Happy 4th of July— Let’s talk about the Second Amendment.

I’m not a huge fan of how open gun laws are. They are pretty lax in Pennsylvania, but localities don’t get to change any rules. I’ve used firearms, and had a good bit of practice growing up, so I want to be clear that I don’t speak from no experience or exposure. I do find myself to be a good shot when I take one, so here’s one into policy that I don’t think anyone was expecting, but I think has value.

After my mom’s town of Lewiston, Maine became the site of one of the worst mass shootings in 2023, I was afraid for her community and devastated. The shooting was so insane, some people thought it was a coordinated attack by multiple shooters, not one man like it was. I know how urgent it is that guns stay out of the wrong hands. But in Pennsylvania, the law is clear: under both the Constitution and Act 6120 of the PA Crimes Code, local governments cannot enact their own gun control laws. Not even under Home Rule; the law is CLEAR HERE.

So, what can we do?

Well, this thinking comes from some thoughts after a summer Uber driving in Philly. THAT WAS A WILD SUMMER, but anyway, I had four people, all black women, if you need to know—and two coming from gun trainings—tell me the same thing. Basically, they told me how important it was to them that they stay strapped in Philadelphia, and clearly they were also taking the steps to be prepared to use them responsibly. It was eye opening to have these conversations. I sometimes love Uber driving for this exact reason.

Anyway, the Second Amendment says:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”

I support our residents’ Second Amendment rights—the Black Panther Party did, they exercised their rights in efforts to monitor police brutality in their communities and demonstrated at the California Capitol. They were well educated, and well prepared on the law. The Mulford Act was put into law in 1967 in California as a response to their actions, and was supported by Ronald Reagan, AND the National Rifle Association. This is critical to understand. This gun control law was a response to legal Black action. There is a perception issue with gun ownership, and I’m not sure when we will get more serious about common sense reform, despite repeated real traumas, as opposed to a demonstration of rights.

So, while I know it is the opinion of many people to prevent guns from being in the community, we can’t. I’m not advocating lawlessness in these next statements—I’m advocating education and empowerment. I am advocating for people to understand responsible gun ownership, since neither the Mayor, nor Council, can enact gun control or reform via the law. We can’t just wait until something happens to discuss gun violence, as it normally goes; we need to try what we can.

Here’s what we can do—equip our community with knowledge. That’s why, as Mayor, I will direct and work with our police department to create programs which:

• Offer gun safety, shooting practice, and gun maintenance for City residents;

• Educate residents on safe storage, proper emergency preparation, and the laws on open vs. concealed carry;

• Ensure residents understand their Federal and Pennsylvania constitutional rights—and their legal responsibilities—as firearm owners;

• Understand who can, and cannot, own a firearm—and what circumstances may make gun ownership complicated for a household;

• Understand the impacts of traveling with firearms, since not everywhere has the same rules.

These programs would be optional, not mandated. I would look at ways we can promote and encourage them for residents, because I think in addition to a Community Police Review Board which I’ve drafted legislation for, it helps add ways our residents and police can have interface and build trust with them. It helps create that two-way street of trust that police ask for. These programs could save lives, and I believe that our police would also feel more comfortable knowing they have educated people on this issue, as opposed to being completely disconnected.

I don’t love guns. Frankly, I hate loud bangs, including fireworks—but I’ve handled guns responsibly. As an Eagle Scout, I learned to shoot through the scouting programs I was a part of growing up. One time, I almost didn’t get the rifle merit badge because they thought I only hit the target twice with five rounds; you need five shots touched by a quarter. Turns out, I shot four bullets into, essentially, the same hole—a square-shaped tear that didn’t register at first because they thought I just was just that bad and missed the paper three times entirely. I hope to see Scouting come back with more fervor in our community, because I see it’s value not only on this issue, but the broader understandings of being a good citizen and prepared adult, especially now that it is not exclusive to boys, but rather all of our youth.

Look, again, we can’t legislate gun bans or controls on the local level. I feel we fail to have common sense gun reform here, and nationally, but that action is up to the State and Federal Legislatures. But local governments like ours are not powerless with the will to do better with what we can. We can be smart, practical, and proactive. I want Lancaster to be a strong, informed community—a place where gun owners are trained, and where no child finds a weapon loosely stored in a drawer.

And let’s be real: the Establishment talks about “waiting on the State” for rent control—but there’s no preemption there. Much like Earned Income Tax exemptions, I have a feeling we can expect some non-sense and flipping narrative like possibly about how we didn’t ask for rent control in the charter, so now we can’t do it. If that becomes the case, then fine, I’ll demand a rent control referendum. That’s not a change to government structure; that’s amending the charter, which we are allowed to do. We can act on rent control if we choose to fight, but I hope residents will not let the Establishment start to confuse them; I know it can be hard when communities like ours have been increasingly conditioned to trust Democrats blindly, even though our local leadership acts like a somewhat watered-down version of Washington, just with different proclivities on issues. They act like poor-little-babies as soon as the going gets tough and start pointing fingers up, up, and away—while punching and pushing down. Anyway… I’m the tough-get-going-type.

