Jo Ciavaglia's portfolio

Friday, August 31, 2018

Attorney: Bensalem man kills himself in county jail day after sentencing

Posted: Aug. 24, 2018
Convicted in June of crashing into his ex-wife’s house and sentenced Friday to state prison, a Bensalem man has killed himself in county jail.

Charles Joseph Freitag, 57, took his own life ‪Saturday morning‬ at the Bucks County Correctional Facility, said his attorney Paul Lang.

Charles Freitag

County spokeswoman Juliet Kelchner confirmed the death as a “presumed suicide” ‪Saturday afternoon‬. No other information on the manner of death was released. A final report on the death was pending, she said.

″ I can tell you at this time is that it is under internal investigation as well as the detectives, though there does not appear to be any reason to believe it is anything but a suicide,” Kelchner said.

She added that mental health professionals were at the prison for those who needed anything after the incident.

Freitag’s death comes a day after Judge Diane E. Gibbons ordered him to serve six to 12 years in state prison for aggravated assault.

Prosecutors had accused him of driving his 1999 Ford Ranger pickup truck through the front yard and into the living room of his ex-wife’s house in Falls in September. Less than a year later, a jury found him guilty in June after two days of trial.

He allegedly made statements at the scene indicating he was suicidal, and required surgery for self-inflicted wounds.

Freitag was on a Level 3 watch based on the sentence he just received, Kelchner said. A Level 3 watch means that he is being checked on every 30 minutes by a corrections officer, she said.

He was housed in a general population unit, not in a locked cell, and he was out to receive medication in the morning, Kelchner said.

The time between when he was last checked and when the incident was reported was less than 20 minutes, she added.

Lang, who took over the case for sentencing, argued Freitag’s mental illness made a lengthy prison sentence inappropriate in his case.

At his attorney’s request, Gibbons allowed Freitag to be held in the county prison for a week before he was transported to state prison.

Freitag is the second inmate to die at the prison this year.

In January, 52-year-old Frederick Adami died of complications related to opiate withdrawal one day after he was arrested on an outstanding warrant.

Family law attorneys: Child custody cases are never clear cut

Posted: Aug. 13, 2018

Kayden Mancuso

Child custody cases are among the longest, most expensive, ugliest and difficult decisions judges face, but rarely do they end as tragically as the murder of a child, according to family law experts.

The death of 7-year-old Kayden Mancuso at the hands of her father, who then killed himself, has released a tidal wave of outrage in Bucks County and beyond. Much of the anger has been focused on Bucks County Common Pleas Court Judge Jeffrey Trauger, who oversaw the contentious custody case between Kayden’s parents, Jeffrey Mancuso, of Philadelphia, and Kathryn Sherlock, of Lower Makefield.

Sherlock and her family contend that Trauger ignored extensive evidence that Mancuso presented a serious danger to Kayden when the judge failed to follow a court psychologist’s recommendation for supervised visits as part of a final custody order handed down in May. An online petition through Change.org that calls for the Pennsylvania State Judicial Conduct Board to remove Trauger from the Bucks County bench had more than 30,000 electronic signatures as of early afternoon.

Family law attorneys interviewed by this news organization said parents have a constitutional right to custody and care of their children, and the courts generally agree children should have a relationship with both parents.

Jeff Mancuso and daughter Kayden

“Parents are presumed to act in their child’s best interest,” said Sarah Katz, an associate clinical professor of law at Temple University’s Beasley School of Law and former supervising attorney in the Family Advocacy Unit at Community Legal Services in Philadelphia. “The law presumes it’s good to have both parents in their life. The question is, at what point do we intervene when there are legitimate best interest concerns.”

Often, though, answers are not easily found, local attorneys said.

With virtually all child custody cases, the starting point is always that both parents will get visitation — or parenting time — with a child. The how and how much time is what gets hashed out based on available facts and what the court believes is best for the child, according to Jack Feinstein, a professor emeritus who ran a legal clinic at Rutgers University Law School in Newark New Jersey.

