaign to November, when Martin-Roberts declared her candidacy before a packed room at the National Civil War Museum. There, she stated what she hoped would be her path to victory—a claim that the current mayor (she never actually said his name) did not represent all of Harrisburg. In that sense, the campaign began on a negative.

And, indeed, she has continued that line of attack. This criticism, though, has had two problems. First, it seemed to peak early as, in the debates, Papenfuse tried to dilute it by repeatedly stating his efforts outside of Midtown. Secondly, if voters don’t agree with her supposition, Martin-Roberts has offered little other reason to vote for her. Meanwhile, Papenfuse has tried to mend some of the frayed relationships from earlier in his term, countering, with some success, another criticism.

Papenfuse eventually found his own line of attack—that a vote for Martin-Roberts was a vote to return to a more troubled time in Harrisburg’s recent history. The Papenfuse campaign may have overstated former Mayor Steve Reed’s support of Martin-Roberts, which, as far as we can tell, was limited to a single fundraising plea. However, it cannot exaggerate the involvement of James Ellison, a former Reed crony and Linda Thompson strategist who serves as her treasurer and key campaign adviser. Papenfuse’s attacks may not steal any of Martin-Roberts’ vote, but it may help solidify his own support or motivate some fence-sitters to flip the lever for him.

Turnout
Ultimately, all close elections depend on turnout, and this one should be no exception. Ellison is regarded as a master of getting out the vote, so we’ll see if he retains his touch or if his involvement has turned into a negative. In my opinion, Ellison has violated a cardinal rule of the political operative–stay out of the limelight, which belongs to the candidate. His social media posts, which include some reckless, accusatory comments, have done no favors for Martin-Roberts.

The x-factor in his election may end up being new voters. Fresh faces are everywhere and, since the last mayoral four years ago, a number of new apartment buildings have filled up. The involvement of first-time voters may upend the best calculations of old-time political watchers.

As you venture to the polls, please remember that the battle for Harrisburg mayor is not the only primary race out there. In the city, four council seats and five school board seats also are at stake. In addition, there have been heated contests in races for magisterial district justice and judgeships.

The polls are open 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. The weather is fantastic. Get out there and make your voice heard!

Author: Lawrance Binda

Final Mayoral Debate: Candidates throw last punches, address campaign issues

May 12, 2017 | by Danielle Roth

Harrisburg’s five mayoral candidates made a final push for votes last night in a concluding mayoral debate that turned heated at times.

Moderators Blake Lynch and Mark Hall, an ABC27 reporter, kept the debate civil, though the town hall-style event at Harrisburg Midtown Arts Center kicked off to a feisty start.

Moderators Blake Lynch, left, and ABC27 Reporter Mark Hall, right, stand in front of mayoral candidates, from left to right, Lewis Butts, Gloria Martin-Roberts, Mayor Eric Papenfuse, Anthony Harrell and Jennie Jenkins.

Challenger Gloria Martin-Roberts started her opening remarks by separating herself from two former mayors, who both have indicated support for her, as well as her campaign treasurer, James Ellison.

“My name is not Linda Thompson, it’s not James Ellison and it’s not Stephen Reed,” Martin-Roberts said. “Some of you may be confused by the negative mailers that you have received over the past couple of weeks…They’ve had their time.”

She then criticized a PennLive article about a letter that Reed sent to encourage a friend to donate to the Martin-Roberts campaign. She said she did not ask Reed to write the letter to request the donation.

Likewise, incumbent Mayor Eric Papenfuse responded to campaign rhetoric from the Martin-Roberts camp. He referenced a Facebook post from Ellison that claimed Papenfuse purchased properties while mayor.

“I have not purchased any investment properties since taking office,” he said, adding that his wife also has not purchased any properties since he was elected mayor in 2013. “This is a ridiculous falsehood of my character.”

He asked Martin-Roberts to admit to the falsehood and have Ellison take down his Facebook post.

Martin-Roberts said she would not have Ellison take down the post. She pulled out several mailers sent by Papenfuse’s campaign that link her to Harrisburg’s old guard, while saying, “This is lack of character.”

Later in the debate, Martin-Roberts did say sorry.

“I apologize for losing my temper,” she said.

Challengers Jennie Jenkins, Anthony Harrell and Lewis Butts also addressed issues that have arisen over the course of their campaigns, as moderators fired questions from the community during the second half of the 90-minute event.

Jenkins addressed her termination from her position as police officer with the city. Last year, Jenkins entered a county program meant for first-time offenders charged with nonviolent crimes. This came after the city suspended her in 2013 after accusing her of taking $7,000 from the Police Athletic League.

Moderators asked why she entered this program if she maintained her innocence in the theft case.

“It was a way I could move on with my life,” she said, adding that she spent two-and-a-half years without income while tied up in the lawsuit.

Moderators bluntly asked Harrell, “Who are you, and where have you been?” They followed up and asked specifically about his community or church involvement aside from his two well-known biographical details: that he served in the armed forces and now studies full-time at Central Penn College.