Unlike rent control, on guns, we can’t make our own laws—but we can demand accountability and respect for life through more education. Under the Peoples’ Administration, we will champion both police reform and public safety. We’re going to build trust, educate our people, and protect what matters most—each other.

Have a good day. Don’t drink and drive. Call for a ride. This day isn’t considered a day of freedom for all, and the fight for true freedom continues. Some days, I think we need the United States of America’s first Article V convention, but I don’t think we are prepared, yet.

Deliberate Silence at City Council Committee: What Happened on July 1

On July 1, I stormed out of City Hall, enraged. What happened at the Lancaster City Council Committee meeting wasn’t, an oversight. It was intentional.

At that committee meeting, every single agenda item allowed for public comment—except three:

1. A presentation on Earned Income Tax (EIT) exemptions,

2. A resolution for a grant application for the Eastbound Connector,

3. And a symbolic resolution declaring July as Parks & Recreation Month.

All three were blocked from public comment. The first was under Councilor Jaime Arroyo’s committee, and the second and third were introduced by Councilor John Hursh, and I find it relevant that he also serves as the campaign treasurer for Jaime Arroyo.

When Councilor Janet Diaz asked about public comment—because public comment had been offered on every previous item—Councilor Arroyo shut it down, stating:

“There’s no action being taken on this, so since it’s just a report from Council, there will be no public comment.”

Okay, fine. I think it’s insane and undemocratic that he wouldn’t allow public comment on items that effect financial decision making, something of great concern when charter drafting, but I at least expected consistency through the meeting for action items then. I was upset enough I had to step out, but I was prepared to let it go… I’ve been through this kind of rodeo many times before.

However, later on, Councilor Hursh denied comment on his own action items, offering this for the inconsistency in the meeting:

“I exercised discretion and did not feel it merited public comment at this moment. As a reminder, committee public comment is not a requirement. That’s all I really have to say on that.”

Let’s be clear: It’s a tactic… But there are no ethics concerns in Lancaster City, or so the story goes. This man has never cared about process, and that’s why he was content to use any avenue to secure power in his election two years ago after being urged to run despite missing endorsement deadline… I had such foolish faith in John Hursh that I actually canvassed for him, and I know he was being liberal with the party rules in ways by leveraging resources meant for endorsed candidates, under the guise of promoting the endorsed candidates. His marketing just happened to be included as he went around. I’m not anexpert on the Democratic Party’s bylaws and rules, but if anyone else did this, it would seem to me to be a violation. He also used Neighbors United on his marketing material at times, saying you could see him there, and never actually showed up for any real meetings, just one holiday party, as far as I can remember. I let it slide and never made a remark as the President, but not anymore. He is happy to use whatever he can for his political future and is willing to preemptively silence members of the public on, frankly, somewhat minor items because he, like many other Establishment Democrats, is worried about his political future first and foremost and afraid of public criticisms like. “Where are the benches, John? Did you forget the simplicity and compassion in putting chairs out for our transportation infrastructure? Why are you afraid of the good trouble now? Have you gained the world, and lost your soul? It certainly appears that way to me, especially from where I sat last night.” Just as an example of what someone might say…

Tene Darby was wronged by the Establishment. They used John Hursh to shut her out. but the Establishment wants to paint her as this uppity person who has no cause for being upset. Folks, people disengaged from the Democratic Party over this, and yet they keep saying they want to build bridges with the Southeast Residents? Bet that kind of electoral strategy really helps turn out when you need it.

Anyway, enough about how John Hursh irreparably damaged the Democratic Party’s relationship with core voting blocks the year before Trump was re-elected and Pennsylvania was, and remains, a critical swing state... The EIT presentation from last night matters most of all. It touched on Lancaster raising the Earned Income Tax exemption above the state’s $12,000 floor. A floor we were told—repeatedly—during the Home Rule Study Commission meetings and presentations that we could. That guidance came from the mayor, the consultants, and even the City Solicitor, who served both the Commission and the City simultaneously. They certainly didn’t stop me from making sure we repeated this to build confidence. Now, without explanation, the solicitor’s legal position appears to have shifted—and residents weren’t even allowed to ask why. Don’t worry, we can await some remark about how he never said this or that, but that’s just the thing, he never refuted this repeated statement that was being used to persuade the voters on Home Rule. We need a new solicitor.

Last night should have been about moving forward progress for the poor and working class people of this City. Instead, Councilors used the presentation as a stage to walk back their support.

Councilor Arroyo called the projected fiscal impact “startling,” emphasizing how it might cost more to administer refunds than the exemption would return to residents. He concluded that other allocations sounded “a lot more appealing” to him. Here’s the thing though, they never broke down where the refunds stopped and administration began. That’s the real cost. He’s clearly afraid to have tough conversations about taxation equity.