“The presumption is the noncustodial parent will get parenting time. That is basically a given in the court’s mind,” Feinstein said, “The court takes everything into consideration. If court thinks there is danger to the child that is credible they’ll want to hold a hearing before the visitation.”

Past violent behavior or criminal past isn’t automatically going to prevent a parent from being allowed contact with their children, if there is no evidence they have abused or threatened them, Feinstein and other attorneys said.

If the court is concerned a parent has serious behavior or mental health problems, it can order a psychiatric evaluation, anger management or parenting classes be completed before deciding visitation, he added. If a parent is accused of abusing a child, the courts can order a child protective services investigation and delay a decision on visitation until a report is issued.

“The court takes allegations seriously. They are not going to look to put a child in jeopardy,” he added. “It always depends on the circumstances of a particular case. Some parents will say anything to interfere with the other parent. The last thing a judge is going to want to do is have to deal with reporters and parents and police asking, ‘How did you allow this visitation?’”

Eight years ago, Pennsylvania underwent dramatic changes in its child custody laws, with new rules designed to hold Common Pleas Court judges more accountable for the reasoning behind custody awards. Among the changes was prohibiting the court from assuming custody should be awarded to a particular parent based on gender.

Kayden (l) and her mom Kathryn Sherlock

Other changes included requiring the court to address 16 custody factors and explain decisions in orders creating a case history for a future judge, and to identify and address any history of abuse, child protection involvement and criminal history before a final award is made.

The revised law also requires safety conditions be created in cases where the court finds an “ongoing risk of harm” to a child or abused parent exists and awards any type of custody to an alleged abuser.

“Good judges would have considered the factors now memorialized in the statute. Too often, busy judges were not articulating the reasoning for an award to the frustrations of parents and lawyers,” said Mary Cushing Doherty, a Doylestown family law attorney who helped get the revamped law passed in 2010. “Then an appellate court or another trial judge on review didn’t necessarily understand the basis for the award. It is important to understand the reasoning if a problem arises later.”

Also important to understand is that a custody case only goes before a family court judge after all other attempts through division programs fail to reach a custody agreement, said Cushing Doherty, an attorney with High Swartz, which has offices in Bucks and Montgomery counties.

Adding to the already tense and emotional situation involving two people who don’t get along, the judge is typically asked to make decisions with limited information about the parents, said Cushing Doherty, who has been in practice four decades.

While past allegations of domestic abuse are among the factors judges must weigh, the court also will scrutinize whether the abuse was against a parent or also the child.

But Katz, the Temple University law school professor, believes the current law doesn’t weight allegations of intimate partner violence as heavily as a minor drug conviction. Studies suggest there is a high prevalence of domestic violence allegations among the estimated 20 percent of child custody cases litigated in family courts, she added.

Sherlock obtained a three-year protection from abuse order against Mancuso last year, according to court records.

“That is one of the difficulties. It seems highly predictable in hindsight, but (judges) are seeing these type of situations and allegations day in and day out with these high conflict cases,” Katz added. “No judge has a crystal ball.”

Lower Southampton asks Bucks DA to investigate zoning “past practices”

Posted: Aug. 29, 2018

Lower Southampton will ask the Bucks County District Attorney’s Office to investigate the “past practices” of the township’s zoning and building department less than one week after a state agency launched an investigation into the department’s permit process.

At a special meeting Wednesday night, the board of supervisors voted unanimously to request the county’s top law enforcement agency look into the department operations prior to March 2, 2018, and report the findings to the township.

The 4-0 vote was followed by a round of applause from the standing-room-only crowd of at least 40 people. Supervisor Joe McFadden was absent.

Keith Wesley

Chairman Keith Wesley told the crowd the board felt it was in the best interest of the township to have the district attorney look into the matter, which has dominated board meetings in the weeks since the release of the Keystone Municipal Services report that found numerous “irregularities” after reviewing two years of zoning records.

Wesley also acknowledged the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry has initiated a separate investigation, which this news organization confirmed last week. The agency oversees regulation of construction codes and it has requested to review documents for more than two dozen projects included in the Keystone report.

