Let No Voices Be Heard

Following the reorganization meeting on January 2, 2024, I sent this correspondence to the borough secretary to have it read at the January 17 meeting. I had two points of contention regarding the reorganization: 

1 - State law requires appointments to be passed with a majority vote - either by motion or resolution. Former Council President Guy clearly states this during the reorganization in the January 2023 council meeting, noting “...they should be voted on by Council, not just read off and accepted as such.” Solicitor Wills affirms, states council should vote on their appointments at the next meeting, and then goes on to disagree with me about whether Council President Purcival has the authority to make committee assignments, despite the fact that I did not mention committee assignments in my correspondence…?

2 - The new GOP majority on borough council violated the Sunshine Act when they proceeded to vote on a series of motions during the reorganization meeting without allowing for public comment. 

Solicitor Wills spends several minutes droning on about how public participation is only required by the Sunshine Act at regular and special council meetings, of which the reorganization is neither. When asked whether a reorganization meeting qualifies as a meeting under the Sunshine Act, the PA Office Of Open Records directed me to the FAQ section of their website, which states as follows: 

The law defines a meeting as "any prearranged gathering of an agency which is attended or participated in by a quorum of the members of an agency held for the purpose of deliberating agency business or taking official action."

Note that the Sunshine Act applies any time a quorum deliberates agency business or takes official action, no matter the physical location of those deliberations or actions. The use of the term "prearranged" does not allow agencies to thwart the intent of the Sunshine Act simply by holding an unscheduled discussion about agency business.

So what is considered an “official action?” The Sunshine Act defines it as follows: 

The definition of "official action" includes four categories:

1. Recommendations made by an agency pursuant to statute, ordinance or executive order.

2. The establishment of policy by an agency.

3. The decisions on agency business made by an agency.

4. The vote taken by any agency on any motion, proposal, resolution, rule, regulation, ordinance, report or order.

Wills goes on to cite the sample agenda provided by the PA Association of Boroughs for a reorganization meeting, stating they’ve “taken the position that public participation is not required at a reorganization meeting.” Keep in mind the borough council is not governed by the PA Association of Boroughs, which is not an entity of the state, has no legal authority to dictate procedure to boroughs, and is merely a professional organization of dues paying members. Parkside Borough Council is governed by the laws of the state of Pennsylvania, including the PA Sunshine Act.

While Solicitor Wills may disagree, I would argue that as soon as borough council added official motions to the agenda to vote on spending your tax dollars, including extending office hours and paying webmaster Theo McCleary to record the council meetings, or as the Sunshine Act would put it, taking “official actions,” they became subject to the provisions of the Sunshine Act.

The Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland County agrees with me. Solicitor Wills stated in the January meeting that there was no legal precedent for enforcing Section 710.1(a) of the Sunshine Act at a reorganization meeting. On the contrary, it took me approximately five minutes to locate Mid-Mon Valley Publishing Company, LLC, d/b/a Mon Valley Independent and Tina O’Dell v. City of Monessen, a Third-Class City, and Matt Shorraw, as Mayor, No. 581 of 2020 (Westmoreland County Common Pleas Court, December 11, 2020). In this case, the court held that all actions taken at the reorganization meeting held January 6, 2020 were in violation of the Sunshine Act for literally all the same reasons I just discussed.

The purpose of the Sunshine Act is to promote transparency and public participation in government. Violations are seldom punished with any substantial repercussions, and the burden lies on constituents to file costly complaints with the Court of Common Pleas in an attempt to force their government to do the right thing. For a campaign that shouted “Let your voices be heard,” they sure are quick to seek out loopholes to shut you up.