Councilor Hursh described the exemption as “a lot of a headache for not necessarily a lot of return,” and said he had “grown a little colder to the idea” after hearing the logistics. That’s some nonsense that translates to me as, “I’ll only do it if I’m scared about my election chances in two years.”

Council President Amanda Bakay echoed their concerns, saying “we can make a better investment for our lowest income residents.” The amount of potential benefit to the individual—$142 a year for someone earning $11,999—was framed as barely worth the discussion. I’ve heard of people evicted over less than that on rent. Every dollar counts to people just trying to make ends meet.

But here’s the way I see it: they’re not trying to solve the problems of our poorest and hardest working residents. They’re just trying to get credit for having “considered” it. It is a sham; it is a show, of the fecal variety.

They are using these talking points—about administrative complexity and partial refunds—as excuses to delay action indefinitely. They’re treating an income tax exemption of up to $12,000 as if it were the upper bound of compassion, when in reality, $12,000 should be the starting point; with Home Rule I expected more than this by people who claim to care about equity. They never investigated this under the Third Class City Code, even after it became clear during the Home Rule process that they had the power to do so. That’s not caution—it’s negligence, dressed up in politeness and being “responsible stewards.”

They’ll clean up the river, and sell you down the Conestoga.

Councilor Diaz’s second question about public comment forced the contradiction into the open with Hursh’s remarks. But public comment should never depend on one council member’s questioning. It should be protected by policy. The right for the public to give their elected officials a piece of their mind at any public meeting should be expected.

This isn’t just about three agenda items. It’s about whether our local democracy is functioning or performative. If councilors can selectively silence the public—especially on matters of budget and equity—then we are no longer participants. We are literally reduced to spectators.

So here’s what must happen. Here’s what I think you should ask them for:

1. Demand the Earned Income Tax presentation must be brought back before full City Council.

2. Public comment to be formally allowed on its content, and take questions in writing as well as if it were a budget presentation.

3. Council to adopt a written policy requiring public comment on all items at committee meetings—just as it already does at full Council meetings.

4. If Councilors Arroyo or Hursh practice this continued avoidance, show any resistance, dismissiveness, or lack of remorse— demand their immediate resignation.

5. I’m tempted to give Bakay a one-time pass as far as it goes on resigning, but only because she didn’t explicitly bar comment herself. I do think she should step down as Council President unless she corrects these most grievous errors.

Public comment at any public meeting should not be a courtesy. It’s should not be discretionary based off who is in the room. I see it as nothing less than a civil right.

If you're only willing to hear praise in private but refuse criticism in public, then you're not practicing accountability — you're performing control.

The people of Lancaster deserve better than silence and avoidance from their government. They deserve transparency, participation, and a government that listens when it matters most — in public, on the record, and without delay.

I’ve never been more disappointed in City Government and elected leadership. What would Thaddeus Stevens do? Maybe something with his club foot, metaphorically speaking, but more likely… he would not remain silent.

Give them a piece of your mind.

Tony Dastra

_____

Here are some potentially helpful links to advocate for progress:

YOU CAN CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE MEETING FOR YOURSELF

YOU CAN CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON JULY 8TH AT 6:30 PM

YOU CAN CLICK HERE TO SEND AN EMAIL TO THE ENTIRE COUNCIL (It will load a pre-drafted email for your ease)

YOU CAN CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO VOTE FOR THE NOVEMBER 4TH, 2025 ELECTION

YOU CAN CLICK HERE TO SUPPORT TONY DASTRA’S CAMPAIGN

Tony Dastra Announces Intent to Multi-File for City Races

Some people will view this as some sort of concession.

It is anything but a concession. I’m just turning up the heat.

When I was 18 and at Temple University, I was given life-changing news: my great-grandmother had been diagnosed with lymphoma. It didn’t take me long to decide—I dropped out of college. She wasn’t happy about it, but I knew I could go back to school. I couldn’t regain the time I would have lost with her.

At Lancaster Pride, someone—who should honestly be a Green Party member—asked me where I get the drive. Where all of this comes from. Writing this now, I think this is the real answer. I’ve always understood the value of time. And I’ve never let my age hold me back, because I have no guarantee of tomorrow. None of us do.

Grin, as my family called her—or Billie, as many in the community knew her—was one of the most influential people in my life. Every concert, every competition, every everything… Grin was there. She was my most ardent advocate. And when it came time to pass things on, she didn’t leave her earthly possessions to the generations before me. She gave her great-grandchildren the chance to survive in this economy. She gave us property. Stability. A fighting chance to thrive in this nation of growing economic disparity.

Before she passed, I had already started attending City Council meetings. I remember telling her I was going to run for Council.

But I never did that.

After the 2016 election, I was angry—furious at the failures of our political system from the very top, to the very bottom. So I aimed higher. I ran for Mayor. I was on a mission. I had big ideas and I was gonna bring them to you live from City Hall. I had things to say, and I knew other people did, too.

But that unfulfilled promise to her still sits with me.