“I lived in the community, purchased from stores, and I send my children to schools,” he said.

Butts touted his Harrisburg First plan, which includes a citywide Wi-Fi network, a shopping mall at PennDOT and, most notably, a hydroelectric dam in the Susquehanna River.

He called himself the “revenue candidate.”

“The hydro-power dam [would bring in] a lot of extra money for roads, scholarships and anything that we need,” he said.

With the final mayoral debate complete, voters get the last word on Tuesday, May 16, with the primary election.

Author: Danielle Roth

Race for Mayor: Candidates lean into platforms at last night’s debate.

May 10, 2017 | by Danielle Roth

Older white man (Dennis Owens) addresses five candidates dressed in professional attire. Harrisburg Young Professional sign is in front of their panel.

ABC27 anchor Dennis Owens addresses mayoral candidates, pictured left to right, incumbent Eric Papenfuse, Anthony Harrell, Lewis Butts, Gloria Martin-Roberts and Jennie Jenkins.

With less than a week until Harrisburg’s Democratic primary, Harrisburg’s five mayoral candidates leaned into the big ideas of their platforms at last night’s live-broadcast debate.

Mayor Eric Papenfuse and challengers Anthony Harrell, Lewis Butts, Gloria Martin-Roberts and Jennie Jenkins responded to questions fired from a panel of four local journalists, including TheBurg’s Editor-in-Chief Lawrance Binda.

The night started with Binda asking the candidates where they stand on the issue of a home rule charter, which potentially could change the governing structure and taxing abilities of the city.

Martin-Roberts said she would work with City Council, saying that it would not be a decision she would make alone.

In her opening statement, she emphasized her vision to be a collaborative leader, which played out in many of her answers including her position on establishing a home rule charter for the city.

“I’m indecisive,” she said. “The home rule process is something the community will decide by vote…Before we go that far, we need to educate the community about home rule.”

Papenfuse criticized Martin-Roberts’ mention of being indecisive.

“We cannot afford to have a mayor who is indecisive,” he said. “Yes, we need home rule. We need to have a serious conversation about it.”

Jenkins said that a home rule charter would “tax and fee the residents out of existence.”

Papenfuse responded that Jenkins “doesn’t understand home rule,” adding that the city must come up with an exit strategy to leave Act 47. A home rule charter would allow the city to keep taxing powers granted by Act 47.

For 90 minutes, the panel, which also included Christine Vendel of PennLive, Emily Previti of WITF and Jason Scott of the Central Penn Business Journal, fired targeted questions aimed to illuminate candidates’ understanding of some of the complexities of the mayor’s position. ABC27 anchor Dennis Owens moderated the debate with more than 130 attendees seated in the ballroom of the Hilton Harrisburg.

When responding to a question about how two potential state laws would affect the city’s gun ordinances, Harrell established himself as a “2^nd Amendment” candidate.

“I do carry and obey all laws this country puts down,” he said. “All of us should carry our own weapons.”

While questions didn’t explicitly touch on crime and safety in the city, Harrell brought many questions back the issue of “securing the city.”

“We must make this city safe and secure, then we can work on these great ideas,” he said.

Jenkins, who said she would aggressively lobby to change the city’s parking situation, said she would not lobby state lawmakers deciding on gun policies that could put the city in costly legal situations.

“I’d abide by all the laws that’d be enacted,” she said.

Some creative questions pointed to warmer topics, such as how often each candidate visits the Broad Street Market.

Martin-Roberts, who moved to Harrisburg as a child, called the market her nursery.

“I start on Thursday and eat my way through to Saturday,” she said. “I eat anywhere in the Broad Street Market except the floor.”

Papenfuse said he goes at least one a week and eats pierogi, pizza and Greek cuisine. He transitioned into how his administration worked to turn the market into an independent nonprofit last December.

“It’s an example of everything going right in Harrisburg,” he said. “Its success mirrors Harrisburg’s success.”

Butts said he’s a fan of the “hard-fried oysters,” adding that each neighborhood should have a market.

Harrell and Jenkins also said they visit the market at least once a week.

Voters can learn more about the candidates at the final debate, which is 7 p.m. tomorrow at Harrisburg Midtown Arts Center and is sponsored by ABC27. Or voters can hope to run into them at the market.

Author: Danielle Roth

TheBurg Podcast, May 5, 2017

May 5, 2017 | by TheBurg Editor

Welcome to TheBurg Podcast, a weekly roundup of news in and around Harrisburg.

May 5, 2017: This week, editor-in-chief Lawrance Binda and city reporter Danielle Roth pick apart Tuesday’s mayoral debate and discuss each candidate’s performance. Binda catches listeners up to speed with Friends of Midtown’s City Council forum, which he moderated, and the State’s corruption probe into the Harrisburg Incinerator. Binda and Roth discuss President Donald Trump’s weekend visit to Harrisburg.

Subscribe to TheBurg Podcast on iTunes and Google Play.

Special thanks to Paul Cooley, who wrote our theme music. Check out his podcast, the PRC Show on iTunes.

