While personnel was expected to be the primary topic of discussion during Wednesday’s Charleroi council meeting, an unexpected move — that was not unanimous — left council with a new solicitor on the books.

Last night’s agenda was filled with several motions to fill positions in a few areas in the borough, but only one of the original motions was given any attention as two new motions took center stage.

The first motion was to fire Solicitor Sean Logue, and the second was to replace him on an interim basis with ABC Solicitor and former borough solicitor Dennis Paluso.

Both motions were proposed by Councilman Randy DiPiazza, who was met with immediate backlash and questions from councilmen Larry Celaschi and Joe Smith, who attended Wednesday’s meeting via phone.

“I think it would be in our best interest to part ways with Sean Logue, our current solicitor,” DiPiazza said.

Councilman Jerry Jericho quickly seconded the motion.

Before it went further into discussion, Smith immediately asked a simple question, “Why? Why?”

“Why?” DiPiazza said. “Because we have been led

Charleroi • A2 FROM A1 down the wrong road. I am not just saying or pointing fingers at Mr. Logue…”

Smith interrupted DiPiazza before he could explain, and he raised his voice to finish.

“Do you want an answer or not?” DiPiazza asked Smith.

“Yeah, gimme it,” Smith said.

“OK, well then listen and shut your pie hole,” DiPiazza responded.

DiPiazza said he is not happy with Logue’s communication with council members and also cited “this whole thing with the Philadelphia attorneys and what is going on with pending litigation right now.”

The borough previously hired a Philadelphia-based attorney to assist the borough in negotiating a deal with ABC, but the firm was later terminated after a deal was reached on the borough’s own accord.

“Really?” Smith asked.

Jericho said he, like DiPiazza, thinks cutting ties with Logue is the right move.

“I have said it here before,” Jericho said. “I have lost good faith in how he works with us and his knowledge of our borough business here.”

Celaschi was the first person to openly disagree.

“You know coming from some council members who do not lift a finger, that’s facts, you know, you’re not involved in any of the heavy lifting for this borough, and I know I have worked with him (Logue) time and time again, as well as our engineer, working with the Mon Valley Alliance on the building down there, the list goes on and on,” Celaschi said. “So, let’s see. You got rid of the borough manager, got rid of him, again, coming from people who don’t lift a finger. Tell me what you (all) do?”

Kristin Hopkins-Calcek, who is on the November ballot for a seat on council, spoke out from the audience.

“That is not for you to say,” Hopkins-Calcek said. “That’s not for you to say.” “What Mrs. Hopkins?” Celaschi said. “Was anyone speaking to you? I don’t think they were. We are having a discussion of council up here.”

Jericho, who is a running mate of Hopkins-Calcek and a long-time council person, took offense to Celaschi’s remark.

“I have done a lot of good in my years here,” Jericho said. “Now, you might not think so. … I have put up with a lot of highs and lows, lately it has been a lot of lows but I have never quit this council. It crossed my mind many times, but I never did. I was not going to run this year, but I am glad I did run this year because we have a good group of people and I believe we can make a change. Larry, this is all you ever do…”

Celaschi said he is not concerned with what Jericho has or has not done, but rather the projects Logue has helped with that are currently in the works.

“I am talking about projects,” Celaschi said. “Things we have been working on and now you want to get rid of this man when we have been working diligently on a lot of things. You bring up the water authority, you bring up the Philadelphia law firm but we would have never been where we are (without Logue).”

Jericho jumped in to counter that statement, as he feels that Logue had nothing to directly do with the ABC deal.

“Me, Randy and Nancy did that,” Jericho said. “Our solicitor had nothing to do with it. You had zero to do with it. Twenty minutes before we voted on the deal you were in here trying to get us not to take it.”

Celaschi disagreed, and the discussion on Logue’s employment turned into a heated back and forth between Celaschi and Jericho about various things including committee assignments, grants and the ABC deal and other ongoing projects before it came down to a vote.

Logue said before a vote was taken, he did want to explain himself and apologized for not communicating as effectively as some council members would have liked. Logue also said he did not recommend that council hire the outside firm to deal with ABC, and that he found the law firm at council’s request, and he had nothing to do with the decision to hire them.

Still, DiPiazza said, he felt it was best for Logue to be let go.

“You know what, we are a small town with a lot of problems, and we put our faith and our trust in you by hiring you, you were the go-to guy for our legal advice for these matters and it seems like we were getting blown off,” DiPiazza said. “Frankly, I like you. But this is business and I believe that our business should be handled by an attorney from our home town. That is my personal opinion.”

“I’m not taking this personally,” Logue said. “If the votes are here to send me on my way, it is what it is.”

As Logue got involved in the discussion, Celaschi said there had been a violation of the Sunshine Act, but it was not clear what that violation was.

“What?” DiPiazza said.

“I’ll address that after the vote, but I think instead of removing a solicitor that is doing a lot of good for us, I think we need to talk about the criminal activity… (at) 818 Oakland Ave.,” Celaschi said, which is the address of a home owned by council President Frank Paterra, whose residency was questioned earlier in the year.

Paterra admitted at the time he did not live at the address because of ongoing health issues, and said despite that being a violation of the law he did not plan to resign from council.

It eventually became a moot point until as of recently no action had been taken.

The property has since been cited for code violations, and Paterra has admitted there has not been any work done to the property this year, and he is still not well enough to ensure that happens.

When Paterra’s home was brought up, the audience and other members of council started shouting, until DiPiazza got tired of the finger pointing, grabbed the gavel from in front of Paterra and slammed it on the table.

“You know what?” DiPiazza said. “This meeting is over.”

DiPiazza and Pivovarnik stood up from the table to leave when the audience asked a vote to be taken on the solicitor’s position.

Logue was removed as solicitor with Celaschi and Smith casting the lone no votes.

The seventh motion on the agenda, to replace him on an interim basis with Paluso was put on the table.

“Is that a conflict of interest?” Celaschi said.

“No, it’s not,” Jericho said. “We own the water authority. He represents the water authority, we own it.” Pivovarnik asked since other motions to hire were tabled to make sure things checked out, if the job should be advertised before making an appointment.

“I think we should not appoint someone until we can advertise for a new solicitor,” Pivovarnik said.

“No one else wants to represent this town,” DiPiazza said. “We are nothing but trouble and chaos.”

Celaschi, Smith and Pivovarnik voted against appointing Paluso to fill the role, which he will do on an interim basis until the end of the year.

Before leaving the meeting, Logue thanked council. “I am happy with what you have been able to accomplish while I was here and I wish you all the best of luck,” Logue said.

Following Wednesday’s meeting, Paluso said as a lifelong resident of the borough he is happy to help and serve as the borough’s legal representation until someone permanently takes on the role.