By Rob Sample
The Putnam County Legislature adopted a new legislative manual at its Jan. 7 meeting, following a contentious debate that spanned more than an hour. Five legislators voted in favor of the new manual, while four voted in opposition.
The manual changes were introduced by Legislator Dan Birmingham, R-Brewster, during his first meeting as a returning legislator, having been elected to the governing body in November following a few-year hiatus when he didn’t seek re-election. The changes include revisions he said were “necessary and proper for the order and operation of the County Legislature.”
They included provisions spelling out the preferred location for legislative and committee meetings, as well as a detailed order of seating by legislators, and taking out language that limited the chairperson’s vote in appeals proceedings, among other things.
Nancy Montgomery, D-Philipstown, was the most vocal opponent of the measure, taking issue both with several sections within the manual, as well as how it ended up on the floor for a vote – a process she termed “a disservice to the public.”
Montgomery also said Senior Deputy County Attorney Conrad Pasquale, in a letter to legislators, had deemed the manual not ready for a vote.
She introduced a motion, which later failed, to table the vote on the manual.
“I don’t know when anybody on this Legislature has ever allowed anything to go to the full Legislature without being considered in committee – where the public can vet it as well as us,” said Montgomery. “I was elected to serve the public and what’s alarming is that you’re passing this without public input.”
Birmingham noted that the manual’s composition relied heavily on legislative manuals already in place in other counties – particularly Erie and Rockland counties – and serves to codify rules the Putnam Legislature already follows.
“This is nothing new, and this shouldn’t be – in my view – viewed with hostility or alarm,” he said. “Perhaps if we all had read the Charter, we would know this is a power we’ve had for almost 50 years.”
Legislator Erin Crowley, R-Mahopac, called for more thorough research on the manual, suggesting that lack of proper vetting could jeopardize the manual’s enforceability and expose the county to future legal action.
“I would really like it if we took the time as a body to reflect upon what’s been put before us before we make harsh decisions that could leave us exposed – and the constituents we represent financially exposed,” she said.
Greg Ellner, R-Carmel, put a different spin on Pasquale’s letter to legislators. “If I heard correctly, the closing of the letter by Pasquale said that we should adopt (the manual) as-is and then fix it in committee,” he said. “I think that’s an excellent approach and that’s why I will be supporting this.”
Montgomery pursued a variety of amendments to the text of the manual, which were not approved by her colleagues. Among these, she sought to strike part five of the section of the manual titled “Organization of the County Legislature.” The language here directs that meetings must take place at the county’s historic courthouse in Carmel.
“I live in a district where i) is not geographically convenient for my constituents to attend these meetings in the first place,” she said. “I was hoping for an opportunity for some of these meetings to be held on my side of the county. That’s how we serve the public.”
William Gouldman, R-Putnam Valley, agreed, noting that meetings were previously held in other locations, and were both productive and acted as a showcase for public facilities in those communities.
“I believe we should have committee meetings throughout the county and not just in this building or the building next door,” he said. “We should not put this in the legislative manual.”
Several legislators also strongly criticized an “oath” provision in the manual, which requires members of the public – as well as legislators and county employees – to attest to the truth of their statements when appearing at a legislative meeting.
A vote on removing that provision failed.
Legislator Paul Jonke, R-Southeast, noted that the language of that section gives the chairperson of the Legislature, as well as the chairperson of a standing committee, the ability to request such a statement.
The operative word is “request,” he said. “That gives them discretion – it doesn’t say shall demand. Not everybody who comes in front of us is going to is going to be required to take an oath. This is at the discretion of the chair of the Legislature and the chair of the committees.”
Comentarios