Government

Councilman criticized over ‘Black child’ label for Luzerne County

THE PHILADELPHIA TRIBUNE — Luzerne County Councilman Robert Schnee says he did not mean to offend anyone last week when he described Luzerne County as “like the Black child here” when it comes to state funding. Local civil rights leader Guerline L. Laurore says she finds Schnee’s comments offensive.

Published

7 years ago

April 25, 2019

Eric Mark

By The Citizen Voice

WILKES-BARRE — Luzerne County Councilman Robert Schnee says he did not mean to offend anyone last week when he described Luzerne County as “like the Black child here” when it comes to state funding.

Local civil rights leader Guerline L. Laurore says she finds Schnee’s comments offensive.

Schnee’s colleagues say they misheard his remarks at an April 9 council work session as the board discussed the poor state of roads in the county.

Councilman Stephen A. Urban criticized state lawmakers who represent Luzerne County for not doing enough to obtain funding to repair the county’s roads.

Schnee said those lawmakers do the best they can at state level, where funding is disproportionately distributed to the Philadelphia and Pittsburgh regions.

“We’re like the Black child here, whatever you want to call it. … We have an uphill battle,” Schnee said.

No one commented on Schnee’s use of the phrase “like the Black child” during the work session.

Council members reached Monday said they thought Schnee had said “black sheep” instead. The phrase “Black child” can be heard clearly on an audio recording of the work session posted to the county website.

Schnee said in a phone interview Monday that he did not misspeak.

He said he wanted to draw a comparison between African Americans, who face discrimination in their daily lives, and Luzerne County, which faces discrimination when it comes to state funding.

“Sadly enough, the Black person in the minority is still discriminated against,” Schnee said. “It’s sad to say in this day and age.”

He compared that to Luzerne County’s attempts to compete for state funding with Pennsylvania’s two large metropolitan areas.

“The money goes … where the votes are coming from,” Schnee said. “Pittsburgh and Philly get all the money.”

Schnee, in a later interview, said he feels “disrespect” might be a better word to describe the county’s situation.

He stressed that he meant no disrespect to the African-American community.

“I think it’s being supportive of them,” he said. “That’s what I meant.”

Laurore, secretary of Gov. Tom Wolf’s advisory commission on African American affairs and former president of the Wilkes-Barre chapter of the NAACP, said Schnee’s remark was “entirely inappropriate.”

“Basically, he’s saying that nobody wants to be the Black child, because this is how you are treated when you are Black,” said Laurore, an attorney and Shavertown resident.

Also, Schnee’s use of language that some would consider racially charged distracted from the discussion of an important infrastructure issue, Laurore said.

“It seems to me the councilman is using language meant to inflame and take away from the real issue at hand,” she said. “You can point out that the African-American community feels mistreated in many areas, but to use them to make your point, I don’t think it’s fair. It’s confusing the issue by bringing up racial epithets.”

This article originally appeared in The Philadelphia Tribune.

Eric Mark

Posts by Eric Mark

Up Next

Lawmakers Announce Creation of Environmental Justice Caucus

Don't Miss

Racist Incidents Prompt Airbnb Partnership with NAACP to Help Blacks Cash In

Eric Mark

Click to comment

Community

Four Candidates, Including Incumbent Barbara Lee, Qualify for Oakland Mayor’s Race

POST NEWS GROUP — Four candidates, including incumbent Mayor Barbara Lee, filed their papers to run for office by last Friday’s deadline, and the City Clerk issued a list this week of those who are qualified to run.

Published

8 minutes ago

August 15, 2026

bpusa-syndication

View of downtown Oakland, California and City Hall. iStock photo.

By Post Staff

The four mayoral candidates who will appear on the Nov. 3 ballot are:

Brenda Grisham. A business owner in East Oakland and public safety advocate, Grisham led the successful recall campaign against Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price. As part of her platform, she pledges to work with local, state, and federal partners to secure stricter gun control measures and investments in community violence intervention programs.