The state investigation will focus solely on zoning permit records and look at conformity with the Uniform Construction Code. It is unknown at this point if the state investigation scope will go beyond the projects in the Keystone report.

Earlier this month, the supervisors approved authorizing its professional staff to prepare bid specifications for an additional review of seven years of zoning records including fees and escrows for projects with at least a $50,000 cost.

While audience members cheered the decision to request a DA investigation, they continued to hammer supervisors with questions and criticism.

Marge McCurdy asked the board how it knows that the new Tawanka Elementary School, which was rebuilt a few years ago, is safe given the questions raised about the permit process.

Wesley responded that he hoped that school was among the buildings the state would review. The property was not among those included in the Keystone analysis.

The Keystone report, which involved 26 subdivision land development and building and zoning permits, was ordered to examine the department’s processes and procedures, and verify compliance with state codes and identify where improvements were needed following the retirement of longtime Zoning Officer Carol Drioli.

Drioli headed the department for 16 years.

The Keystone report findings showed a higher than usual number of common “irregularities” in zoning records reviewed, including misplaced or missing land development plans, missing inspector signatures, missing inspection reports, missing permit applications and “numerous” projects improperly issued permits without going through the land development approval process.

The report also revealed the township’s longtime in-house building inspector, James Jones, was not properly state certified to perform energy reviews or inspections. The report recommended Jones immediately stop doing energy reviews, but did not address if re-inspection or recertification was necessary. The township has since hired a certified third-party consultant to take over energy inspections.

An invalid inspection would technically invalidate a use and occupancy certificate associated with a structure, according to zoning and building code experts. Previously, a state Labor and Industry spokeswoman stated that if an inspection were performed by a person who was not certified “that portion would need to be re-inspected by an individual who has proper certification in that area.”

John McMenamin

Residents criticized longtime Township Manager John McMenamin, a former supervisor who earlier this month announced he would retire in 30 days, for apparently not knowing what was going on in the zoning department.

McMenamin told the audience that he was not qualified to check zoning applications or permit inspections.

“Don’t you check who you hire?” resident Karen Lowry said.

McMenamin countered that zoning employees were hired before he took over as township manager in late 2012.

State investigating Lower Southampton zoning and building department records

Posted: Aug. 24, 2018

The state agency that oversees regulation of construction codes has opened an investigation into the Lower Southampton Zoning and Building Department and requested to review documents for more than two dozen projects that were the subject of a recent consultant’s report that found “irregularities.”

A Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry spokeswoman Friday confirmed its Bureau of Occupational and Industrial Safety has opened an investigation, but declined to provide additional information or comment.

Township officials confirmed that agency representatives visited the department Thursday and met with employees for several hours to review operations and policies and what procedures it has put in place as a result of an outside consultant’s review of two years of zoning and permit documents.

Township Manager John McMenamin said the township sent the state agency a copy of the Keystone Municipal Services report, which involved an analysis of 26 subdivision land development and building and zoning permit files. The review was ordered to examine the department’s processes and procedures and verify compliance with state codes and identify where improvements were needed following the retirement of longtime Zoning Officer Carol Drioli.

The state investigation will focus solely on zoning permit records looking at conformity with the Uniform Construction Code, McMenamin said. He added the agency has offered the township help moving forward in getting “back on track doing the right thing.”

The agency representatives requested to review the same zoning files as the Keystone report, Zoning officer William Oettinger said. He didn’t know if the investigation scope would be confined to the report or if additional records would be reviewed.

Oettinger said he anticipated the files would be ready for the state to review late next week.

Supervisor Kim Koutsouradis, who has been pushing for a deeper review of the zoning and related financial records, was “extremely pleased” with the state’s interest in the matter.

“I’ve been the one who has been critical with all the issues that stem from the zoning office under the direction of the former zoning officer,” he added. “I wish it could have happened sooner, but I do feel this is a positive and a step in the right direction.”

Koutsouradis was the only supervisor to respond to an email from this news organization seeking comment about the state investigation.