City Council matters. But I saw a system so flawed, so deeply broken, that I refused to be gentle with it. I wanted to break it down and rebuild it from the ground up—just like my great-grandfather could do with any machine—starting with civic participation and radical government transparency.

And I still have things to say. Maybe more than ever before. I still have big ideas—so big that they exist beyond the comprehension of establishment politics. I only mention some, like a municipal stable coin, as little blips because I want you to know I have some things on my radar. Like the cost of card transactions that, not only get passed off onto our residents and businesses, but the complacency from elected leaders on these “minor” issues that let money escape our local economy.

I’m not blind to the need to flesh out ideas more and determine cost of implementation, but those 3% credit card fees add up for small businesses. I know that’s capture available right there that we can keep from the tech and financial giants; money that the establishment is more than happy to let slide. Those few dollars and cents tacked onto paying our utility bills online add up, especially for working families. I see you, because I am you. We are the working class.

Grin, I’m going to make good on the promise I made to you, but with a Tony Twist.

I’m running for City Council this year, in conjunction with my run for Mayor.

Not because council is my end goal, but because I told you I would run for council.

To be clear, under the City of Lancaster’s Home Rule Charter, I’m fully permitted to appear on the ballot for both Mayor and City Council; voters may vote for me for both positions. While it would not be legal to serve in both offices at the same time, there is no prohibition on running for both. A victory in both races would trigger a vacancy—an opportunity to open the door to another independent, progressive voice to step in. The Peoples’ Administration requires a Peoples’ Council.

Outside of this statement, I don’t plan to market my Council run, except on those debate stages I’ll have access to. I just want the public to know—I’m taking on the entire City Democratic Party Establishment. By running for both Mayor and Council, I’m ensuring our ideas get heard in both races, LOUDLY. I’m making room for more voices and a wider vision. We don’t need more consensus-building around mediocrity—we need momentum for change.

I was deeply disappointed by the lack of knowledge—and the timidness—of Council candidates at the Bethel AME forum when rent control came up. I’m ashamed that I live in a City where two sitting members of an all-Democratic City Council claim to support a police review board, and yet… there’s still no motion. Still no second. Seemingly no conversation once we all leave the room and primary voting tables. They just say enough to placate us. That’s poor leadership, and how we end up in these messes.

I guess it’s party before people for the Democratic Establishment. They have yet to show us why it isn’t. It’s a vicious and painful cycle that we need to break, now.

Not next time. Now. We demand change, now.

My great-grandmother once received the Key to the City from Mayor Art Morris. So maybe she didn’t just leave me property. Maybe she left me something more.

I have inherited the Key to the City.

And I intend to unlock the doors of this government to everyone.

I don’t need luck. I need you voting Double Dastra on November 4th, 2025.

Add Election Day to your calendar and make sure you’re registered to vote; the deadline is October 20th.

Use this link to register or update your information online: https://www.pavoterservices.pa.gov/Pages/VoterRegistrationApplication.aspx

Together we can,

Tony Dastra

Dismantling the Glass Closet

For as long as I can remember—since I was about four years old—I knew I was different. I didn’t just look up to my mom; I wanted to be her. Not in the abstract “she’s strong” way. I mean literally. When no one was looking, I’d sneak into her closet and imagine myself growing up to be like her in a more literal way.

(Mom, if you’re reading, this is why your knee-high boots with that 3-4 inch heel might have disappeared and reappeared from time to time. I think I was pretty slick about it though.)

As a kid, I didn’t dwell on it. I didn’t have the words or understanding of what gender dysphoria is. And the older I got, the more it felt like something I wasn’t supposed to explore. I was atheist for most of high school because my youth group leader at church once said “because it’s Adam and Eve and not Adam and Steve,” after I asked what the problem was with being gay. It was an insufficient and unsatisfactory response to casting people out of the Catholic Church.

——————

The more I thought about it. Transitioning? That was taboo. Scary even. Maybe expensive. Potentially dangerous if I didn’t maintain consistent medical care. Definitely isolating. I would have been kicked out of what if finally now just Scouting, not Boy Scouting. So I shelved the thought—packed it away with the rest of the things we pretend not to notice. It just was something I chose to avoid for a time.

The first time I recall that told anyone I wanted to be a woman was years later, when I went to walk for my first diploma in Tempe, Arizona. I told my mom. We didn’t talk about it much. Maybe she already knew, and there really isn’t a lot to say. After all, she’s the same person who burst out laughing when, as a frustrated little kid mad at my brother, I once said, “At least my brother isn’t gay!”

What a comeback. I was so smart.

Anyway, “gay” definitely a fitting label for me. At one point, I briefly described myself as Agender Demisexual—though truthfully, I’ve never liked labels much. I don’t think the full range of human identity fits on a census form or a drop-down menu. I think it’s reasonable to say I’m “Queer,” but that’s about it.