Find the stories referenced in this week’s podcast, plus candidate Q&As and a list of upcoming debates:

Mayoral Debate: Veteran candidates talk experience, others try to make a mark.

Burg Blog: One Down

Take Your Pick: Harrisburg City Council and Mayoral candidates to debate, participate in forums

Mayoral Candidate Q&A: Candidates outline visions for Harrisburg.

Harrisburg in the Balance: 6 candidates vie for 4 seats on City Council.

This Is the End: State closes Harrisburg corruption probe with suggestions, not charges.

Burg Blog: Wrong Place

Burg Blog: Promises Made

Burg Blog: Last Words

Burg Blog: One Down

May 4, 2017 | by Lawrance Binda

Tuesday’s debate shook awake a rather sleepy mayoral campaign in Harrisburg, one that, until then, was marked by little more than Facebook posts and midnight runs along N. 3^rd Street to plant signs.

It was the end of the “phony campaign” (to use a war analogy), when, with great anticipation, the sides stare each other down but little happens face to face.

For the first time, in an awkwardly laid-out room at HACC’s Midtown II building, all five candidates were present, sitting close to one another, to answer a barrage of questions from CBS21’s John Hanrahan and PennLive’s John Micek and Christine Vendel.

So, what did we learn?

From a superficial standpoint, we didn’t learn much that we hadn’t already read from the candidates’ websites and social media posts: Lewis Butts has never met a development gimmick he doesn’t like; Jennie Jenkins thinks she can sweet talk SP+ into turning the parking system back over to the city; and all the challengers think the city could be safer and cleaner.

But, on a deeper level, there was more to learn.

First of all, the debate exposed something that had been simmering beneath the surface for months—that the old, Reed-era Harrisburg establishment has coalesced behind challenger Gloria Martin-Roberts.

During the debate, Martin-Roberts was asked, for instance, about former Mayor Linda Thompson, a long-time ally who circulated a nominating petition for her. In responding, Martin-Roberts defended Thompson’s tenure, saying “she did quite well” despite “some hiccups with personality,” which may be the most generous analysis of Thompson’s term I’ve heard.

Martin-Roberts also was asked about James Ellison, who is serving as her campaign treasurer. Ellison has been a fixture around Harrisburg for about 20 years, serving as counsel and chairman of the Harrisburg Authority, as counsel to the Harrisburg school district and as a top campaign aide to Thompson.

In one of his most noted actions, Ellison voted to approve the final bond issue to retrofit the Harrisburg incinerator, doubling the facility’s debt load, an action also supported by Martin-Roberts as a councilwoman. He also advised the school district’s board of control that it legally could fire former Superintendent Gerald Kohn, though 16 months remained on Kohn’s contract, a measure driven by Thompson and supported by Martin-Roberts. Kohn eventually won a $1.2 million settlement for wrongful termination.

But it’s not just Ellison. City Treasurer Dan Miller, who served on City Council during that same period, also supports Martin-Roberts. And, just recently, it was revealed that Reed himself sent out an email encouraging a friend to donate to the Martin-Roberts campaign.

Papenfuse mentioned some of this during the debate, as he feels that Harrisburg’s old guard wants back in power, a group he’s battled for years. For her part, Martin-Roberts said that neither Thompson nor Ellison would serve in her administration. That said, Martin-Roberts certainly is not distancing herself from Harrisburg’s recent, troubled past, an interesting decision that voters will have to weigh seriously.

Secondly, voters got to look at several of the challengers for the first time. I generally wasn’t impressed by their performances, though I’d say Jenkins presented better than Anthony Harrell or Lewis Butts. Jenkins had a few rough patches, but probably did well enough to continue the momentum she’s built up over the past few months.

Without question, Jenkins has run the most visible and energetic campaign among the mayoral hopefuls. While I don’t always agree with her tactics, I can’t deny that she’s run a solid campaign, beginning early and continuing over months with consistent effort. I doubt this will be enough for her to win, though it may be sufficient to play the role of spoiler.

Conventional wisdom has it that Jenkins will take more of the vote away from Martin-Roberts than Papenfuse. I don’t disagree with that, but it remains to be seen just how much support she’ll earn citywide and, thus, how many votes she’ll grab from her fellow challengers.

Because of this, I thought we’d see Martin-Roberts go after Jenkins more directly. I’ve been told that that’s not her style, though I’ve seen her, as a councilwoman, be plenty tough.

With the first debate behind us, we move on. Next is the HYP debate at the Hilton Harrisburg on Tuesday, and I’ll be on the reporter panel for that. It will be interesting to see if the gloves come off, if the candidates decide to shift what they say and to whom they direct their fire.

Author: Lawrance Binda

Mayoral Debate: Veteran candidates talk experience, others try to make a mark.

May 3, 2017 | by Danielle Roth

five candidates in suits and business wear sit in front of PennLive and CBS21 signs.

Mayoral candidates sat in the order they will appear on the ballot. From left to right: Lewis Butts, Gloria Martin-Roberts, Mayor Eric Papenfuse, Anthony Harrell, and Jennie Jenkins.

