State upholds Morrisville mayor’s veto of ordinance to fund $1.25M street-light improvement project

Published: Thursday, November 14, 2013

By D.E. Schlatter
BucksLocalNews.com

MORRISVILLE - The Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development (DCED), which oversees borrowing and spending by municipal governments, has upheld that Mayor Rita Ledger’s veto of a $1.25-million loan to pay for the borough’s street-light improvement project.

In an Oct. 29 order, the DCED agreed with former council president Jane Burger and five other residents, including borough controller Eric Hellman, that the mayoral veto was indeed proper.

They had petitioned the DCED to determine whether the mayor had the authority to approve all ordinances passed by borough council, including those dealing with financial matters.

The order, which was signed by DCED Secretary C. Alan Walker, also rejected the borough’s $1.25-million debt application to pay for the energy improvement contract that the borough had entered into with Johnson Controls, Inc.
In July, borough council had accepted a 2.99-percent loan from TD Bank to pay for the 17-year project which requires Johnson Controls to replace more than 600 streetlights with energy-saving state-of-the-art LED lamps, as well as perform energy upgrades to the municipal building.

Even though the contract with the company had been approved earlier this year, at the time no motion had been made on how to pay for it.

Under state law, an ordinance was needed in order to technically fund the project so that it could get underway. There was heated controversy surrounding this deal.

Council members Debbie Smith, Todd Sanford and Eileen Dreisbach, who repeatedly have opposed the project, have contended that they were kept in the dark and they were not given all the cost estimates in order to make an informed decision on the street-light improvement plan.

All along, Mayor Ledger had backed the three council members, also questioning how the energy upgrade would be paid for, and whether the contract best protected the borough.

On Aug. 26, when council voted 5-3 to approve the ordinance to finance the deal, Ledger could not attend the meeting because of a medical emergency. However, she subsequently vetoed it.  

At the following council meeting Sept. 16, there were not enough votes to override the veto, so the project was temporarily put on hold.

One of the issues that the DCED was asked to determine was whether Mayor Ledger could technically veto the funding ordinance, or if her authority does not extend to financial matters.

In addition, there was a question whether the mayor vetoed the ordinance within the 10-day time frame specified by state law, or if it was actually 11 days, therefore making the veto invalid.

At the time of the failed veto override, borough solicitor James Downey had noted that the mayor might have waited 11 days to formally override the approved funding ordinance, but the actual time frame was unclear.

“I don’t know when the mayor got it by mail, I don’t know all of the facts” Downey had said, noting that he could not make a determination of the veto’s legality.

Because of this added uncertainty, Burger and the other taxpayers filed the petition with the DCED on Sept. 23, asking for a ruling whether the veto could be sustained.

“I asked DCED to review all the information and make a determination that everything was properly done and valid,” Burger had said, “It is important that everyone follow the laws and regulations and does it properly.”

Burger has maintained that if Morrisville still wanted to proceed with the financing, then borough council should follow all procurement guidelines, as well as provide realistic cost estimates to council members for each of the improvements.

In its response to the complaint, the borough had denied all the claims and asked that the DCED uphold the bank loan, as well as determine that Mayor Ledger’s review of the funding ordinance was not required, therefore making a veto unnecessary and the override invalid.

But the DCED’s presiding officer, attorney Scott Longwell, clearly sided with the four complainants and upheld Mayor Ledger’s veto.  

“The complainants have raised a number of challenges to the regularity of the proceedings and the validity of the obligations of the proposed Borough borrowing,” he wrote.

According to Longwell, the Local Government Unit Debt Act (LGUDA), which governs municipalities’ borrowing, definitely covers Morrisville's energy improvement project. Therefore the agency must sign off on the TD Bank loan for the energy upgrade.

In his seven-page report, Longwell also pointed out that the Ledger was given an unsigned copy of the funding ordinance, and not that mandated signed version, two days after it was passed by council in a 5-3 vote.

On Sept. 6, 11 days after Mayor Ledger received the ordinance, she delivered her written veto to the borough secretary, as required.

At the following council meeting, which was Sept. 16, Ledger read her veto statement, after which council failed to override it with the six votes needed.

Longwell stated that while there is some disagreement over material facts, and when the veto was actually received and signed by the mayor, there is no dispute surrounding validity of the veto itself.

In addition, he noted that that the override vote was properly taken at the next council meeting after the mayor had delivered her veto.

Therefore, Longwell held that because Ledger was never presented with the signed ordinance in a timely manner, as required by state law, the veto was properly issued and must be upheld.

“Accordingly, the borough lacked the necessary votes to override Mayor Ledger’s veto and the Ordinance was not lawfully enacted,” he wrote.

As a result, Longwell concluded that the ordinance to fund the energy improvement project cannot take effect under state guidelines governing borough procedures, as well as the Debt Act, so he recommended that it must be “disapproved.”

In issuing his order, DCED Secretary Walker accepted all of Longwell's findings and recommendations.

If borough council decides to challenge the order scrapping the funding measure, it has 15 days from when it was issued to file an appeal with Commonwealth Court, which oversees all legal issues involving state and local governments.

The next regularly scheduled council meeting is Nov. 18, so a decision on any appeal must be made before then.

Under the project, every streetlight in Morrisville would be replaced with the same type of LED lamps and wattage, something which Council President Sherlock has said “will make the town very attractive and uniform.”

Currently, the borough spends about $120,000 a year for electricity to keep the streetlights on, a cost is expected to be reduced to around $70,000 annually with high-energy efficient lighting, which is guaranteed to last 30 years.

Besides the electric costs, Morrisville pays around $25,000 each year to maintain the streetlights and replace the existing bulbs.

Borough manager Tom Bates has said that the borough recently has spent $15,000 in labor and supplies for streetlight maintenance and repairs.

In addition to the streetlights, the Johnson Controls would replace windows and insulation in the 64-year-old borough hall, as well as new heating and air conditioning installed. Electronic sensors would also be placed in the municipal building, as well as the library and public works garage, which would also see improvements.

According to Bates, Morrisville has until January to initiate the contract with Johnson Controls without penalty, and with the latest setback that deadline could be in jeopardy.