The supervisors have scheduled a special meeting Wednesday night to discuss the Keystone Municipal Services report, according to McMenamin. At a meeting earlier this month, supervisors approved authorizing its professional staff to prepare bid specifications for review of seven years of zoning records including fees and escrows for projects with at least a $50,000 cost.

Also missing are physical copies of mechanical and plumbing permit inspections performed by the third-party firm the township contracts with for the plumbing, electric and mechanical, Oettinger said. The department only has physical copies of previous electric inspections, and those cards are stored in the building inspector’s office, not the property files, he said. Oettinger added that his review of zoning files found “numerous” approved permits that were not properly signed.

The report also revealed the township’s in-house building inspector, James Jones, was not properly state certified to perform energy reviews or inspections. The report recommended Jones immediately stop doing energy reviews, but did not address if re-inspection or recertification was necessary. The township has since hired a certified third-party consultant to take over energy inspections.

If the state requires Lower Southampton to re-inspect buildings, it would add to the costs the township is already shouldering related to the third-party energy inspections and certifications. The township is charged $50 or $100 for each home or business respectively for each inspection; since the inspection is not included in the township’s current fee schedule, the cost cannot be passed onto applicants, Oettinger said.

Previously, energy certifications were part of the process for building inspection permits, rather than handled as a separate permit, he added.

Lower Southampton supervisors to end practice of pre-signing resolutions

Posted: Aug. 22, 2018

For more than a decade, Lower Southampton supervisors at times pre-signed resolutions before they officially voted on them, a practice that raises “a lot of potentially very significant questions,” according to the executive director of the Pennsylvania Open Records Office.

The practice came to light Monday after Lower Southampton Supervisor Chairman Keith Wesley mentioned it in an emailed response to questions posed by this news organization as part of its ongoing investigation into the township’s zoning department policies and procedures.

Wesley — the only supervisor to answer the emailed questions — stated that he intends to discontinue the longtime practice to prevent “erroneous” signatures when a supervisor may need to be recused from a voting item during the meeting. Supervisors still may review resolutions before the regular meeting, but signatures would be held until after the meeting “when the votes are recorded,” he wrote in the email.

Patrick Irving

Wesley was responding to questions involving a Jan. 4, 2016, resolution granting preliminary and final plan approval to a two-lot minor subdivision at 616 Avenue A. The document contains the signatures of all five supervisors, though then-supervisor Patrick Irving had recused himself before the vote citing a conflict of interest, according to official supervisor meeting minutes. This news organization found the resolution while reviewing zoning department records for the property, part of an ongoing look into what a recent consultant’s report described as “irregularities” in the township zoning department under a previous director.

Irving resigned from the board last year after moving out of the township. He did not immediately respond to an email asking about the pre-signing practice.

Wesley described Irving’s signature on the document as an “administrative oversight.” He attributed the error to the “previous practice where supervisors review and possibly sign resolutions during the public workshop before the (voting) board meeting,” according to his email.

The signing of resolutions before votes was a practice for “all boards” for “at least the last 11 years,” Wesley wrote. He added that after consulting with the township’s solicitor, Irving’s signature on the resolution would not be cause to reconsider the vote or resolution.

Wesley did not respond to follow-up questions, including under what circumstances resolutions were signed before votes or what happened if or when a supervisor changed his or her mind. Township Solicitor Francis Dillon was unavailable for comment.

Municipal officials often use work sessions to hear reports and informally discuss matters, with action taken in so-called regular or voting sessions. Work sessions are open to the public and votes could take place, but typically do not.

Lower Southampton Supervisors have formally voted to approve at least two dozen resolutions so far this year, including ones involving preliminary and final subdivision and land development plans, according to a review of board minutes. It’s unknown which, if any, were pre-signed before a formal vote was taken.

Pennsylvania’s Sunshine Law, which requires public agencies to deliberate and take official action on agency business in an open and public meeting, does not address the practice of pre-signing board resolutions before official votes, according to Erik Arneson, who heads the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records, which provides training on the law. Arneson added that he is not aware of any existing case law on the issue, either.