Harrisburg mayoral candidates Gloria Martin-Roberts and incumbent Eric Papenfuse defended their records last night, taking jabs at each other, while challengers Lewis Butts, Anthony Harrell and Jennie Jenkins tried to introduce themselves, and their ideas, to a live TV audience.

The moderators, CBS21 Anchor Robb Hanrahan, PennLive Opinion Editor John Micek and PennLive City Reporter Christine Vendel, asked candidates about pressing city issues and their backgrounds. Candidates sat in the order they appear on the May 16 Democratic primary election ballot. About 60 audience members filled the room at HACC’s Midtown Campus for last night’s hour-long, live-recorded event.

Mayor Eric Papenfuse took the first rhetorical punches at Martin-Roberts as candidates answered a question about improving blighted neighborhoods.

Martin-Roberts started off the panel’s responses with a common phrase of her campaign.

“I don’t have a favorite neighborhood, and I’ve been saying this,” she said. “This entire city would be the city that I love. I would start focusing on those neighborhoods that have been overlooked for a very long time.”

She added that, as mayor, she would listen to the needs of the community, use the law’s full force with absentee landlords and encourage buyers “to see blighted properties as diamonds in the rough.”

Papenfuse responded first with a dig at Martin-Roberts.

“I first would l to say that I do not have a favorite neighborhood,” he said. “I care about this whole city equally, and I find Ms. Martin-Roberts’ rhetoric, frankly, divisive. If the city is going to succeed, we are going to have to look for all of us to succeed together.”

He cited South Harrisburg’s sinkhole remediation plan, Allison Hill’s $3 million grant-funded MulDer Square development project and LERTA, a city-wide investment incentive program, as three of the “most important anti-blight remediation efforts” in many years.

Harrell, a veteran, mentioned a program to help veterans purchase houses before turning his answer back to crime.

“As long as crime is on the rise, no one will move into [these neighborhoods],” he said.

Butts referenced his “Harrisburg First” plan to train workers and contractors with a trade center in an attempt to connect job creation with neighborhood development.

Jenkins said she would go after federal funding for crime and blight, before criticizing the current administration.

“I thought three years ago, that’s what we were going to do: fight blight,” she said. “Here we are, three years later, wondering about blight,”

“Any funding that comes in for blight, that is what I am going to use it for,” she said of her plan.

Jenkins defended her troubled career as a police officer. The city fired her after accusing her of misappropriating $7,000 from the city’s Police Athletic League. She also found herself in trouble when thieves stole two guns from her unoccupied car. Currently, she is in a federal discrimination lawsuit against Police Chief Thomas Carter.

When asked about her transparency with these lawsuits, she said she couldn’t talk about the discrimination lawsuit as it is currently in progress. She said lawsuits prevented her from speaking about the embezzlement case with the city, though the case ended in January 2016.

Moderators asked a follow-up question about how, as mayor, she would manage a police department led by Chief Thomas Carter, who she said she would keep in office. She said that the discrimination lawsuit would be over in January, before she would take office.

“I don’t hold anything against anyone,” she said. “I’ve grown from it. I’ve learned from it.”

Martin-Roberts also defended her record in response to questions about her City Council vote to increase the incinerator debt and about her connections to former Mayor Linda Thompson and to James Ellison, a former associate of Mayor Stephen Reed.

Though Thompson had “hiccups with her personality,” she had “her hands deep in the Harrisburg Strong Plan,” she said.

“We would not be where we are today without her work,” she said.

She said that Ellison, now her campaign treasurer, would not serve in her administration. Ellison, a lawyer, found himself in controversy while serving both with the Harrisburg Authority under the Reed administration and, later, as counsel to the school district of Coatesville, Pa.

Papenfuse’s responses to certain questions elicited their fair share of groans, including one about the lack of a residency requirement for police officers.

“As a result, we have been able to attract some of the best and brightest from the nation and across the state,” he said.

Coming after Harrell and Butts commenting that police officers should reflect city neighborhoods, some members of the audience took Papenfuse’s comment as an insult.

As Harrell offered his closing remarks, Midtown resident Chris Siennick crashed the live television recording, introducing himself—complete with red headband and skateboard—as the Socialist candidate in the November general election.

After the audience erupted in laughter, Hanrahan closed the evening with these remarks: “[Last night was] a great example of how anything can happen on live television.”

Author: Danielle Roth

See How They Run: This election, give some thought to how candidates conduct their campaigns.

April 28, 2017 | by Lawrance Binda

Illustration by Rich Hauck.

Every couple of years, I get myself into trouble.

Well, not trouble exactly, but my office line rings, my cell phone buzzes with texts and angry people stop me on the street (or purposely ignore me).

It’s election season.

Now, TheBurg does not endorse candidates, as I feel it’s not our business to tell people how to vote—one of the most presumptuous things a newspaper can do. So, that’s not the source of consternation.

But I do feel a responsibility to comment on the way campaigns are run, as I often know more about what’s happening behind the scenes than the average voter—and, well, like every editor, I have obnoxious opinions about how candidates should go about their business.