For most of my life, I’ve lived in what I call the glass closet. You can see in. I can see out… I’ve never had much interest in making a public declaration, otherwise I would have in 2017 to score some point. I wasn’t putting a lot of work into hiding—but I wasn’t advertising either. This may be all I ever explicitly say. I can’t really say for sure right now, but I know once I publish this it is out there.

I registered for the Race Against Racism this year, and without thinking much about it, I marked my gender: Non-Binary. I forgot I was in an actual competitive race and those points of data matter and are public.

That was the moment the closet started to crack. I accidentally outed myself, and I definitely had raised some questions, although I think the fact there wasn’t an onslaught of them speaks to my “Glass Closet” metaphor. The rise of signing emails and stating pronouns was and is very difficult for me, so I typically haven’t done so unless I feel a lot of pressure to put ones down. Government forms, I just find it easier to maintain the “M.”

I’m not here to perform an identity for anyone’s comfort. I’m not here to plead for belonging. I’m not afraid of losing approval—from institutions, strangers, or even God themself.

Galatians 3:28 — “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

That verse is how I know: I don’t need God permission to exist. I AM.

——————

My favorite anime character had always been Emporio Ivankov—a fearless, genderfluid figure who lives joyfully outside and between the binary, and helps others become their truest selves. Ivankov gets to make it as if someone was always like they make them, with no taboo as long as you don’t let anyone know you had once been different.

In my early 20s, sometime shortly after the Mayoral election, I resolved the decision not to medically transition and become comfortable in this body as it grows naturally. That decision was incredibly difficult, and I made it alone. But it was mine. And now, years later, I’m still at peace with my choice. I’m comfortable in my body and, most days, I feel free. And for the first time, I am consciously choosing for that freedom to be visible—not just to me, but to others who might be quietly navigating the same journey. I see you.

In my city, I don’t care who you are, who you’ve been, or who you’re becoming. I care that you feel safe enough to be. I will die on the hill that is Lancaster City to see to it that you feel safe here.

So, I’m dismantling this glass closet.

I’ll repurpose the panes for windows in the housing we need to build.

——————

And to all my Municipal Monsters out there:

We’re gonna build a city that works for everyone—and it’s gonna be FABULOUS.

Please help me slay this election.

It’s Time for Lancaster’s New Era

When I was younger, I visited the historic site where George Washington’s chair still sits — the one with the half-sun carved into its back. I learned the story of how Benjamin Franklin looked at that chair during the Constitutional Convention and wondered whether the sun was rising or setting. In the end, he decided it was a rising sun — a symbol of hope for a new nation.

But now, as I reflect on that chair and this country, I know the sun cannot rise forever.

I believe we’ve already passed sunset. That doesn’t mean the nation is over. It means we are in the night.

And in the night, we get to work.

This is not a time to mourn the day that’s passed — it is a time to build toward a new dawn. Not with the same assumptions, not with blind optimism, but with the grit and vision to work through the darkness. Because if there is to be another morning in America, it will be made by those who stayed up through the night to make it so. Third shift employees often don’t get the credit they deserve for keeping the country running, but we need them.

I can’t promise a new day for America. I can’t even promise that the sun will rise tomorrow on Lancaster…

But the sun does rise in the East.

And the People’s Administration will work — every day and every night — to ring in Lancaster’s New Era.

We are working through the night; working to Build a City That Works for Everyone.

Let’s Tax Games of Skill — Right Here, Right Now

I’ve spoken with leaders across Pennsylvania about an issue nearly every community is dealing with: PA Games of Skill machines.

Some communities that already have a Business Privilege Tax use that tool to collect revenue from these devices. But others, including ours, do not—and under state law, can’t adopt one now.

That leaves us with one clear path: the Amusement Tax, authorized under Pennsylvania’s Local Tax Enabling Act.

Oh yeah… some City leaders talked a big game during the Home Rule Study Commission process about identifying new revenue sources, but I’m here to actually deliver on that.

We can act through the Amusement Tax to ensure that these devices—which may be legal “Games of Skill” on paper, but are often played no differently than slot machines—are not operating here without contributing a single cent to public benefit. An actual slot machine would at least have to pay gambling taxes.

I’ve spoken directly with a lobbyist for the industry—one who claims these machines should be taxed and legitimized. Yet, when I asked about municipal regulation and taxation, they threatened me with a lawsuit unless I was going to also tax jukeboxes, billiards games, baseball games… Everything. That communicates to me that they like this long and drawn out process and slow action from Harrisburg. It’s a stall tactic to keep our communities’ dollars in their pockets and not reinvested where they extract these dollars from.

By taxing these machines now on the municipal level, we can:

• Legitimize the devices the way lobbyists claim they want;

• Help crack down on illegal gambling by requiring proper licensing and compliance;

• Put revenue back into the community, instead of watching it leave through unregulated channels.

We don’t need to wait. Even though some state legislators claim they’re working on a solution, progress has been slow. We can act now—and we should.

That’s why I’m introducing a draft ordinance to tax Games of Skill through the Amusement Tax. We can’t afford to let this opportunity slip by while we wait for Harrisburg. We can lead by example—starting here, starting now.

