Conservative * Forthright * Public Servant
RESPONSE TO LEINBACH ATTACKS
LEINBACH VS. SCOTT: A Personal Response
While I had hoped to wage a positive campaign based upon issues, qualifications and accomplishments, it has become increasingly clear from his public statements that incumbent Commissioner Christian Leinbach is intent upon running a negative campaign. This tactic speaks perhaps to a growing awareness of his true character and dwindling public support. Whatever his motivation, I am unwilling to be maligned by Berks County's preeminent politician without a response. The following is unfortunate but necessary for the voters to understand what is at stake in this election.
Leinbach's Negative Allegations:
1.) In various venues, Commissioner Leinbach has repeatedly insinuated that I am not a full-time commissioner. I find this perplexing as he is often absent when I am present in the Services Center, especially on Friday afternoon. However, it is true that on occasion I perform some of my best work for the County while sitting at my kitchen table, where I am not distracted by the petty political intrigue that rages within County offices. Among my “from home accomplishments” is drafting my 15-page memorandum dated June 26, 2018, which suspended efforts to sell Berks Heim and ultimately resulted in its salvation through the union negotiations I proposed.
I also distinctly recall reading complex legal documents on a wintry Sunday afternoon years ago in my living room, whereupon I realized the urgency of taking Antietam Lake Park from the City of Reading by eminent domain prior to the consummation of the Mascaro option to purchase that revered property from the City Council. Over the ensuing weeks I convinced my colleagues Schwank and Gajewski to take decisive actions that secured Antietam as a County park.
There are other high-profile accomplishments that were conceived or pursued from home or on the road for that matter. But the upshot here is that I am more concerned with accomplishment than punching a clock or working up a sweat for political consumption. I attend my share of meetings and public hearings such as those regarding landfill expansions late into the night, sometimes as the only commissioner present. My colleagues do the same, and I do not question their schedules or commitment to their jobs as they see fit. We have our differences, but work ethic is not one of them.
It is also possible that Commissioner Leinbach's assertions regarding my attendance are designed to deflect attention from his own record of absences as evidenced by his taxpayer reimbursed travel and mileage. The following chart indicates Leinbach spends a lot of time on the road and at conferences and supplements his salary with mileage. Though I am entitled to mileage reimbursement, I have not requested it for many years.
What is truly sinister about Christian Leinbach's attacks regarding my presence at the courthouse is that he is in essence exploiting my loyalty to my family. Over the past four years, my mother, Martha Michelfelder Scott, a resident of New Hampshire, slowly succumbed to the ravages of Parkinson's and dementia. She died on November 16, 2018 in a nursing home. As her health declined, I felt it important to visit my mother and care for her as her only surviving child. She appreciated it immensely.
My periodic visits required a seven hour drive one way.While in New Hampshire, I was able to work on County matters, attend meetings by phone and was always available by e-mail. But of course, I was not in my office or occupying my parking space, and thus provided ammunition for Christian Leinbach to assert my alleged part-time status.
Words cannot describe how deeply I resent Commissioner Leinbach's attempt to politically profit from my family tragedy and soul searching, debilitating grief. He knows full well my circumstances and the reason for my absences. If losing an election is the price I must pay for attending to my mother during her long decline and death, then so be it. I believe in the triumph of familial love over political ambition.
Mom and Mark
2.) On occasion I have opined that too few well-intentioned, highly talented people seek public office. I have speculated that low salaries may contribute to their reluctance. This does not mean, as Leinbach suggests, that I am unhappy with my commissioner salary. It does mean that I am concerned by the caliber of leadership at all levels of government and that I, as a taxpayer, would be willing to pay more compensation to encourage more talented people to run for public office.
It is clear to me that the financial consequences of poor decisions and wasteful spending absolutely dwarf the cost of the higher salaries that would encourage more fiscally responsible people to serve. In management classes I was taught that money motivates and that, in general, you get what you pay for. The perfect example of this is the school board that drives taxes ever higher with lavish, unnecessary expenditures and generous union contracts. School boards are paid nothing. Are they a bargain?
3.) I was surprised to learn that Commissioner Leinbach has been questioning my "integrity" on the basis that I changed my mind and decided to run again, largely due to numerous requests from members of the public and fellow elected officials. I was unaware that I needed to seek Leinbach's permission to exercise my God-given freedoms. Perhaps he fears my candidacy will derail his obvious desire to orchestrate the election of a more accommodating Republican partner. Or maybe this is just more evidence of a bullying personality so many have observed. As a matter of contrast, my candidacy is an assertion of the importance of independence, individuality, and diversity of opinion in public life and for that reason, among others, it demonstrates integrity.
WHERE IS MICHAEL RIVERA?
Michael Rivera is running with Christian Leinbach as a "team". Presumably he therefore endorses Commissioner Leinbach's negative tactics, distortions and lies. If he doesn't, he should speak up and distance himself from Leinbach's behavior.
FOLLOW THE MONEY
From 2016 and through 2018, Leinbach's political committee raised over $103,000, with over $52,000 remaining for this election. Commissioner Scott conducted no fundraising and raised nothing. Among Leinbach's largest contributors are County contractors, developers, and other special interests.
Take for example the political action committee "Responsible Citizens" formed and funded by the law firm Stevens and Lee. Reviewing reports in the Berks Elections Office reveals that on January 3, 2018, "Leinbach for Commissioner" received a $2,000 contribution from this Stevens and Lee PAC. Three weeks later, Christian Leinbach and Kevin Barnhardt, with Mark Scott dissenting, voted to hire Stevens and Lee and its affiliates to market Berks Heim, despite the fact that the County Solicitor recommended against this decision, stating that a competing firm was better qualified and less expensive. Was Leinbach's vote influenced by campaign contributions? You decide.
BIG MONEY VS GRASS ROOTS
In this 2019 Primary, Commissioner Scott will not seek nor accept campaign contributions from County contractors or any other special interest group. Contributions from connected parties and those seeking influence can impair the judgment of elected officials. At the very least, they make decision making awkward and undermine the principle that merit alone should govern the political process. The voters should be prepared for the onslaught of expensive Leinbach/Rivera advertising intended to destroy the modest, self-funded and therefore unusual Scott campaign.
THIS WEBSITE MAY BE UPDATED IN THE FUTURE
STAY TUNED