So, four years ago, I heard from mayoral candidate Eric Papenfuse, who didn’t like that I felt his focus on schools, which is beyond the mayor’s purview, was an unnecessary distraction, and from candidate Dan Miller, who really didn’t like that I felt his decision to run as a Republican, after losing the Democratic primary, was opportunistic.

Both, I continue to believe, were important to point out to voters.

This year, my first annoyance of the campaign season came rather early, back in March, when contender Jennie Jenkins asked primary candidates to limit their spending to $50,000 in the mayor’s race.

“Our city is not for sale to the highest donor!!!” said a press release that filtered into my inbox one morning.

Now, this idea isn’t totally without merit. As Jenkins pointed out, Harrisburg is a tiny city, and it probably shouldn’t cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to run a credible race.

My problem, however, was this—it does. Four years ago, mayoral candidates together raised in excess of $500,000 and, even during the more restrained 2009 race, spending reached almost $300,000. The current race, which will be decided on May 16, almost certainly will clock in at half-a-million or more.

In a way, I can’t fault Jenkins for making this suggestion. Her candidacy is considered a long shot, and she almost certainly can’t raise the kind of money that the frontrunners—challenger Gloria Martin-Roberts and incumbent Mayor Papenfuse—can. In addition, she might have figured that she could earn lots of free publicity by calling for spending limits, which turned out to be exactly right.

My reaction, though, was—ugh—here we go again. In almost every election, some candidate “demands” that those who can raise a lot of money stop doing it, unilaterally disarm, which is a ridiculous suggestion unless we change how campaigns are funded in this country. Absent that, it’s a publicity stunt.

Likewise, this cycle, let’s dispense with all the other campaign distractions and clichés: who’s stealing campaign signs, what the county committee thinks, what the so-called power brokers are up to, complaints about “unfair” press coverage and, perhaps worst of all, who’s being endorsed by whom. Outside of the campaign bubble, no one cares.

As media and as voters, let’s stop allowing ourselves to be led around by candidates and their surrogates, and, instead, pay more attention to the things that actually matter. So, what are those things?

Some are obvious: policy stances, debate performances. But one thing that I pay close attention to is this: How well is a campaign run?

Which candidates show the most professionalism? Which demonstrate commitment and energy? Who has a message that is clicking with voters—and why?

Granted, these criteria can be subjective, but, if you’re a reporter or a somewhat engaged citizen in a small city like Harrisburg, you should be able to get a fair sense of who’s working hard and connecting and who’s not.

Four years ago, I thought that Papenfuse ran an excellent campaign, announcing late but then giving it his all so that, in just a couple of months, he lapped both the incumbent mayor and a very strong challenger. Likewise, two years ago, I wrote that newcomer Cornelius Johnson ran the most focused, energetic campaign during the City Council race. And, indeed, he won the most votes in a nine-person field.

So, pay close attention to who’s out there meeting people every day, beating on doors, asking for votes, engaging with residents, campaigning enthusiastically and going outside their comfort zones and core supporters. These are the people who really want to serve, who are motivated, who deserve serious consideration—and who are not just in it for their egos or a paycheck or a narrow, personal cause.

Moreover, I’ve found that the people who work hardest and smartest while running tend to make the best officeholders. A knowledgeable, committed, caring candidate probably will make a knowledgeable, committed, caring representative. Similarly, don’t expect a candidate who thrives on drama and division—or who runs a lazy or gimmicky campaign—to change much in office.

People vote for candidates for different reasons. In a snug city like Harrisburg, many people know candidates personally, so vote for them or otherwise identify with them. There’s little that an opposing candidate can do about that.

However, maybe half of the pool of likely voters is persuadable. They take their vote seriously and base it on things like policy and debates and, I hope, how candidates run their campaigns—how competently, how energetically, how intelligently. These are the people who will decide the makeup of our local government for the next four years.

Lawrance Binda is editor-in-chief of TheBurg.

Mayoral Candidate Q&A: Candidates outline visions for Harrisburg.

April 28, 2017 | by Danielle Roth

Many issues sit on the shoulders of Harrisburg voters: financial recovery, neighborhood development, habitable housing, safety, to name a few. Come Tuesday, May 16, the city’s registered Democrats can weigh in on these issues by voting for mayor in the primary election.

To help inform your decision, we gave candidates the opportunity to outline their visions for our city. TheBurg asked the five mayoral candidates—Lewis Butts, Jr., Anthony Harrell, Jennie Jenkins, Gloria Martin-Roberts and incumbent Eric Papenfuse—three questions about city issues and their background.

We printed candidate responses in full, editing lightly for grammar and, in some cases, word count. We encourage you to attend upcoming debates, learn more about the candidates, and, most importantly, vote.

Candidate responses are listed in alphabetical order.

Lewis Butts

Q: In the next four years, the city will face significant financial challenges as it tries to exit Act 47. How would you lead the city in choosing an option related to the taxing powers granted by Act 47, whether that is creating a home rule charter, staying in Act 47 or something else entirely?

