Ww NO. 43
DALLAS, PA.
Phone 675-5211
\
FIFTEEN CENTS
Kingston Twp.
on Election Day, voters in Kingston
Township will be among the few residents
of Luzerne County to have an opportunity
to express their opinion of the new home
rule concept of government. Ballots in
Kingston Township—as well as in
Kingston Borough and Wilkes-Barre
Township—will ask voters whether or not
they desire the establishment of a seven-
member commission to study their local
govetnment.
If &cingsion Township study commis-
sion 1s established, it will subsequently
recommend the form of government it
believes most suitable for the muniec-
ipality. Possible recommendations could
be to retain the present form of govern-
ment or to call for a referendum for a
home rule charter or an optional plan of
government.
The first step, however, is the selection
of the seven-member study commission.
The names of 10 Kingston Township resi-
dents will be listed on Shavertown,
Trucksville and Carverton ballots, and
voters will be asked to select seven
persons to serve on the commission.
Last Friday night, the Kingston
Township Taxpayers Association spon-
sored a forum for the would-be commis-
sioners, and six of the 10 candidates at-
tended the session. A seventh candidate
expredf®ed regret that he could not attend
but sent a letter explaining his can-
didacy. >
Listed here in order oi their ‘appear-
ance Friday night are the study commis-
sion! | ndidates, with excerpts from their
statéments.
John Hibbard, RD 3, Wyoming: A
resident of Kingston Township since
January, 1970, Mr. Hibbard is the presi-
‘dent of Commonwealth Telephone Com-
pany and president of the Economic
- Development Council of Northeastern
Pennsylvania. Actively involved in the
home rule question for some time, Mr.
Hibbard pointed out that, with the
passage of the home rule act, “we have
an opportunity to look at the structure
and powers of local government to
Flood-Ayers
Fund Sources
Disclosed
According to Ralph Nader’s recently
released profile on Congressman Daniel
Flood, the largest single contributor to
his 1970 election campaign was Mrs.
Albest D. Lasker, a New York art dealer
active in the areas of mental illness and
health education. Figures released re-
cently through Common Cause, a nation-
al citizen’s lobby, indicate that Mrs.
Lasker also contributed a substantial
sum ‘to Mr. Flood’s current re-election
effort, a sum listed as $2,500.
Common Cause’s report covers the
period of time from April 7, 1972 to Aug.
31 and reveals that total contributions to
the Flood campaign during that time
amounted to $2,850, with $350 coming
from small, unidentified sources. Total
contributions to the campaign, including
thogs collected before April 7, were listed
,437.
Mr. Flood’s opponent, Dr. Donald
Ayers, reportedly collected a total of
$1,700 for the period, $1,538 of which
represents Dr. Ayers’ own funds. Accord-
ing to the report Dr. Ayers spent the total
amount of his campaign contributions on
communications media, while Mr. Flood
spent only $384 in that area. Cash on hand
for Mr. Flood was listed as $704.
Congressman Flood serves as chair-
man of a House Appropriations Subcom-
mittee that maintains jurisdiction over
allocations in the area of health,
education and welfare.
determine if it is well set up to handle the
problems . confronting it.’ Citing four
significant legislative acts passed by the
State legislators during the past year,
Mr. Hibbard pointed out that each of the
laws has potential application to local
government. ‘‘It’s been an historic year,”
Mr. Hibbard suggested. While he is ‘‘not
convinced of any particular thing regard-
ing Kingston Township’s form of govern-
ment,” Mr. Hibbard insisted that the
home rule study is ‘highly desirable.’ He
concluded: “Even if it is decided that
there should be no change in government,
the township, 6 will be well ahead for
having undertaken the study.”
William Pugh, Trucksville: A police
officer in Kingston Township, Mr. Pugh
explained that he sometimes believes
policemen are ‘‘second class citizens’
because they cannot seek elective office.
