Friday, January 02, 2004

 

Sunshine

On Dec. 9, 2003, our city council passed on first reading an ordinance that would raise garbage rates by $1.25 a month. Before council voted on the matter, however, those attending the meeting (including me) learned that coupon books with the new rate had already been ordered. Although the mayor, council and their solicitor say no decision on raising the rates had been made before the vote was taken, it seems painfully obvious that a decision was made prior to the meeting.

If no decision was made, why did they order the coupon books with the new, higher rate on them? Here’s the mayor’s story: The coupon books had to be ordered so they would be here before residents’ first payments of the new year were due. The mayor further stated that if council didn’t raise the rate, the books would have to be re-ordered with the old rate on them. She also admitted that the books could have been ordered with no rate on them and sent back to have a number put on them after the vote. But instead of ordering the books blank or with the old rate, they ordered them with the new rate. Sounding fishy yet?

The mayor and the city clerk -- who is not a voting member of city council -- were discussing this dilemna when the city clerk came up with the new rate that should be printed on the coupon books. Apparently, there was no discussion of the refuse department’s budget.or anything else for that matter. Seemingly, according to the mayor, the city clerk came up with the number off the top of his head. Council members say they were unofficially polled on the issue as they entered the city clerk’s office prior to a council meeting

Violation of The Sunshine Act? You betcha. But, following the meeting a reporter asked the city solicitor why this was not a violation. According to him, it wasn’t a violation because the informal gathering of the mayor, council members and city clerk was not a “pre-arranged” meeting. Council members are also claiming this was not a violation of The Sunshine Act, although one council member did admit council should have discussed the issue during a public work session.

Be that as it may, Section 704 of The Sunshine Act states “Official action and deliberations by a quorum of the members of an agency shall take place at a meeting open to the public ...” Deliberations in The Sunshine Act are defined as “the discussion of agency business held for the purpose of making a decision.” Agency business is defined as The framing, preparation, making or enactment of laws, policy or regulations ...” Was agency (city) business discussed? Yes. Was a decision made? Yes. The coupon books were ordered with the new rate on them. Was there a quorum? As soon as the third council member entered the office, yes, there was a quorum.

How is this not a violation of The Sunshine Act?

I’ll admit I wasn’t always the most agressive reporter at the newspaper, but I know I wouldn’t have let city officials sweep this under the rug. If I found the information on the Internet, how did the reporter covering the story not find it? She has access to the PNPA and its lawyers. Apparently, she didn’t contact anyone at the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association. If she did, she didn’t write about it.

What messages does the lack of a follow-up story deliver? If the actions were not a Sunshine Act violation, it tells city officials the reporter doesn’t care about the appearance of impropriety she left in people’s minds. She left her readers up in the air on whether what city officials did was wrong. The other message, the one that concerns me most, is that if city officials did violate the act, she’s letting them get away with it.

If city officials are going to be able to get away with this, what’s next?

posted by Anne 1/02/2004 06:12:00 AM