Hellertown Denied Second Shot at Gaming Grant

Hellertown will likely lose one of two police officers hired a year ago as a result of the Northampton County Gaming Revenue and Economic Redevelopment Authority's Nov. 28 decision not to reopen the borough's application for $170,000 in 2012 grant funding to pay for the officers' salaries and benefits.

The 7-2 decision followed the advice of the authority's solicitor, Scott Allinson, of Tallman, Hudders & Sorrentino, who cited the "potential for litigation" in recommending that the application not be reconsidered.

Hellertown gaming authority representative Stephanie Kovacs and Lower Saucon Township representative Priscilla deLeon were the only two members of the board to support the reconsideration, with Kovacs arguing that the current round of grant applications was "never closed."

Allinson said he was not sure if that was the case or not, and added that he would have to "look at the tape (of the October meeting)" to know conclusively.

DeLeon argued that the authority should go back and reconsider the borough's and other applications because restricted funds remain unawarded after .

However, Allinson pointed out that the authority has no mandate to approve all or any number of restricted funds gaming grant applications in a given year.  

Restricted funds are initially earmarked for municipalities that are contiguous to the City of Bethlehem--which hosts the Sands casino--but will roll over to the next "uncommitted funds" round of grant applications if they are not awarded this year. Municipalities from throughout Northampton County are eligible to apply for the uncommitted funds.

and are both contiguous to the city, as are Freemansburg, Bethlehem Township and Hanover Township, Northampton County.

The logic behind the two-round system holds that municipalities closer to the casino host city are forced to bear more of the impact from the casino than municipalities that are geographically further away--a point that was stressed by Hellertown Police Chief Robert Shupp, who attended the meeting and implored the authority to reconsider its denial of the grant that would fund the continued employment of the officers.

"I know how the crime in Hellertown has increased (since the casino opened in 2009)," Shupp said. "If we do not employ these officers to continue we are going to take a huge step backwards."

"I would hate to have to go back to the residents of Hellertown and tell them, 'You are less protected now from the people that the Sands casino has brought,'" he added.

According to Allinson, who cited Robert's Rules of Order in issuing his opinion, six members--or two thirds--of the nine-member authority would have needed to vote to reopen the application in order to proceed with a reconsideration of the borough's grant application for the funding for the officers.

Speaking out before a vote on whether to reconsider the application was taken, authority chairman John "Jay" Finnigan seemed to advocate for following the solicitor's advice against doing so.

Otherwise, he said, as held up a copy of the authority's by-laws, "we might as well take these by-laws and throw them away."

Finnigan said that, at times, the authority seems to conduct its business and make decisions on "a wing and a prayer," and added that he would vote against reconsidering the grant application in order to avoid the appearance of deciding something in that manner.