Barbara Lee. A former congressional representative and state Assembly member, Lee was elected by voters in a special election last year for a two-year term. Now running for a four-year term, she points out that her administration achieved major successes in addressing some of the city’s major challenges, including balancing the city budget, dramatically reducing crime, and making significant inroads into homelessness and illegal dumping.

Mindy Pechenuk. An educator and activist, Pechenuk is a registered Republican and supporter of Lyndon LaRouche, who has been described by observers as a conspiracy theorist and cult leader. She ran unsuccessfully for mayor in last year’s special election and for the at-large council seat in 2024. She seeks to end Oakland’s police commission and MACRO and invest in more police while launching a new local war on drugs.

Julius Robinson. While little information is available so far about Robinson, he was quoted in a KTVU story about Thao’s recall, stating that people in Oakland want to come together as a community but lack infrastructure and leadership.

bpusa-syndication

Posts by bpusa-syndication

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of August 12 – 18, 2026

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of August 12 – 18, 2026

Published

3 hours ago

August 15, 2026

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Commentary

COMMENTARY: Why Local School Tax Measure G1 Will Not Be on the November Ballot

POST NEWS GROUP — Measure G1 is the local tax measure that supports middle school teacher retention and the expansion of arts, music, and world language programs at both OUSD middle schools and charter middle schools. The current measure expires in 2029.

Published

3 hours ago

August 15, 2026

bpusa-syndication

By Jennifer Brouhard, Oakland School Board President

There has been considerable speculation recently about why Measure G1 will not appear on the November ballot and what that means for the Oakland Unified School District’s current budget.

I want to provide some clarity about what happened and, importantly, what did not happen.

Measure G1 is the local tax measure that supports middle school teacher retention and the expansion of arts, music, and world language programs at both OUSD middle schools and charter middle schools. The current measure expires in 2029.

Because these funds are important to our schools and to the continuity of these programs, the district initially intended to place a renewal initiative on the November ballot to provide greater early certainty about funding beyond the expiration of the current measure.

As part of that process, the Board scheduled a special meeting for the required public hearing on the ballot initiative. There has been some suggestion that this meeting was noticed only one day in advance. That is not accurate.

Public hearings of this nature are subject to specific notice requirements, and the meeting must be noticed at least two weeks before the hearing. In practice, the notice may appear even earlier depending on publication schedules. The notice for the Measure G1 public hearing was published in the Tribune on 7/24/2026 and 7/31/2026.

So, why wasn’t the Measure G1 paperwork ultimately filed?

After the Board approved placing the measure on the ballot, the next step required the Alameda County Superintendent of Schools to sign the necessary paperwork before it could be submitted to the Oakland City Clerk.

During that process, Alameda County Superintendent Alysse Castro raised concerns about potential litigation stemming from another court case unrelated to OUSD and about whether proceeding with the measure could expose the district or County to legal challenges. Superintendent Castro’s action is unprecedented and concerning.

It is important to distinguish between the Board’s decision to pursue Measure G1 and the subsequent procedural and legal issues that arose. The Board did approve moving forward with the measure. The measure did not fail because the Board chose not to support it, nor was the public hearing improperly noticed.

The decision not to proceed with the November ballot was made in light of the County’s concerns about potential litigation and the County’s required approval process.

We also need to be clear about what this does, and does not, mean for OUSD’s current budget. The existing Measure G1 funds remain available through the expiration of the current measure in 2029. The immediate issue is the longer-term continuity of funding beyond that date, not the elimination of these resources from the current year’s budget.

Our responsibility as a Board is to protect the educational programs and services our students depend on while ensuring that our decisions comply with the law and protect the district from unnecessary legal and financial risk.

We will continue working to understand the County’s concerns, explore our options, and advocate for the resources our students deserve. Our middle school students, teachers, and school communities deserve stability, and continued investment in arts, music, world languages, and teacher retention—and that work remains a priority for Oakland Unified.

Jennifer Brouhard is a retired OUSD educator and is the current OUSD School Board President representing District 2.