Let’s get this done and use these dollars to invest in public housing, not private equity handouts. We are going to Build A City That Works for Everyone.

The Rent is Too Damn High

Is that too old of a reference? I remember when it was a YouTube song hit from Shmoyoho. Anyway, it doesn’t seem so funny anymore. I do believe it is getting worse for renters and that the more we allow corporate interests to have domination over housing investments, the worse it will become. It’s time to get hands on about this.

“The government doesn’t build housing.” Yeah, because no one has the guts to do it. They are too afraid to fail, and despite how often you’ll hear the word “management” this year, most would rather pay a contractor for projects and avoid responsibility, which comes at a high cost. However, governments are afforded certain privileges such as the ability to sell bonds. Someone with vision could lead the development of the projects they will fund, and even land acquisition. Speaking of land acquisition, while a mutually agreeable sale is preferred because it allows for more options, eminent domain is an option for affordable and low income housing projects.

See here’s the deal folks; let’s cut the malarkey. The government always has the power to build housing, it chooses not to. I don’t care what anyone tells me. I can be a homeowner, but at the end of the day my property taxes remind me I’m basically paying rent. So, if whomever is on the next council agrees with me, and you can make sure they do even if it takes a write-in campaign, here’s what a Dastra Administration is going to do:

1) We will open a bond program for first dibs to City-residents to invest in—preferably down to increments of $100 so it is accessible to the masses—because while bonds are debt service, we can make sure that service is to local residents, not big banks. Then we will open it to the surrounding Lancaster Inter-Municipal Committee (LIMC) communities, if necessary, and then maybe the County residents, but this is not for envisioned for businesses. This is me saying, “Put your money where your mouth is, you’ll get a guaranteed return, and in a best case scenario our projects can offset tax increases to pay for the bond payments to residents. You as the investor cannot lose, and this is development our community wants.”

If the conditions of certain developments are right, the City could engage in housing development without concern for affordability. While we need affordable housing, we need to be mindful we are playing their game and we’re playing so our residents win. That means when we get the financial return, it pays the residents who invested in the bonds for the first decade, and after that, it can be invested in more housing—it all stays local. It doesn’t go to faceless entities who just want to make money from the need to be housed. With this we can systematically invest in the growth of our community—FOR DECADES—and make it so that our existing residents can directly benefit long-term from this investment in development.

2) We are going to start requiring rent disclosures with rental permits of the maximum rent they will charge for the life of that permit, which currently varies but is less than 5 years. This will build a database of rents, and as valued we can make sure to have information like unit type as it will be marketed and leased. This data will then later be used to determine whether significant rent increases are justified and make sure a tenant doesn’t get gouged.

3) We will enact our own version of the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act so that as residential developments might change hands, it allows the residents to form a collective ownership, and keep our value local. A single family house is not the only way to own a piece of Lancaster—we must diversify these options to build community equity.

4) We will enact some form of rent control. I recognize rent control in its purest form is not workable—especially in turbulent markets—but people deserve some assurance. We need rent control that allows for reasonable inflationary and market increases, accounting for depreciation, and making it illegal for a landlord to just evict someone just to increase rent unreasonably. Large rent increases should accompany reasonable investment, in my opinion. If I’m Mayor, the City is getting hands on about this—as long as the Democratic Council lets me.

If the federal government is as bad as we report it to be, then there’s not going to be many more grants. If this nation is truly going into oligarchy, then we have to quickly advance an agenda that opens the doors of prosperity to the middle class. If the housing is really in crisis, then you better believe I’m going to declare a state of emergency on day one to permit the swift passage and effectiveness of the bills we will draft. If we can’t count of the federal government, and even the State if things get worse, then we can only count on ourselves.

People ask me why I am running for Mayor and not Council, especially because I’d probably win a seat on Council. The reason is because we desperately need someone at the helm with the will for these big visions, and I have the full intention on seeing them through as long so long as they remain necessary. I don’t plan on being a one-term Mayor, at least not of my own choice.

Anyway, get yourself a Mayor who doesn’t keep the security deposit. Some of you candidates and officials say “crisis,” but you don’t act like it. Where’s the urgency? We’ve been having this conversation since at least the 1993 Comprehensive Plan.

I recognize this is a massive shift from the norm around here, but as the kids say, I’m ten toes in when I’m standing on business. I refuse to allow the City to kick this can down the road any longer and act helpless. I want a Strong Town.

-Tony Dastra

Speak Up: Don’t Privatize Public Property Sales

If we want to change how we sell public land, if we want to expedite Council’s ability to take part in private sale, let’s start with a community conversation—not a vote. Just like we did with Short-Term Rental legislation.

Tonight, at 6:30PM, 120 N Duke St, Lancaster City Council will vote on Administrative Bill No. 03-2025—a proposal that would change how the City sells public property, allowing future sales to happen through private real estate brokers instead of public bidding or auction.

