Taylor asks court to overturn ‘conflict resolution’
UPPER POTTSGROVE >> Planning Commission Chairman Elwood Taylor has filed a legal appeal of the resolution which prevents township commissioners from serving on other boards.
Filed Jan. 17, Taylor’s civil action, preceded the Jan. 21 vote by the board of supervisors to advertise an ordinance to eliminate the entire planning commission and to replace it with a planning committee under its direct control.
The board of commissioners is expected to vote on that measure at the Feb. 3 meeting.
Called an “appeal from action of a local agency,” Taylor’s court filing seeks no money or damages. Rather the filing seeks to have the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas declare the resolution adopted in August by the commissioners to be unconstitutional.
“The resolution violates the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Art. VI, Section 2, which grants sole authority to the General Assembly to decide which offices are incompatible, holding certain offices incompatible,” according to the filing.
The First Class Township code “does not deem the office of township commissioner incompatible with service on the township planning commission,” wrote Joan London, a lawyer with the Wyomissing firm of Kozloff Stoudt, who is representing Taylor in the matter.
That code, she wrote, “has expressly authorized service on municipal planning commissions by members of governing bodies, by solely limiting the number of elected officials who can serve.”
“The township has not proved malfeasance, misfeasance, or nonfeasance in office, or other just cause for removal of Taylor from the planning commission,” wrote London.
“Simultaneous service on the governing body and the municipal planning commission does not constitute a ‘conflict of interest’ under the Pennsylvania State Ethics Act,” London wrote.
The issue was first raised publicly last February and again in July when a draft of the resolution was first presented. At the time, Commissioners’ Chairman Trace Slinkerd said the idea was to avoid “the appearance of conflict,” or any one official appearing to be capable of exercising “undue influence.”
“The board of commissioners believes that commissioners should only serve as commissioners and not hold additional roles within the township,” according to a prepared statement issued by Township Manager Michelle Reddick in August and written by Commissioners’ Chairman Trace Slinkerd.
“This is to maintain a separation of different spheres of influence that additional roles provide. This precludes commissioners from having to vote on an issue at a lower committee level then again at the BOC level as well,” according to the statement.
“The township did not establish that Taylor had engaged in ‘undue influence’ or ‘appearance of impropriety’ in simultaneous service on the board of commissioners and the planning commission,” London argued in the recent filing.
Taylor has maintained that the measure was targeting him directly and his dual role as a township commissioner and chairman of the planning commission.
Other commissioners were affected by the resolution as well. Former commissioner France Krazalkovich and Commissioner Renee Spaide both resigned from other boards on which they served.
Taylor resigned from the board of directors of Green Allies, which operates the Althouse Arboretum and receives money from the township, but refused to resign from the planning commission.
The board voted to remove Martin Schreiber from the township’s Civil Service Commission when he refused to resign, but state law dictates a procedure for removing planning commissioners and reasons adequate to justify removal.
On Oct. 7, the board of commissioners held a hearing, which the law allowed Taylor to request before Taylor could be removed from the planning commission.
The board never voted to take action, but the voters took action the next month when Taylor’s bid for reelection was rejected at the polls.
No longer a commissioner as of Dec. 31, Taylor is no longer in violation of the resolution. His term on the planning commission does not expire until next December.
But that does not make the matter moot, London wrote.
“This matter, including and especially the legality of Resolution No. 703, still requires a full determination,” she wrote in a footnote.
“In this case, it is not only Taylor’s right to simultaneously hold the two positions at issue, but also at stake are the rights of future township officials (including Taylor should he decide to run for commissioner in a future municipal election) to hold offices in the township in the event that township resolution No. 703 and its legality are not addressed by the court,” she argued.
Although the filing does not seek monetary damages, it will cost the township money to pay lawyers to answer the filing.
Contacted Wednesday for comment, Taylor would say only: “While I sincerely regret that public money is being spent, I believe that a very basic principle of republican government needs to be defended.”
Attempts to reach Township Solicitor Charles D. Garner Jr. Wednesday evening for comment were unsuccessful.