Thursday, January 7, 2010

A Mockery of Democracy

At the Monday night reorganization meeting of the Middletown Township Board of Supervisors, we got a glimpse of the kind of government we can expect from the Republican majority – and it wasn’t a pretty sight.

First and foremost, the decision of the Republican majority to schedule public comment at the end of the meeting is a blatant attempt to discourage residents from voicing their concerns or opinions. Combined with the fact that the start of the meeting was moved from 6:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., residents may have to wait until 10 p.m. or later to address the Board.

Local government has been referred to as the purest form of direct democracy. It presents a forum in which any resident can come before their elected officials and speak their minds. The minds of those who stick it out will probably be numb before they get the opportunity to speak.

While I would expect nothing less from Tom Gallagher or George Leonhauser – both of whom prefer working in the shadows – I must say I am quite surprised that Pat Mallon and Drew Kreiling would agree to this. I expected more.

Secondly, the Republican majority has established a meeting schedule that may be confusing to some of our residents. As best as I can figure out, meetings will be held on the first and third Monday of each month. However, this will change if a holiday falls on a Monday, which happens quite frequently. In those weeks, the meeting will be held on Tuesday instead. What was the problem, Mr. Gallagher, with simply holding them on a day that would be unlikely to change – say the first and third (or second and fourth) Tuesday?

Third, I was astounded that there was no opportunity for the public to comment on motions. Mr. Gallagher was blowing through a beautifully choreographed set of motions without asking whether other Board members or the public would like to comment until Supervisor Robert McMonagle interrupted him on the motion to appoint a solicitor. This is especially ironic since Mr. Gallagher sued the past administration because of an oversight in allowing public comment before voting on a motion, and then sought an injunction when a meeting was scheduled to redo the motion – the appropriate curative action that was ultimately upheld by a judge. If asked, I wonder if he’d recommend someone following his lead and sue the new board for this violation?

Finally, motions were being made, seconded, and voted upon, in some cases, without even minimal documentation. Mr. Gallagher called for a vote on the appointment of a solicitor when Mr. McMonagle asked if Mr. Gallagher could provide the details of the contract – i.e., what the compensation would be. The dialog happened as follows:

Mr. Gallagher: “All in favor?”
Mr. McMonagle: “Is there going to be any discussion on that vote, Mr Chairman?”
Mr. Gallagher: “Sure.”
Mr. McMonagle: “What is the rate that the solicitor is being hired at or is it just open-ended?”
Mr. Gallagher: “No, it’s actually less than what the previous administration’s solicitor was.”
Mr. McMonagle: “Well, maybe I’ll rephrase the question. What is the rate that the solicitor is being hired at?”
Mr. Gallagher: “It’s the same, uh, monthly fee and $120 an hour.”
Mr. McMonagle: “Same as what?”
Mr. Gallagher: “As what was in the past.”
Mr. McMonagle: “So it’s not less than the previous solicitor?”
Mr. Gallagher: “The hours, the dollars amount for the hourly rate is less, yes.”
Mr. McMonagle: “OK, I just wanted to be clear on that.”
Mr. Gallagher: “The previous solicitor was $125 an hour. This solicitor will be $120 an hour. Is there any other discussion?”

The next motion and second involved the appointment of a township engineer and when Mr. McMonagle asked if there was a rate that the township will be charged, Mr. Gallagher’s answer was “yes, there is and I don’t have it with me.” It is beyond my comprehension that our elected officials voted on hiring a firm without knowing the rate. That is scary and irresponsible, to say the least.

As I said, it wasn’t a pretty sight.

In closing, it was interesting to see that Mr. Gallagher was so pleased in saving the township $5 per hour in legal fees. The reality is that, with legal fees for 2010 budgeted under $150,000, this will not make much of a difference. We do hope that this focus on saving money extends to doing something about police overtime, which topped $1 million in 2008.

No comments:

Post a Comment

This blog does not allow anonymous comments.

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.