LB: Since 2013, I understand from this current administration that going into your term without a comprehensive plan or a draft of a comprehensive plan does the community which you serve no service. The community without a plan doesn’t know where you want to take them.

Harrisburg under Act 47 requires a comprehensive plan. Not a promise that one will be composed within the next several years. This administration has had enough time and money to create one. I say, “Times up.” It’s important to send a message that this administration never had a vision for Harrisburg.

My Harrisburg First Plan will enable the city to rise out of Act 47 by equipping our city with the components required for a prosperous city of the future. Harrisburg can take advantage of Act 47 by creating better revenue engines throughout the city, while creating jobs for residents that are currently lacking. This will raise the morale of our citizenry and put hope and prosperity to residents.

Harrisburg inability to create adequate revenue to repair roads, reduce taxes, satisfactory schooling, blight-ness, crime and city connectivity. This administration hasn’t created a more communicative administration to assist residents.

Below is listed several infrastructure components that will create adequate revenue to rise from Act 47:

Voith Hydro Generation Plant: This superstructure will provide the municipality a power and revenue stream that could balance the scales of Act 47. The power generated will reduce the electrical bill of the common resident. This project will generate 700 local jobs and over $150 million annually.

Wi-Fi Municipal Commutation Infrastructure: This infrastructure component will enable the Harrisburg School District to offer a year-round educational curriculum. This component will allow children, students and residents to participate in higher education courses to improve job qualifications. The autonomous car industry (Volvo, Tesla, Mercedes Benz, Audi, Toyota and General Motors) is waiting for Harrisburg’s Dome.

Taxing residents is not an option. The only option is creating jobs and rebuilding our failing infrastructure through a comprehensive plan supported by the Act 47 management team. This will enable for best practices and outcome base criteria to be established and achieved.

My platform consists of the erections of the Harrisburg International Aquarium (HIA) located at the old post office on Market Street. This will attract millions of visitors. The advantages are that it’s on the rail line and the aquarium will offer more than 500 jobs. I will create more heritage parks that illustrate our contributions to the Civil War in the Uptown districts. I will also create a PennDOT Plaza; it will have nine eateries and 17 retail shops and will attract patrons of PennDOT, as well as state employees.

Harrisburg bridges were built as toll bridges. I would like to activate that component that can create close to $40K on a weekday.

The overall objective is to create jobs and revenue by holding international events in Harrisburg. For example, Harrisburg’s Motor Week will bring Indy Car Style Racing to the City. A week of racing and will yield to the tune of $5 million in tourist revenue.

Q: Apart from Act 47, what do you think is the most pressing issue facing Harrisburg, and how would you address this issue as mayor?

LB: The most pressing issue facing Harrisburg is moving blind throughout the years wasting time without a comprehensive plan. Residents are willing to work “together” with the administration if there was something that we could hold on to. When empowering residents to take part in the plan, inclusiveness must be the priority. Crime will be lower if our leaders could connect with all citizens, not just the downtown and midtown populations. I am the candidate who can transcend all demographics of the Harrisburg population. I can communicate within all city dialects and promote unification through community investment.

Q: How have you prepared for this position?

LB: My experience as a Harrisburg native, state employee, city small business owner, city committee member, and founder of several environmental organizations enables me to have a unique perspective regarding environmental issues and natural environmental best practices. I will establish several municipal watchdog organizations to monitor the health of the Susquehanna River from non-point source pollution, since there is a real threat our Federal EPA will be deregulated.

I know how important relationships are between the media as well as stakeholders like the Civil War Museum. A leader must know how important it is to build the bridges of communication instead of lines of conflict.

Anthony Harrell

AH: As far as Act 47 goes, it will run out by 2018 and there will be no relief for the City of Harrisburg, unless home rule is in effect. After careful consideration and a lot of research, I am in favor of home rule. The main reason being that the citizens of Harrisburg can now have an input into how the city is run and being funded. After all, my main goal for running was to give the government back to the citizens who live here and out of the hands of the federal government and outside investors.

Q: Apart from Act 47, what do you think is the most pressing issue facing Harrisburg, and how would you address this issue as mayor?

AH: There is no one issue I can say is the most pressing one, that the citizens of this city would think is above any. The young citizens killing each other, the sinking of some streets, the addicts doing drugs in abandoned buildings, the lack of jobs and business in areas apart from downtown. Not one candidate speaks about the homeless and job rates of the veterans in Harrisburg except me. I was told just the other day while getting a haircut on sixth street (Uptown) that a hardware store would be an excellent addition to the neighborhood. The other neighborhoods in this city don’t want some to have and others to not have. We all flourish as a city when we all benefit the same. All they have ever said is, “Don’t leave us behind.” I have heard them and stand with them. I will stand and fight for them until all of Harrisburg is standing up, to show what a beautiful city looks like when everyone is fighting for one common cause.

Q: How have you prepared for this position?