But the practice does raise potential legal questions such as what would happen if a public official changed a vote after signing a resolution, or, like Irving, recused himself or herself from the vote, he said.

“We don’t see any benefit to an agency to pre-signing anything that they are going to subsequently vote on; the only thing it can do is raise questions,” Arneson said. “We would strongly advise agencies not to do it; avoiding the pre-signing of anything you’re going to vote on later just makes good sense.”

The practice also sends a message to residents that their voices don’t matter to public officials, said Melissa Melewsky, the in-house media law attorney for the Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association.

“The resolution is the reflection of the vote, and the vote must follow public comment and, in ideal circumstances, the vote takes public comment into consideration,” Melewsky said. “The signing of the resolution is the last step in the process. Signing first, really what it tells the public is we don’t really care what you think.”

Lower Southampton may need to redo energy inspections

Posted: Aug. 9. 2018

Lower Southampton taxpayers could be forced to shoulder the cost to redo an unknown number of energy inspections performed by an uncertified township inspector for more than a decade.

At this point, it is unknown how many energy inspections in-house building inspector James Jones performed without required state certification, said Zoning Officer William Oettinger, who replaced former department head Carol Drioli after her retirement earlier this year. Energy inspections ensure the mechanical systems and equipment comply with approved project documents and state construction code.

Township officials learned in June that Jones was not properly state certified to perform energy reviews or inspections, a revelation included in an outside review of the zoning and building department operations. The report, prepared by Keystone Municipal Services, recommended Jones immediately stop doing the energy reviews, but it did not address if reinspection or recertification was necessary. The township has since hired a third-party consultant to take over those inspections.

An invalid inspection would technically invalidate a use and occupancy certificate associated with a structure, according to zoning and building code experts. But it’s unclear what action the township is required to take next.

The Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry, which oversees state building code compliance, did not specifically answer questions about if the state can order a reinspection, though agency spokeswoman Lindsay Bracale confirmed in an email that if an inspection is performed by a person who was not certified “that portion would need to be re-inspected by an individual who has proper certification in that area.”

“Energy codes change, so what is in existing structures may be sufficient, and may not be sufficient, based on the building,” Bracale wrote.

She added if a formal complaint is filed, the department would investigate and require all documentation associated with a building in the complaint.

Bracale did not directly answer what happens if a use and occupancy certificate is deemed invalid. She added that a certificate of occupancy, the final approval issued after a building passes all mandatory inspections, is “presumed to be valid,” but local building code officials have a duty to investigate if there is a complaint that a certificate was not “properly obtained.”

If the township doesn’t re-inspect, then the current zoning officer could be issued a warning letter or potentially have state certifications revoked, which are the same potential penalties facing the inspector without certification, she said. Bracale declined to comment on whether it has initiated action against any Lower Southampton zoning employee, citing department policy.

But other building code professionals believe the township must reinspect since there is a chance the structure may not meet state code.

Any inspections, approvals and certificates of occupancy issued by a non-certified inspector are invalid, said Ryan McCann, president of the Pennsylvania Association of Code Officials.

McCann added the township could face an uphill battle proving it was not legally responsible if something happened at a property that could be connected to the invalid inspection.

“It would be tough to argue any hold harmless clauses normally afforded to government inspectors when they knowingly utilized unqualified persons to enforce laws which have strict qualification requirements, and are well past any ‘grandfather’ status present in the original (state) legislation,” McCann said. A hold harmless clause protects an individual or organization from being held liable for injuries or damages.

Municipalities that allow unqualified individuals to perform required inspections short change customers, added Herman Slaybaugh, a former State College zoning officer and planner and current co-chairman of the Pennsylvania Municipal Planning Education Institute.

“This situation would be no different than having the inspector perform plumbing or electrical inspections without proper certifications,” Slaybaugh said. “Citizens of the municipality are paying through the permitting process for a service they aren’t receiving.”

The situation is already costing Lower Southampton, which is now paying its third-party consultant to do the energy inspections. The township is charged $50 or $100 for each home or business respectively for each inspection, costs the township must shoulder since inspection is not included in the current fee schedule, meaning the cost cannot be passed onto applicants, Oettinger said. Previously, energy inspections were part of the building inspection permit process, rather than handled separately, like inspections associated with electric, mechanical and plumbing permits, he added.

