Lansford Borough will be paying out of its own coffers once a settlement in a federal lawsuit is finalized, its council president said Tuesday night.

Council approved a settlement proposed at an April 9 arbitration hearing in a lawsuit filed by former part-time officer Gilbert Diaz last month on a 4-3 vote. The terms or amount were not disclosed at the time but discussed in executive session.

Council President Joe Genits said that the borough did not have insurance to cover any costs related to the lawsuit.

“There was no insurance,” he said, when asked by a resident if the agreed-upon settlement would be paid by the taxpayers. “The insurance policy was not in effect at the time for various reasons.

“The taxpayer is going to pay whatever the settlement is,” Genits said.

He explained that council approved the settlement that came out of the April 9 hearing, and that the matter is now in the plaintiff’s hands. Council still needs to review and sign off once the paperwork is finalized, Genits said.

Councilwoman Michele Bartek pointed out that not all of council members approved the settlement. She was one of three no votes. Council members Bruce Markovich and Gwyneth Collevechio also voted no.

None of the dissenting council members were named in the lawsuit, in which Diaz claimed he was deprived of his due process rights when he was removed from the police schedule in April 2025.

Council had voted against holding a hearing with Diaz to allow him to present his side in August 2025.

Diaz sued the borough along with Councilmen Joseph Butrie and Jack Soberick, and former council members George Gilbert and Jennifer Staines, who voted against holding the hearing.

Also named as defendants in the suit were former Mayor Hugh Vrablic and police Sgt. Shawn Nunemacher.

Bartek also claimed that Diaz could come back as a part-time officer, and Genits said that wasn’t the case.

“All the particulars that were discussed in arbitration is done, final,” he said. “There is no room for him to come back. That was discussed in arbitration. We said that two and three times in executive session.

“Those options were taken off the table by the plaintiff, and the only option left was the amount of money that he wants to settle,” Genits said. “That’s the only option that was left available.”

As for the lack of insurance, Bartek said the borough didn’t submit paperwork in a timely manner, resulting in denial.

“I was told that the reason why the insurance company did not cover this was because paperwork was not handed in in a timely fashion by Hugh Vrablic, who was the mayor at that time,” Bartek said, “And the insurance company refused to cover it.”

Resident Erin Soberick asked why the borough would settle for a rumored $230,000.

“Maybe the borough is not at fault, so why would we go ahead and settle,” she said. “Why would we settle if the borough as a whole and an entity did nothing wrong? Why would we go ahead and pay that?”

Genits, who was not a member of council when the lawsuit was filed, said that he only sat in on the April 9 arbitration hearing to listen on behalf of council. He did not confirm the amount of the settlement.

Soberick then asked why he voted in favor of the settlement.

“Because it was the least amount of penalty that the borough is going to pay, as compared to any other conditions that were brought up within that arbitration. It was the easiest way to settle this thing,” Genits said.

The unfortunate part is why there wasn’t insurance, he said.

“There was a secondary law firm that looked into that and sent a letter in to say why the insurance coverage was not approved,” Genits said.

Soberick asked about the bill for that firm’s service, and Genits said that bill had not yet been paid.

Afterward, Genits told the Times News that the letter regarding the lack of insurance could not be released until after the lawsuit is finalized. The Times News has also requested the settlement amount from the borough.