Residents urge Erie County Council to revisit ECRSSA decision, cite lack of due diligence

Cindy Treiber told Erie County Council on June 22 that the decision to alter the county’s ECRSSA re-entry program was rushed and lacked basic due diligence. "We're in a hurry," Treiber said, arguing the program’s reported March 1 end date and other timing claims were contradicted by records obtained via Right-to-Know requests. She urged the council to "fund the program where it is right now, if we have to, for 3 months" and to adopt a resolution requiring full first and second readings rather than skipping steps.

Jen Paulson of Mill Creek raised a separate procedural concern about a February personnel/finance meeting that she said was not recorded. Paulson read an email she said was sent Feb. 17 noting a pre-meeting with court officials and asked what was discussed; the chair declined to answer during public comment and told her to pursue a Right-to-Know request or follow up after the meeting.

Other public speakers reinforced the call for review. Alan Brown, who described himself as a former senior case manager involved in the re-entry program, said staff lost jobs and were now collecting unemployment, and he urged the council to consider the human impact of its actions. Dave Yule said the council should "revisit the ECRSSA decision" and criticized what he described as a pattern of poor oversight and an unwillingness to use resolutions to direct the county executive.

Speakers raised legal and procedural concerns in general terms. Treiber said there were "so many violations of the administrative code, of the home rule charter, of Pennsylvania state law" in how the program was handled; she and others requested a pause to allow outside experts and affected people to be consulted and to ensure service continuity while the council examines the matter.

The council did not take formal action on ECRSSA during the meeting; public comments were followed by regular agenda business. Commenters were told how to pursue additional records requests and encouraged to follow up with the council or staff outside the meeting.

What happens next: multiple speakers urged a short-term funding extension and a formal resolution to require standard readings on future measures; council members did not vote on those requests at the June 22 meeting.