We’re not experts in municipal government, and we didn’t stay at a Holiday Inn Express. But if there’s something newspapers know about, it’s the Sunshine Act.
And when two editors with more than 50 years of combined experience have never heard of a “call out” vote, as was done recently in Bradford Township to facilitate the purchase of a more than $175,000 tractor, we turn to the Pennsylvania News Media Association for an opinion.
On the agenda for the Nov. 14 meeting of the Bradford Township supervisors was a measure explaining the purchase of a new tractor had been discussed during a work session on the budget. Since voting cannot be done during a work session, the supervisors asked the secretary to do a “call out” vote, where she phoned each supervisor separately to ask for their vote.
Mark Cline and Laree Sue Behan voted yes; Steve Mascho voted no.
The board then, at Monday’s meeting, made a motion to approve the call-out vote. Again, two for yes, one for no.
When we called Media Law Counsel Melissa Melewsky, after emailing her the agenda with some questions, her first question was, “What’s a call out vote?”
She said this method of voting was problematic.
“Agencies can’t avoid a quorum discussion to avoid the Sunshine Act,” she told The Era. “The problem is the call around deliberation and official action outside the public” purview.
“It’s certainly not the first time I’ve heard about this, but that doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do,” she continued. “From a public policy perspective, it shouldn’t happen.”
The Era was told by Bradford Township secretary Susan Gibiser the vote was necessary in this fashion because of a “timeline,” because the tractor dealer’s salesman was retiring and everything needed to be done before Nov. 1.
“Even if it was an emergency, they have to call an emergency meeting,” Melewsky said. “The salesman retiring is not an emergency.”
The Era asked about another item of concern that came up regarding a supervisor’s actions. Behan, who is married to township roadmaster Frank Behan, allegedly was involved in negotiating and voting on a contract involving her husband’s wages.
“This is a situation where the agency needs to reach out to the Pennsylvania Ethics Commission beforehand,” Melewsky said, “anytime you use your government office to benefit yourself, or your spouse or your immediate family.”
She acknowledged that there are thousands of legal opinions on this very matter, and some take into account how many people are included on the contract. With the matter being in question, “you should still get an Ethics Commission opinion to be sure.”
At the meeting, Cline said Behan’s vote was necessary as a tiebreaker.
“There’s no exception of the state Ethics Act for a tiebreaker vote,” Melewsky responded. “If there was a conflict of interest, what’s required is the elected official announce the conflict publicly and abstain from the vote.”
Granted, The Era didn’t specifically ask Behan about an Ethics Commission opinion, but based on her clenched-teeth responses to being questioned, if she had reached out to the commission, she would have made sure the residents and the press knew it.
Perhaps what surprised us the most was hearing throughout the community that the supervisors — Cline and Behan — were talking about banning the press from their meetings.
Melewsky was taken aback as well.
“The threat to exclude the press is patently unconstitutional,” she said, referring to the First Amendment’s Freedom of the Press — which applies in Bradford Township as well.
The Era reached out to Bradford Township’s solicitor, Christopher Byham of Warren, who doesn’t attend the monthly meetings.
He didn’t return our call.
