This entry was posted in General News. Bookmark the permalink.


     I will stay on top of the Stedman/Hatch Act situation.
     There was a city council meeting last night and former Mayor Art Morris addressed them to honor Charlotte Katzenmoyer and her 17 years of service to the city as the former Director of Public Works (Morris is pictured left and you can watch the meeting here).
     But the highlight of the meeting was Darlene Byrd – again! This woman is wonderful and did she ever let council have it – again! I hope to have a transcript of her comments here tomorrow. She should be on city council!


**   A police chief running for district judge in Tuesday’s primary ran afoul of a law that restricts the political activity of anyone working for agencies that receive money from the federal government.
     The U.S. Office of Special Counsel has determined that under the Hatch Act Ed Tobin cannot run for district judge while also serving as the Warwick Township police chief, the candidate said Tuesday.


     Yesterday, during the Debra Slaymaker-Walker bail debacle, I googled District Judge Edward Tobin and one of the first things to come up was the above LNP article from May of 2011, “Law forces candidate for judge to quit job ,” (click here).
     Now this is getting complicated but please bear with me.  A comment came into this site about District Attorney  Craig Stedman who is running to be a judge and possible violations of the Hatch Act. The comment included this:


      He will do ANYTHING to become a judge, including break the law. And speaking of that, as soon as he announces his candidacy and/or opens up a campaign (finance) with the Pa Dept of State, he will be in violation of the Hatch Act.
     I was under the belief that the Hatch Act only applies to federal employees but as the article states it also applies to anyone receiving money from the federal government.  So as I research this, I would also appreciate anyone’s opinion on Stedman and the Hatch Act and when and if he is in violation of it.

*    District Judge Edward Tobin set bail at $1 million unsecured, meaning Debra Slaymaker-Walker was not remanded to prison, according to the Lancaster County District Attorney’s Office.
From LNP’s article this morning, “Woman charged in crash that killed 2 Warwick students confined to house on $1M bail, (click here).
     LNP added the word “unsecured” sometime late yesterday without any indication they have edited the story. The story ran all day yesterday and just said $1 million bail. This is not acceptable and there will be more coming on this.



     On Monday of this week, the law firm representing the Chapter 7 trustee in the Worley & Obetz bankruptcy filed a “Petition to Intervene” in the divorce proceedings of Julie and Jeffrey Lyons (see below).
      I am told this is rare but it happens! They don’t want any assets hidden!

Please check back later today.


  1. Anonymous says:

    It’s sad that one conniving Lyons brother can “afford” the best lawyer and be out on bail while the mentally ill brother sits rotting in the jail and is probably more publicly hated than his thieving, amoral brother.

  2. huh? says:

    Regarding the divorcing Lyons. I’m not surprised that they are scrutinizing their finances. I would bet that a big chunk of purloined pesos are going to his criminal case lawyers.

  3. Ohwellist says:

    To anonymous:Sooo…who do we report D.A. to besides A.G. office so it will be notice and properly taken care of then.
    Whats crazy is out of all city council members that was invited to watch the video Darlene mentioned in meeting Janet Diaz was the only one to watch it. That speaks alot when you start thinking we voted these people in. They cant give you the time or day but their supposed to be about the people and get paid by the people. Janet was also the only one that opened her mouth and checked mayor on what kind of apology Darlene was actually looking for.

  4. barryinwinnipeg says:

    About the Hatch Act… When I worked as a County Supports Coordinator for (the then) MH/MR/EI, because our Agency received funding through the Medicaid program, I could not legally display a “Vote for Obama” sign on my front lawn. So if a D.A. can, without first resigning, run for State Office while the County receives any Federal funding, then this appears to be a violation. Would not a wannabe judge NOT know this?

  5. anonymous says:

    With Stedman’s #MeToo issues, it is not a given that the judgeship is his for the taking. Buckle up.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Becky, That’s not true that there has never been a democrat elected as a Common Pleas Court judge in Lancaster County. Spahn, who is currently on the bench, is a registered Dem. He won the dem. primary, then cross-filed – as they all do. There are other examples in the past, too. Whereever did you dig up such a blanket non-statistic?

  7. WTF? says:

    Bar association schmar association we don’t care if our guy’s a monkey and the other guy’s Einstein we ain’t votin for no damn Democrat.

  8. huh? says:

    I too was in the dark re the Hatch Act reference. Thanks Anonymous for laying it out in a very understandable way.

    I wish Mecum would run again. From everything I know, he was a very viable candidate. I am trying to recall who it was that won that election.

  9. Anon says:

    Don’t know if he is violating law, but it looks like he knows he is gonna win the bench if he is giving up the D.A.’s office. Dontcha think?

    • Becky says:

      Sadly, with the county being Republican I think it’s almost guaranteed. 🙁 🙁 There has never been a Democratic County Judge elected in Lancaster County. Never! Sam Mecum came the closest!

  10. Anonymous says:

    The Lancaster County District Attorney’s Office receives federal funding in the form of, at least, matching funds for victim services, special investigations, and more. Because of that, (under federal law), Mr. Stedman cannot, legally, remain as the district attorney while running for the judgeship. I don’t know what state law is regarding candidate for an elected office running as a candidate for another elected office, the play between running for a judgeship while acting as d.a., or the nuances of state election law. However, he is…indeed…in violation of federal law. I believe he also was afoul of Hatch when he ran for Superior Court, as well. I assume PA election law allows him to remain as county prosecutor while campaigning (overtly or covertly) for a seat on the bench, or it would have been called to the attention of state election officials when he ran for Superior Court. Professional ethics dictate that he resign from one post, as well, because of the conflict of interest – real or perceived – but the PA Ethics laws do not, specifically, enforce his particular scenario, and the PA Judicial Conduct Board doesn’t enforce anything. He is, undoubtedly, in violation of federal law. He does not want to risk losing his current job, I assume, should he not receive the Republican Party nomination in February (?). I do not know when his term of office ends, but I have not seen anything that says he is running for re-election… only for the bench. Therefore, one assumes that he assumes he will be elected to the bench. Otherwise, it is a risky move – quit your day job and not get elected to another position = unemployed. He IS in violation of Federal law, but unless someone reports it to the right entity, and/or files a formal complaint, it will go unnoticed. One can only assume that is what occurred with Tobin as he, obviously, did not “self-report”.
    In the meantime, Stedman risks federal funding that benefits everyone, for his singular goal. Technically, that selfishness, alone, is a violation of State Ethics law, (deliberately breaking a law – any law – for personal gain.) However, with the PA Supreme Court ruling on Veon more narrowly defining “pecuniary gain”, he might wiggle around any state investigation, which must be done – and decided – on a case-by-case basis. Some law says “pecuniary” can be intangible political gain, other defines it differently.
    Either way, it appears he is more willing to risk federal monies than his own career OR he already knows he will get the nomination AND win the election. He doesn’t strike me as a personal risk-taker.

  11. Anonymous says:

    The hatch act was modified in 2012 which would have allowed Tobin to run when he ran in 2011.

  12. Becky says:

    Regarding Stedman, I must point out that unfortunately it is “common practice” that the DA’s run for and become Lancaster County Judges (Judge Donald Toiaro). Stedman, of course, also ran unsuccessfully to be a judge on the Superior Court and the Hatch Act never came up that I know of. So I am mightily confused!