EASTON, Pa. — Seniors in Easton will have to wait a bit longer to see whether they may be able to get a tax rebate from the city's fuel savings derived from hybrid patrol vehicles.
On Wednesday, City Council delayed until at least January Councilman Roger Ruggles’s ordinance, which would take the funding allocated for fuel for Easton Police Department and use the savings as a funding source for a rebate program for seniors’ property taxes.
But before even reaching that point, there were questions and concerns from council, both on the ordinance and the proper procedure for tabling, introducing and voting on legislation.
With estimated fuel savings pinned at about $3,200 per hybrid, “It is estimated that in full implementation the total savings will be approximately $200,000.00/year.”Proposed Easton ordinance
Ruggles’s ordinance details that Easton Police Department added two new hybrid vehicles to its fleet in 2025, with plans to bring on four more each year thereafter until all patrol vehicles are hybrid.
With estimated fuel savings pinned at about $3,200 per hybrid, as per the ordinance, “It is estimated that in full implementation the total savings will be approximately $200,000.00/year.”
Furthermore, the ordinance states, full implementation would see an approximate 1-million-pound reduction in carbon dioxide emissions per year.
If and when the ordinance goes into effect, the savings would be pooled into a fund for a city property tax rebate for eligible property owners older than 65.
That figure would be divided by the total number of qualified applicants to set the rebate amount for each applicant.
Applications would be made available annually on Sept. 1, and must be submitted to Easton’s Department of Finance of the year prior to which the rebate will be applied.
Applicants will have to be current on all taxes and fees owed to the city, and applicants are eligible for one rebate per family unit per year.
Questions and concerns
Councilman Frank Pintabone said that while he liked the concept of the ordinance, and would even like to see it expanded for all residents, he harbored concerns.
“My concern is, talking to [City Administrator] Luis [Campos] and others, parts have gone up on our cars, 10 percent, 15 percent, on all of our vehicles, different things," Pintabone said.
"We give the rebates back, and, you know, if it puts us in a position [where] we’ve got to raise taxes next year or the year after or the year after that, we're hurting those same seniors that we're talking about,” Pintabone said.
“So I think we need to take a hard look at it and see what other costs are going to come from these electric vehicles before we allocate those funds, knowing that there's gaps that we definitely have coming up.”
“I also like the idea, but without knowing what the savings is exactly, I think it's hard to vote on.”Easton Councilwoman Crystal Rose
Vice Mayor Ken Brown agreed that officials need to “take a look at it before we make a hard decision,” but emphasized that the measure would greatly assist a vulnerable population.
“Our seniors are being hurt every year on school taxes," Brown said. "Every year, school taxes go up, their income stays the same.
“We got to give them a break somewhere. They’re not getting it from the state, they’re not getting it from the federal government, and they voted us in locally, so we’ve really got to find some way to get them relief.”
Pintabone responded by saying he was worried that if, for example, a senior received a $100 rebate in 2027 and taxes were raised $60, net savings would amount to only $40.
If taxes were increased again, the rebate would essentially be offset.
Councilwoman Crystal Rose also raised questions about the ordinance, particularly the actual savings and who it would really help.
“I also like the idea, but without knowing what the savings is exactly, I think it's hard to vote on,” Rose said.
“We haven't raised taxes in almost 20 years, property taxes, so there's already that piece of it. And also, I think some of the lowest-income seniors are renting, so this wouldn't help them as well.”
Rules of Order
Before the discussion could continue, city solicitor Joel Scheer interjected to discuss protocol for the ordinance, which was technically listed as being introduced that evening.
However, procedures to table and untable legislation, and when it can be voted upon, became an issue.
“Upon further review, Robert's Rules of Order, there's mention that normally tabling is something that happens for a very short period of time," Scheer said.
"This is not a very short period of time, so the appropriate step would be taken off the table, but it has to then be reintroduced at the next meeting. You wouldn't vote… you would basically reintroduce."
Ruggles said the ordinance had been tabled after it was up for vote, but city solicitor Jeremy Clark further explained the protocol as per Robert’s Rules of Order.
“Let's just forget about the seniors and not think about them at all. I just… you know, again, here we are, delay, delay, delay, delay."Easton Councilman Roger Ruggles
“If the matter is not addressed by the next meeting, the matter technically dies, and then it must be reintroduced and voted on again under Robert's Rules, if you're applying Robert's Rules strictly,” Clark said.
He said “tabling” constitutes a one-meeting continuance.
After a brief discussion over whether the ordinance had been previously tabled or delayed, it appeared that council agreed it would have to be reintroduced at the meeting and voted upon in January.
That left Ruggles, whose term on council ends this month, frustrated.
“Let's just forget about the seniors and not think about them at all," he said. "I just… you know, again, here we are, delay, delay, delay, delay.
"And, you know, this is really a situation where you find money for a particular program and people want it. People want it.”
Pintabone said he would prefer to see the matter go back to committee for discussion so that it could be voted upon in January, reassuring Ruggles that he will get credit for the ordinance.