I believe Council should either table or reject this bill. If we’re going to expand the City’s power to sell public land outside of traditional channels, that decision deserves a broader conversation—with you. Not just a resolution for each sale, but a public process rooted in transparency and community trust.

I’ve already made my position clear on this bill. I believe that when we sell public land, the process should stay as public as possible. The current system might not be perfect, but it keeps things out in the open. It forces elected officials to make the case in daylight, not behind closed doors. Projects not getting good bids like the Station Six sale have stirred up frustration within the administration—but rather than improving community engagement and updating the Zoning Code to get better projects, they’ve gone right to giving up on public process. This bill allows the government to sidestep it almost entirely; the interface is minimal. It privatizes public property sale, and maybe the assistance of realtor could be useful, but not without caution.

I have a prior commitment tonight and may not be able to get there before the vote. And honestly? That’s okay. Because this isn’t about me.

What Council needs to hear—loudly and clearly—is how you feel about this shift in power and process. If you believe the public should have a stronger voice in decisions about public land, then tonight is your night to show up and speak.

It’s your city. Your neighborhoods. Your future. And your voice carries more weight than you know.

Thank you for your attention,

Tony Dastra

P.S. I’ll try to arrive as soon as I can. Thanks for understanding.

A Fire That Builds: Easter Reflections from the City of Gold

To the People of the City of Lancaster,

You may not celebrate Easter, but I just experienced my first Holy Week with Bethel AME, and I want to share something with you.

One of the most misunderstood and misused books of the Bible, is also one of my favorites: the Book of Jeremiah. In it, I find words that resonate deeply with my calling, my doubts, and my mission. I return often to this passage, Jeremiah 1:5-10, The Call of Jeremiah:

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”

“Alas, Sovereign Lord,” I said, “I do not know how to speak; I am too young.” But the Lord said to me, “Do not say, ‘I am too young.’

You must go to everyone I send you to and say whatever I command you.

Do not be afraid of them, for I am with you and will rescue you,” declares the Lord.

Then the Lord reached out his hand and touched my mouth and said to me, “I have put my words in your mouth. See, today I appoint you over nations and kingdoms to uproot and tear down, to destroy and overthrow, to build and to plant.”

The Lord knew me before I was formed in the womb. He knew my mother had a choice, and still, He sent me forth with fire in my lungs and purpose in my heart.

It is a holy fire, not meant to burn the city down, but to refine it. To make it clean. To challenge what needs to be torn down, and to lay the foundation for what must be built up.

I know what some say: that I’m a reactionary clown. I don’t fault them. They are united in their hatred for me, and I welcome it. It is not easy to see what’s directly beneath your feet and in your hands when you’re taught to look elsewhere. But I see it clearly; the City of Gold isn’t a legend. It’s not far away. It’s right here in Lancaster. It’s in our people, our stories, our neighborhoods. It’s in the fire we carry together.

That’s why I turn also to the Gospel of Matthew 5:14-16:

“You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden.

Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house.

In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven.”

Lancaster, we are the light of the world.

There will be no bowl covering this place. We will not cower. We will not bend the knee to fear or threats about losing federal or state funds. Our decisions will not be made under the shadow of fear, but in the light of faith—in each other, in this city, and in the work we must do.

We will show the world the strength of our community. And yes, all will bear witness to the great things we can achieve together.

Whether or not you celebrated Easter this weekend, I hope you have peace. I’m grateful to be part of your community. Thank you for being part of mine, no matter where you are from, because as Philippians 3:20 tells us, “But our [true] citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ.”

With fire and faith,

Tony Dastra, the next Mayor of Lancaster

🛑 Oppose Administrative Bill 3 — Public Land Deserves Public Input

On April 22nd, Lancaster City Council will vote on a major policy change: Administrative Bill 03-2025, which would allow the City to sell public land through licensed real estate brokers instead of through public bids or auctions.

The bill’s supporters say it gives Lancaster more flexibility. But here’s the problem: flexibility without accountability opens the door to favoritism, speculation, and gentrification.

Under this ordinance, the Mayor could recommend properties for sale, and Council could approve each deal through simple resolutions—without requiring robust public input, clear criteria, or community benefit agreements.

And here’s the kicker: A staggering 42% of City-owned land is concentrated in Southeast Lancaster, the very neighborhoods that have endured decades of disinvestment, racial segregation, and harmful land use policy. These 108 acres represent our public wealth, our chance to invest in affordable housing, green space, and long-term community good—not quick flips for short-term cash.

We mapped the data. It’s clear.

A digital copy of a flyer Tony created. The image is linked to a PDF you can download and distribute.

• The Southeast has almost half the City’s public land holdings.

• These neighborhoods need more public trust, not less.

• Selling public land behind closed doors only deepens the pain of past policy failures.

Lancaster’s new Home Rule powers should be used to empower communities, not sidestep them. Any public land sale should meet equity-based criteria, include community voice, and ensure the land is used for the public good.

That’s why I’m asking you to join me in calling on City Council to vote NO on Administrative Bill 3.