AH: From the beginning, I will state that I am not a politician. I have not held any political positions, PTA, school board, City Council. I don’t have the pedigree that the usual politician has, nor do I want it. I have not received nor do I want any endorsements from any PACs, or political persons. I do not ask for campaign funds, nor do I want any, from PACs or outside money that wish to contribute to my campaign. I do not ask for money from the citizens of Harrisburg either because the people here are struggling to make ends meet and that would not be acceptable for a person calling themselves a servant of the people to take from them. I saved up my money to support my campaign and I buy my signs, my buttons, postcards and wardrobe. The citizens of Harrisburg want a candidate that is willing to spend his own money, knock on the doors and shake their hands personally. They don’t want 30 to 40 volunteers wasting their time.

At the last election, the people had two choices: one was horrible and the other, less horrible, but they both were not what the people wanted. That’s why only 7,000 people showed up to vote. I voted because, as an American citizen, it’s my duty to do so, even though I didn’t support either of the candidates. It was at that time I decided to put forward my vision, my view of what issues trouble citizens and myself. My children go the elementary and middle schools here and I have gone to HACC. I decided a long time ago to make an investment in this city. I have seen the streets eroded in some areas (Uptown, South, Hill) while others are being taken care of. I have seen bright lights being put up in some areas (Midtown) and others being left in the dark. The crime, shootings, the empty buildings, the drugs are rampant in some areas. In others, it’s like it’s a different world. I am an American soldier and the one thing we live by is or our creed, “Never Leave a Man Behind.” For the last 28 years, the administration and all those who were in public office have left behind parts of the city. The last two administrations have repeated what the one before has done as well. With the one exception that outside money has now been shown preference and has put its hands in the construction of this city.

Lastly, I would like to say, “If you are not registered to vote, stand up and be counted.”

Jennie Jenkins

JJ: Harrisburg needs to be financially self-sustaining for the next 100 years. While everyone is worried about the next three, I am thinking beyond the box we’ve been placed into, via dictation.

Harrisburg faces much deeper issues than financial security. In the streets and through comprehensive plan feedback, city finances are not the most pressing issue. It’s crime, safety, jobs, the schools, blight, and rebuilding their neighborhoods that keep residents up. It’s vital that everyone feels confident in my ability to understand this.

To the credit of Act 47, we’ve been in the black. Still, the “strong-arm” plan (failure) is dictating our future. There needs to be effective and creative ideas to counter what’s on the table.

For multiple reasons, I am not supportive of implementing a home rule charter. How can we trust the current leadership to effectively implement a change of this magnitude when they can’t even handle the comprehensive plan project? I believe the residents are being deceived, and that home rule will tax/fee the city into non-existence. Harrisburg will be a ghost town.

There is another way.

Q: Apart from Act 47, what do you think is the most pressing issue facing Harrisburg, and how would you address this issue as mayor?

JJ: As the only mayoral candidate with community policing experience, crime and safety will be an actionable priority. A safe city equals economic growth.

It is common knowledge that crime is a deterrent for positive growth, and it is even more common to Harrisburg’s residents and business owners who’ve experienced contraction.

Acknowledging Harrisburg’s crime problem and then developing a comprehensive strategy aimed at empowering the people by building bridges with our communities, law enforcement and government agencies is the solution. We can take back our city.

Though rendered ineffective in fulfilling their mandate, numerous communities and law enforcement agencies have developed program models aimed at preventing crime.

The “Harrisburg Anti-Crime Initiative” is a problem-solving approach. Having knowledge of Harrisburg’s dynamics, I can tell you that we already have many key components in place. We all have a role to play. By blending these components together into an actionable plan, Harrisburg can be a safer place to live, work and play.

I will put my 10+ years as a police officer and my well-versed knowledge in crime prevention to work for the people… all people, regardless of race, creed, color, religion or unique personal expression. I’ll be going to work for nearly 50,000 people.

To the visitors, state employees, business owners, professionals and non-professionals, and regional residents that come into our great city, I want you to know that I care about your safety, too. I want you to stay and thrive in the City of Harrisburg.

Q: How have you prepared for this position?

JJ: My life experience, work history, and education have prepared me to be mayor.

A good leader is one who has a vision, can motivate and can inspire others to achieve greatness.

Communication is tied to transparency. What would it feel like to elect a leader that actually listens to the public, values its staff’s opinion, accepts responsibility and makes balanced decisions? My goal as a leader is to raise the standards of the executive branch, and rebrand Harrisburg’s image.

More than a leader, I’d be your representative. I am the people, too.

I believe an organization takes on the image of the leader. When was the last time we had a leader with a genuine smile?

Harrisburg needs a street-wise leader that attracts new residents and businesses by delivering respect, and protecting their hard work. Experienced candidates have broken our trust 10-times over. We’re done!

A good leader is surrounded by talent, not political favor. Whether native or planted, Harrisburg is flush with talent.

Gloria Martin-Roberts

GMR: In 2018, the state will review the status of our city under Act 47 to determine what has been accomplished, what remains to be accomplished and what has not been addressed. The Coordinator will make either of these recommendations: 1) The city is ready to exit Act 47, 2) The city is not ready to exit and a three-year extension is required, and at this point, the Strong Plan would be updated through 2021, 3) the city has poorly performed and should be returned to receivership.

