HILLSDALE—Mayor John Ruocco wanted an explanation at the Feb. 1 Borough Council meeting why his four-page letter sent to the state’s advisory Government Records Council in November — on what documents should be made publicly available before a council meeting — has not yet been posted in the “Mayor’s Spotlight” section of the borough website.
He said the same material is available via public records request and should therefore be added to the borough website for the convenience of those interested in the discussion.
Ruocco said his Nov. 3, 2021 inquiry to the GRC, in pursuit of the public being able to see materials the council is basing agreements and contracts on, has yet to receive a response.
Over the past year, Ruocco has pressed for more transparency from the council on such issues as the Patterson Street Redevelopment Plan, the annual budget, and discussions of a proposed community center and new artificial turf field.
At times, the discussions have become acrimonious. The council started the year, in its reorganization under new president Janetta Trochimiuk, revising four of its bylaws to strip Ruocco of ex-officio membership on standing committees and change the speaking order at meetings of the governing body such that he speaks first, rather than last: a position he’d enjoyed but that some on the council majority have told us they found grating and “explosive.”
Ruocco said he turned to the GRC for clarification on policy: whether the borough clerk, who is the designated official records custodian, should always use the “ACD” (advisory, consultative or deliberative) exception to withhold documents from the public prior to them being approved or introduced at a public meeting.
Ruocco said he favors some draft documents — mostly those referenced in a resolution or ready to be introduced or voted on — to be made publicly available before the mayor and council act on them. However, Borough Clerk Denise Kohan has said she relies on the “ACD” exception as provided under the Open Public Records Act (OPRA) to withhold the records until they are no longer considered advisory, consultative, or deliberative.
Borough Attorney Mark Madaio has supported Kohan’s position as being legally defensible under OPRA and in fact standard operating procedure for municipal clerks under those guidelines.
Ruocco elaborates on his concerns in his letter to GRC: “But does that exemptive privilege … extend to agreements that are referenced in resolutions solely intended to record the will of the governing body … and where discussion of the resolution and the agreements can and does take place at an open session of a public council meeting?”
He adds, “How can a resolution that either incorporates by explicit reference approving an agreement or contract, or refers to an agreement or contract as an exhibit be evaluated by the electorate in a public comment period if the material is only made available to the officials on the dais? How does keeping the public in the dark about what the contents are of these agreements further the goal of arriving at the best possible decision when the public does not have the information it needs to pose questions or to express their views to their elected officials?”
During the Feb. 1 meeting, in a six-minute discussion, Ruocco pressed to learn why his letter to GRC had not yet been posted under the borough website’s Mayor’s Spotlight, where, most recently, his remarks to the Greater Pascack Valley Chamber of Commerce Breakfast With the Mayors, his correspondence with Teterboro Airport’s Noice Office, and his reflections on MLK Day appeared.
Both Madaio and borough labor counsel Ray Wiss warned that the mayor’s GRC letter touched on the clerk’s job performance, and as such should not appear on the Mayor’s Spotlight.
“There was a concern with not just the position you advocated … but to aspects of the letter that could be interpreted as to going to [job] performance and the last thing that anyone wanted to create was an HR issue, so I think that was in the mix a little bit too,” Wiss said.
Ruocco noted the press has asked him about the letter and where it stands. He said the letter “is in the public domain” and pressed for it to be posted on the Mayor’s Spotlight.
When Ruocco noted, “You can say that it might be critical of one individual or another individual,” Borough Clerk Denise Kohan said, “I have a problem with this conversation.”
Then member Abby Lundy told Ruocco, “I think you’re putting us at a liability.” Kohan agreed: “Yeah.”
Member Frank Pizzella added, “I do not want to expose Hillsdale to unneeded exposure. I really don’t. Can I move to table this, please?”
After Pizzella moved to table the discussion and Ruocco declined to stop the discussion, someone muttered “Jesus Christ” — but no one owned up to it.
Ruocco said he would talk to attorneys [Madaio and Wisss] following the meeting — Kohan interjected “As will I” — while he worked to understand why his letter may be publicly requested via OPRA but not provided via the Mayor’s Spotlight.
We reached out to Madaio for comment but did not hear back by press time. Kohan declined to comment, but earlier told us that she averages 400-600 open public records request annually. (Separately, the Municipal Clerks’ Association of New Jersey has said that records custodians have been overwhelmed by records requests from businesses and others, and that abuses of the system have led to great expense.)
Ruocco told Pascack Press on Feb. 2 that his letter was not personal criticism but rather a policy criticism.
“Our borough clerk is organized, competent and industrious. My letter to the GRC was meant to be critical of the policy and its effects, not the person. Denise has told me that many municipal clerks in the state use the same policy, and I have no reason to doubt her. Attending the annual [State League of Municipalities] conference last year solidified that understanding, but also gave me reason to think that the application of the policy could be optional,” Ruocco said.
He added, “I wrote my letter in the hope that the GRC would give the borough room to deviate from the policy we are using. I am disappointed that my letter will not be accessible on the borough’s website, but hope that when the GRC responds, both letters will be accessible there, regardless of whether the GRC agrees with me or not.”
And he said, “I would remind your readers that the letter can be obtained if one makes an OPRA request to the borough clerk. I am not afraid of setting forth a view and then being given reasons why my view is incorrect. That comes with the job of being mayor.”