Township Manager John McMenamin did not respond to emails sent Monday asking how much the township has spent on energy inspections since the consult took over last month. The township’s solicitor and supervisor chairman also either did not respond or declined to answer questions about the energy inspections.

Lower Southampton supervisors take first steps to deeper zoning review

Posted: Aug. 8, 2018

Lower Southampton supervisors agreed to begin the process of a deeper dive into the township’s zoning department operations, including financial records, following an hour of nonstop grilling from residents demanding the board take action Wednesday night.

“Somebody should be held accountable,” said John McDermott, who was among more than a dozen residents to speak. “Maybe it’s time to clean house. Maybe this is a wake-up call.”

Resident Marge McCurdy urged the board to go through the records of recently retired zoning officer Carol Drioli “with a fine tooth comb.”

“The residents of Lower Southampton are tired of corruption,” she said. “Let’s see what else is going on.”

Drioli, who headed the department for 16 years, has become a lightning rod for resident anger following the release last month of an outside consultant’s review of zoning department operations under her direction. She did not attend the Wednesday meeting.

The Keystone Municipal Services report, which reviewed two years of subdivision and land development files as well as permits, found an unusual number of common “irregularities” in the records, including misplaced or missing land development plans, missing inspector signatures, missing inspection reports, missing permit applications and “numerous” projects improperly issued permits without going through the land development approval process.

A municipality is required to keep records of the inspections that are performed as part of the permitting process to ultimately receive a Certificate of Occupancy, according to Lindsay Bracale, a spokeswoman for the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry, which oversees regulation of the state’s construction code.

All records must be retained for the life of the building, said Bracale, who added the department has the authority to investigate code officials for improper enforcement of the Uniform Construction Codes.

Following an hour of public comment, the board voted 5-0 to authorize its professional staff to prepare bid specifications for a look back into more than seven years of zoning permit and subdivision and land development records, as well as the fees and escrows for projects with at least a $50,000 cost. The specifications will be presented to the board for consideration before they are put out for potential bids.

Supervisor Kim Koutsouradis had first recommended including financial records in the new review after he learned from zoning department employees that Drioli reportedly failed to follow the township’s fee schedule multiple times, something she did not have authority to do.

Koutsouradis said Zoning Officer William Oettinger, who replaced Drioli after she retired earlier this year, provided him documents that show at least six times Drioli gave applicants discounted fees for permits or did not require escrow. Escrow is used to pay for township services, such as engineering and legal costs, associated with reviewing subdivision and land development plans.

“Carol, if you are listening, why?” Koutsouradis said into the TV camera filming the meeting. “Tell us? Did someone direct you (to make the changes)?”

Other supervisors agreed that a further analysis was warranted, but as township officials they need to consider the cost for taxpayers. The further probe is expected to be expensive, mostly because of poor record keeping in the department.

“We all know you want this accountability. ... We want the same things you want,” supervisor Ed Shannon said. “We’re not the bad guys.”

Supervisor Chairman Keith Wesley again reminded the standing-room-only crowd of at least 30 people that it was the board that authorized the Keystone review to look at department policies and procedures with a new department head coming on the job.

“We wanted this,” Wesley said.

But the supervisors’ words did little to calm the crowd, which frequently yelled out and interrupted board members. Some audience members shouted that the board only authorized the review at the insistence of Oettinger.

“He asked for it,” shouted resident Scott Russell, referring to Oettinger. “And you obliged.”

One resident, who said he was attending only the second supervisors meeting in 30 years, pulled a dollar out of his pocket, approached Wesley and asked him to read what was on the back.

“In God We Trust,” Wesley replied.

The man then threw the dollar at Wesley and told him to keep it.

“Things better start changing,” he said before returning to his seat. “When you guys go home tonight and look at yourselves in the mirror, I hope to God you say, God help me, God help me to do the right thing.”