Based on the aforementioned factors, as a newly elected mayor, I would prefer a three-year extension allowing time for a new administration to work closely with the state, city council, county commissioners, the community and other stakeholders on the best options to move the city forward by exploring alternate plans for revenue generation without putting further burden on our city’s tax payers.

Exiting Act 47 impacts our power to maintain the current tax rate for the local service tax and earned income tax (EIT). EIT tax reverts back to $52, and the local services tax goes away if we exit Act 47 without a home rule option or a three-year extension under Act 47. The other option is to increase real estate tax, which already exists and within the purview of the municipality, this is not my preferred option and could potentially create an unfavorable exodus of valuable home owners.

At this early stage, I am not dismissing home rule; however, this is something that needs much deliberation with the community, stakeholders, and other elected officials before I can embrace this option. It also is not an immediate fix, as the process would take a minimum of 18 months and requires a decision by the electorate. My priority would focus on increasing economic development activities, those planned and those yet to be proposed to mitigate the possibility of revenue loss through taxation. I anticipate that the building of a new courthouse, improved transportation (train station), economic activities planned for MulDer Square neighborhood of Derry Street and the 13 projects funded by Impact Harrisburg, including proposed economic development in the Strong Plan, would ignite an intoxicating interest of those wanting to invest in a city on the move, one of Unity.

Q: Apart from Act 47, what do you think is the most pressing issue facing Harrisburg, and how would you address this issue as mayor?

GMR: Economic development is the most pressing issue because it generates revenue and supports a strong tax base. My administration will foster a climate conducive to economic growth, which is integral to strong public safety, excellent education system, responsiveness to quality of life issues and respectful, civil government, public/private partnerships.

Q: How have you prepared for this position?

GMR: I have worked for and/or served as a consultant with federal, state and local governments in senior management positions, administering large budgets and managing large staffing complements. I have served as chief operating officer of a federally qualified health center. I served on the elected school board, the board of control (appointed by two different mayors) and City Council, leaving as president. I currently sit on the board of Impact Harrisburg. I have served on numerous boards locally and represented our state nationally. I have been the recipient of many community awards. My civic and government experience has prepared me for the seat of mayor.

Eric Papenfuse

EP: Thanks to my administration’s efforts to increase the local service tax (LST), the city has the sustainable revenues it needs to exit Act 47. The key is keeping the earned income tax (EIT) and LST tax rates outside of distressed city status.

To that end, we put money in the current budget to hire a lobbyist to help enact the legislative change necessary for the City to exit Act 47 without having to relinquish its current taxing authority.

If we are unable to change the state law by the end of 2018, I will push for a three-year Act 47 extension. I will work with City Council to begin the home rule process, which will enable residents to enact a new city charter granting us the necessary taxing authority.

Either way, I believe the city can be out of Act 47 by the end of my next term. This is the primary reason I chose to run for re-election. I want to help guide us through this process and not see us revert to the dysfunction we had in previous administrations.

Q: Apart from Act 47, what do you think is the most pressing issue facing Harrisburg, and how would you address this issue as mayor?

EP: The most pressing issue facing Harrisburg is the continued division in our community. As mayor, I have worked hard to mend the long-standing racial and economic tensions that have historically plagued Harrisburg. I have also dedicated my efforts to restoring public confidence in the political system.

Harrisburg has economic development plans that will benefit all residents in every neighborhood. Some of these projects include the millions of dollars in infrastructure grants for the MulDer Square project in Allison Hill, the new federal courthouse and state archives buildings in Uptown and the relief funds we secured for the residents of South 14th St. A plan is also in place to rebuild every park and playground in the city.

Under the leadership of Chief Carter, I have encouraged the continued efforts of our police force to engage the youth in our community and earn their trust. We hired 46 new police officers in the last three years but need to continue to recruit and train officers who are willing to participate in our community policing strategy, which has a proven success rate. We need to break down the barriers between the police and the community and look for ways to continue bringing the city together. Focusing on economic development and crime reduction are just two places to start.

Q: How have you prepared for this position?

EP: As mayor, I have managed the city over the last three years without several key positions including business administrator, deputy business administrator or chief of staff. Part of balancing the City’s budget includes making some sacrifices, resulting in me taking these tasks on myself.

Without the aid of the state, I negotiated labor contracts with little dispute between the city and the Police Department, AFSCME and the firefighters. Working together, we were able to find middle ground to keep city employee’s salaries competitive without over-extending the budget.

I continue to fight back on parking. This past January Harrisburg was threatened with another increase. City officials and I worked together to prevent that from happening. I negotiated the four hours of free parking on Saturday using the LUVHBG promotion code along with reducing the rates between 5 and 7 p.m. on weekdays to $1 an hour with use of the mobile app.

I successfully worked with local, state and federal officials to bring in millions of dollars for a variety of projects that provide jobs and capital improvements to our city.

Author: Danielle Roth

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like