“Now I have an opportunity to seek this
position and to get the consensus of my
neighbors on the question of home rule—
feel I can perform a service to the people
of my community.’”’ He stated that he had
“not yet formulated his own ideas”
regarding the best choice of government
for the township, but that he is “willing to
meet people and do what they want
done.”
(continued on PAGE TWENTY)
Imagine the thrill experienced by Fred
Ostrum and Peter Isbitski last July 7
when the clothes for flood victims they
were sorting in a garage on Chestnut
imagine the even greater thrill the
youngsters experienced last Friday
afternoon when each of them left the
Kingston Township Muficipal Building
clutching envelopes containing $366.67—
their portions of the found money.
As Fred and Peter tell it, they were
busily sorting through clothes which had
been donated for flood victims last July
when Fred Picked up a nondescript grey
suit coat and handed it to Peter. Out from
Trust Bank envelopes bearing the hand-
boys’ utter amazement, the envelopes
were found to contain $520 and $580!
‘““We started laughing,” the boys re-
called, “we just couldn’t believe our
eyes.”
The boys turned the money over to the
granddaughter of the owner of the
garage, Bonnie Roth, who resides at 130
Page St., Kingston, and the decision was
made to turn the money into the police.
Kingston Township Police Chief Paul
Sabol accepted the money, placed it in a
safe place—and began advertising for the
lawful owner.
The notices brought a few queries from
area residents, but no one came forth
with any positive identification of the
jacket or of the amount of money contain-
ed in the envelopes. Interestingly enough,
Chief Sabol did receive a handwritten,
anonymous letter bearing a Philadelphia
postmark from a person who identified
the money as ‘‘syndicate’’ money. The
letter writer told Chief Sabol to expect
many claims for the money but that ‘“‘the
money claimants are phonies.”’ Instead,
the supposed ‘‘syndicate man’ urged,
Chief Sabol should “give it to the finder or
flood victims.”
(continued on. PAGE TWENTY)
Query Representatives
A consumer coalition of citizens groups
placed their support for lower milk prices
on the line this week, with a poll of how 22
Lackawanna and Luzerne County can-
didates to the Pennsylvania General
Assembly support a House bill to abolish
retail milk price controls.
The poll, initiated with certified letters
to each of the 22 candidates, asked both
incumbents and their opponents to an-
swer whether they will support House Bill
2483, if elected. A reply deadline was
given the candidates, with the ex-
planation that a firm yes vote would be
necessary to keep their names out of the
‘“against’’ column in advertisements to
be placed in local newspapers during the
week. The advertisement, appearing
that the two-county statehouse hopefuls
split 11 to 11 over the question of lower
milk prices.
The proposed legislation is designed to
Photo by Joseph. Kane
eliminate the retail price fixing powers of
the Milk Marketing Board, thus placing
milk in a retail market of competition
like other food products. Since 1937 the
MMB has had the power to set the
minimum retail price of milk to the
detriment of consumers and producers.
Under the proposed law, the MMB would
function to maintain adequate prices for
milk producers, as it does currently. But
the measure would give each retailer the
right to sell milk for whatever price he
desires, as long as he could maintain at
least a five percent profit, thus
preventing grocery stores and super-
markets from selling milk as a loss
leader.
The coalition of consumers,
representing thousands of voters in the
two county region, include such
organizations as labor unions, women
clubs, consumer groups, church groups,
teachers, and a host of others.
Pennsylvania voters will do more than
help decide the next President of the
United States on Tuesday.
They will also be given the opportunity
to participate in a referendum on a
Constitutional Amendment to determine
whether the Commonwealth has the right
to make direct grants to people who
suffered financial loss in the flood.
The proposed amendment, which
requires a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ vote, reads:
“Shall Article VIII of the Constitution of
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania be
amended to give The General Assembly
authority to provide tax rebates, credits,
exemptions, grants-in-aid, State supple-
mentations or special provisions for
individuals, corporations, associations or
nonprofit institutions, including non-
public schools (whether sectarian or
nonsectarian) to alleviate the danger,
damage, suffering or hardship faced as a
result of storms or floods of September,
1971 and June, 1972’?
