Should there be "detention" for Council?

City Council is about to adopt changes to the City Charter
that will affect us all for decades to come -- if not forever.

Plainfield City Council is scheduled on Tuesday evening to take up the ordinance (MC 2018-22) enshrining the changes to the special city charter (and the code) authorized by the Legislature over the summer.

This will be the second and final reading, and includes a public hearing on the ordinance. If passed on second reading, it will take effect in twenty days.

So, to my mind, the question arises: Does the City Council need "detention"?

In the 3-room country schoolhouse of my boyhood, we got detention if it became apparent we had not done our homework.

Not only did we complete the unfinished homework during detention, we also wrote on the blackboard a sentence like "I will always complete my homework on time." As many times as the teacher felt appropriate -- the hope of a lesser number held dear by those who had been singled out. And then, to top it off, we had to clean the blackboard and erasers before we could go home.

One only had to face this punishment once to understand it was far better to set aside the time at home to get your homework done. Lesson learned.

Why do I bring this up?

At last week's agenda-setting session, Councilor Storch was the only one to step up to the plate and discuss how much of the 131-page ordinance he had read (120 pages, he said). The rest of the Council remained silent on whether they had read the document at all.

Resident Mary Burgwinkle testified that she had read it all and had quite a few questions. (Her thoughts have been posted online here and here.)

As I have noted before, I do not have any problem with expanding the number of departments, and while including the Confidential Aides in the charter is unfortunate, the provision mostly has the effect of forever after limiting the Administration in this regard.

I do have problems with the way in which this was done, with Mayor Mapp having publicly stated at Council meetings and to the Courier News that he took it upon himself to make the changes to the petition -- exceeding his authority, and giving no rationale for why he didn't convene the Council to change the petition.

Nevertheless, done is done.

What disturbs me about taking up the ordinance for final passage on Tuesday is that there is a lingering suspicion -- bolstered by the silence of everyone except Storch -- that the Councilors have not closely read the ordinance and do not even know if they are comfortable with everything in it.

All elected officials in New Jersey swear to "faithfully, impartially and justly perform all the duties of the office."

Should that include reading and understanding ordinances before one votes on them?

I certainly hope so, especially since the charter changes being enacted are likely to stand for 50 years or more -- as the last revision did.

Certainly such a responsibility demands the utmost care in its execution. It would be reassuring to hear from Councilors' own mouths that they had read and understand what they are voting on.

And if they can't demonstrate that they have a clear grasp of what they are voting on, should they face "detention" -- that is, perhaps tabling the ordinance until they can show they have read and mastered it?

After all, they must make such a declaration to the state each and every year upon the adoption of the budget.

I hope no one is going to suggest to me that the Council doesn't truthfully honor THAT pledge. That would be the height of cynicism.

City Council meets at 8:00 PM (note the time change) on Tuesday, September 11, in the Council Chambers / Courthouse, Watchung Avenue at East 4th Street.

Parking available on the street or in the lot across from Police Headquarters.

---

 -- Dan Damon [ follow ]

View today's CLIPS  here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.