We can—and must—do better.

🗓 Mark your calendar: City Council Vote – April 22nd, 2025
📍 Attend in person or send public comment
📧 Email your Councilors and tell them: NO to Bill 3. YES to public accountability.

Here are the email addresses for the members of the Lancaster City Council:

• Amanda Bakay (President): abakay@cityoflancasterpa.gov

• (RUNNING FOR MAYOR) Jaime Arroyo (Vice President): jarroyo@cityoflancasterpa.gov

• (RUNNING FOR MAYOR) Janet Diaz: jdiaz@cityoflancasterpa.gov

• (RUNNING FOR RE-ELECTION) Ahmed Ahmed: aahmed@cityoflancasterpa.gov

• (RUNNING FOR RE-ELECTION) Lochard Calixte: lcalixte@cityoflancasterpa.gov

• Faith Craig: fcraig@cityoflancasterpa.gov

• John Hursh: jhursh@cityoflancasterpa.gov​

For general inquiries or to submit public comments, you can also contact:

• City Clerk Bernie Harris: bharris@cityoflancasterpa.gov

Let’s protect Lancaster’s future—together.

—
Tony Dastra
Candidate for Mayor of Lancaster
Neighbor. Researcher. Public Servant.

Draft Legislation to Create a Community Police Review Board

To the People of the City of Lancaster,

Maybe I am a reactionary. But if reacting to the voices of the Public and a clear desire for transparency makes me one—so be it.

After hearing from residents and the presentations from the administration, I see no reason why we shouldn't be working—right now—to improve the relationship between the community and the police. Even if that relationship exists only in an advisory capacity. Because Lancaster deserves more than closed doors and quiet nods—it deserves real dialogue.

The Community Police Review Board proposal I’ve put forward doesn’t have to be adopted word-for-word. I welcome debate, edits, and ideas. What matters is that we begin. This draft creates a foundation—a structure where the Police and the People can sit together, review use-of-force cases, and build toward transparency and public trust.

If you support this idea, I’m asking you to add your name. Let City Council know you want them to review this proposal and take action. Let them know you believe our community deserves a voice—not just when something goes wrong, but before it happens again.

Those in power who seek to continue to lead Lancaster have a chance—right now—to prove they believe in transparency, accountability, and shared civic responsibility.

📣 Help bring the Community Police Review Board to life.

✍️ Add your name. Demand action. ✍️

Public Safety works best when the Public is part of the process.

Tony Dastra Announces Candidacy for Mayor of Lancaster

A Civic-Minded Vision Rooted in Public Service and Municipal Experience

A photo of Tony Dastra wearing his iconic hat

LANCASTER, PA – Tony Dastra, a longtime civic advocate and public servant, has officially announced his candidacy for Mayor of Lancaster. With years of hands-on municipal experience and a deep connection to Lancaster’s neighborhoods, Dastra promises a new era of people-powered government rooted in transparency, accessibility, and common sense reform.

“I'm running for mayor because I believe Lancaster is ready for a civic-minded leader—someone who understands the full depth of how a municipality can operate and who puts public service before politics,” says Dastra. “My strength comes from the People of Lancaster that I’ve served, the People I’ve worked with, and the belief that we must run government like a government, not like a business.”

Dastra has applied himself in recent years as an employee at Lancaster Township, not only assisting the Public Works Department—getting hands on with Communications, MS4, Traffic Data, GIS Mapping, and Grant Writing, but Dastra has also aided the Township in assembling the first single-use plastic regulations in Central Pennsylvania. He has served on the Home Rule Study Commission and remains a member of the Planning Commission, having both helped to draft our City Charter, and Comprehensive Plan. A tireless advocate for infrastructure reform, public access to information, and municipal strength. His campaign platform emphasizes housing equity, ethical policing, environmental stewardship, and transportation.

“I’m not entering this race because I think I might be a better option,” says Dastra. “I’m running because I know I’m the most qualified person to lead Lancaster into its next chapter. I’ve walked these streets, listened to families, and worked hard to understand the municipal organism. I’ve made so much impact here in Lancaster City through sheer force of will and sacrifice. Imagine the magnification of that work when I serve the People in the city’s highest role; when that work becomes my job.”

Among Dastra’s bold policy ideas are establishing a civilian aid program to address community concerns and traffic control without over-reliance on armed policing or having staffing issues for crossing guards; evaluating the role of the Lancaster Parking Authority to determine if it would be better if reintegrated to City operations; and exploring tech-forward innovations like a municipal stable token to reduce transaction fees that leave the City and give residents an option to save with municipal bills, and potentially eliminate credit card fees generally in the City of Lancaster through broader adoption amongst the business community. 

Dastra, who is running as a Green Party Candidate, says his campaign will remain focused on elevating voices across Lancaster, especially in under-represented neighborhoods. “This isn’t about party lines—it’s about people. It’s about ensuring that the power of government always stays with the whole public. I’m asking the people of Lancaster City to lend me their power.”