Hd)
According to State Secretary of
Community Affairs William H. Wilcox,
the amendment, as currently planned,
would ‘facilitate the use of the $150
million already allocated by the state for
flood relief.” He further explained that
“there were no specific plans as to how
the money would be used if the amend-
ment passes,’’ but there is ‘‘certainly a
good possibility it will be used to give tax
relief to flood victims.” Mr. Wilcox
estimated that not more than one-third of
the $150 million has been spent to date.
Approval of the amendment by Penn-
sylvania voters will dispel doubts sur-
rounding the constitutionality of Senate
Bill 3, designed to alleviate the financial
woes of local governments still reeling
from the devastation of the flood.
Senate Bill 3, however, as presently
constituted, contains a number of flaws in
addition to its suspected unconstitution-
ality. Consequently, Gov. Milton J. Shapp
has requested the General Assembly to
recall the bill for corrective amend-
ments.
In a public statement, Mr. Wilcox
pointed to another flaw in the bill in that it
“requires that each property owner
petition for a tax abatement on or before
January 1st of the next year, a date which
is unrealistic.”
In the meantime, while the bill is being
recalled, ‘the Governor’s Budget Office
and the Pennsylvania Department of
Community Affairs, in cooperation with
Thomas P. Garrity, Chief Assessor of
Luzerne County, is drafting possible
amendments,’”” Mr. Wilcox continued.
The Secretary noted that ‘‘a large part
of the problem with respect to any flood
related tax abatement is the fact the Fed-
eral legislation on this subject is inade-
quate.”
Mr. Wilcox called cortaln provisions of
the Federal Disaster Relief Act ‘a
disaster in itself,”’ terming one provision
a ‘““Catch-22 provision.” :
Story on page 3
Those candidates who said they
favored passage of the bill now before the
House, include Thomas Walsh (D-
Scranton) in the 113th District; John
Wansacz (D-Old Forge), 114th; Jon
Vipond III (R-Waverly), 114th; Joseph
Wargo (D-Olyphant), 115th; Orville
Williams (R-Olyphant), 115th; Thomas
Kennedy (D-Hazleton), 116th; George
Hasay (R-Shickshinny) 117th; Stanley A.
Zelinsky (R-Nanticoke), 119th; John
Levandoski (D-Exeter), 120th; and
Samuel Dolgopol (D-Lehighton), 122nd.
Candidates who said they would vote
against the measure or who did not an-
swer the certified letter included Paul
Crowley (D-Scranton), in the 112th
District; Charles J. Volpe (R-Scranton),
112th; Robert F. Jones (R-Scranton),
113th; James Ustynoski (R-Hazleton),
116th; Raphael Musto (D-Pittston),
118th; Benjamin C. Seacrist (R-Wilkes-
Barre), 118th; Fred J. Shupnik (D-
Luzerne), 119th; Frank O'Connell Jr. (R-
Kingston), 120th; Bernard O’Brien (D-
Wilkes-Barre); 121st; Albert Sutcavage
(R-Wilkes-Barre), 121st; and Joseph
Semanoff (R-Lehighton), 122nd.
Some candidates qualified their an-
swers, such as Mr. Ustynoski of
Hazleton: ‘I never commit myself until
the debate on the floor is over and after I
attend our caucus.”
Jon Vipond, candidate from Waverly,
wrote: ‘““‘A small step in the right
direction.” Incumbent Rep. Meholchick,
Ashley, said that he would vote for the bill
as it now stands. Mr. Wargo, Olyphant,
said that he wanied to give a “qualified”’
yes.
In the letter sent to the candidates, the
coalition of consumers asked the
statehouse hopefuls for a yes vote, ex-
plaining that ‘‘consumers in the Scran-
ton-Wilkes-Barre area are asking for a
public commitment from you on H.B.
2483 (an amendment to the Milk
Marketing Law to abolish retail milk
price controls.)
(continued on PAGE TWENTY)