A media law counsel with the Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association believes there may have been multiple breaches of the Sunshine Act during Monessen’s first council meeting of the year –– though the city’s new solicitor, who didn’t attend the meeting, maintains there were no infractions.

​

Melissa Melewsky, PNA media law counsel and an expert on the Sunshine Act, expressed concern about conduct at last week’s meeting and identified actions she believes may be in direct defiance of the law.

​

The Sunshine Act is a state law that requires governing agencies to deliberate and take official action on agency business in open and public meetings. The law requires meetings to have prior notice so the public can comment and participate before a governing agency takes action.

​

Solicitor Tim Witt was not present at the Jan. 6 meeting and said he has not watched the video recording, adding he hadn’t had a chance to collaborate with council on many of the matters in question. 

​

Council voted last week to fire its solicitor and city administrator, alter meeting times and limit future public comment. The actions took place as Mayor Matt Shorraw and Councilman Gil Coles returned to council after nearly two years of absence from city hall. Newly elected Councilman Donald Gregor voted with them, effectively forming a new majority. 

​

Shorraw came equipped with a copy of an agenda that the public and council minority did not have access to during the meeting. It was from this agenda that decisions were made regarding terminations, appointments and reorganization.

​

Melewsky said council is permitted to have executive sessions regarding personnel with a quorum in regard to whom they want to hire and fire, but said there are conditions that apply. 

​

“All members of the board must be given at least 24 hours notice of the date, time, location and purpose of this executive session,” she said, adding the purpose of the meeting must be described in detail, not by using one word such as “personnel.”

​

In addition, she said the Sunshine Act guarantees an employee’s right to request the decisions be made at a public meeting or in private, noting that a quorum is not permitted to deliberate outside of a public meeting. For a council with five members, a quorum would be three.

​

Council members Anthony Orzechowski and Lois Thomas said on the record they were both unaware of all motions brought to the table, and assert they haven’t had in-person contact with the mayor for the majority of his absence.

​

“I didn’t even know anything through the grapevine,” Orzechowski said. “It was all a rumor, and I don’t believe rumors. All I know is what the agenda was that I put forward at the time, and I knew nothing about even a word that he put out there, and neither did Lois.” 

​

Witt said he is unaware of any potential Sunshine Act breaches. 

​

“We will look closely to determine nothing precludes individual council members as long as there’s not a quorum of council members present when those discussions occurred,” he said. 

​

Before adjourning last week’s meeting, Shorraw announced the second designated time for public comment that night would be eliminated.

​

Melewsky said the Sunshine Act provides no requirement for agencies to make agendas, but clarified that if public comment is conditioned on providing an accurate agenda, as it has been for Monessen, it does raise likely Sunshine Act compliance hitches.

​

“The Sunshine Act guarantees the public the opportunity to give meaningful public input,” Melewsky said. “Arguably, in order to comment on agenda items, you need to see the agenda.”

​

Similarly, Shorraw announced –– not through a resolution –– all future public comment and questions at work sessions must be pre-approved through the office of the city administrator. Shorraw did not expand on what the vetting process would look like, but Melewsky said pre-approval of those questions would be “inappropriate.”

​

“You simply cannot control something like that,” Melewsky said.

​

Melewsky said the Sunshine Act permits officials to develop reasonable ways to govern meetings, but added that extreme measures should only be taken when special circumstances are at play— for instance, if 1,000 residents wanted to all make comments about an agenda item. Melewsky said even if that were to happen, a special meeting should be set up to hear all of the public’s voices.

​

“Limiting or prohibiting barriers with public participation should not be a policy,” she said.

​

Former Monessen solicitor Mark Shire said his eyebrow was raised by the announcement to limit future public comment at work sessions.

​

During the meeting, repeated questions on motions from Orzechowski, including inquiries regarding the termination of two city employees, went unanswered by Shorraw.

​

Shire said it is considered appropriate for council to refuse to respond to questions from the public, as sometimes those inquiries may prove to be unreasonable or even irrelevant. But Melewsky said the refusal to acknowledge or answer questions from council on motions is a potential breach of the Sunshine Act.

​

“The Sunshine Act requires all agencies to deliberate on agency business,” she said. “And when questions go unanswered, that does call up questions, and it’s certainly not good government.”

​

Witt said he could not speak to the mayor’s decision to leave questions on motions unanswered, but said “past history” may have played a part in Shorraw’s decision to stay silent.

​

“My guess is that there was not substantial discussion because it would not prove fruitful or helpful in moving the city forward,” he said. 

While council is still working through details, Witt assured that there is a goal to make work sessions “true work sessions,” and to eliminate what he described as a “loss of character.” He said council will take action to concentrate and focus meetings on “real discussion” and the hope is that no votes will be taken during work sessions — only during business meetings. 

​

During the vote to terminate former solicitor Joseph Dalfonso, Coles appeared to audibly cast a “no” vote, making the vote 3-2 against firing Dalfonso. Coles’ answer is reflected in the video recording of the meeting, though Shorraw declared the motion passed and Dalfonso was fired on the spot.

​

Orzechowski said the minutes reflect that Coles voted yes and that the motion passed, a discrepancy Melewsky said is potentially in defiance of the Sunshine Act.

​

“The law requires minutes to accurately represent roll call votes, and if the minutes don’t accurately reflect the record, it’s in violation of the Sunshine Act,” Melewsky said. “It has to be accurate. It can’t just be made up.”

​

Similarly, new city administrator John Harhai did not permit Orzechowski to cast a vote during a motion. When the roll was called, Orzechowski, who afterward said he was “deliberating,” did not cast his vote, Harhai moved on as though Orzechowski had and Shorraw announced the motion carried. Orzechowski confronted council, and after resistance, the roll was taken again. 

​

“I haven’t watched the video and I would have to take a look at that,” Witt said. “I know that all five members of council are committed to doing the right thing going forward.”

​

Shorraw also announced at the meeting—not by resolution—there would be a change in meeting dates and times. Minority council members Thomas and Orzechowski, who have not missed a council meeting for close to two years during Shorraw and Coles’ absence, both expressed unawareness regarding the altered schedule. They said they have genuine concerns about whether or not they will be able to attend at the revised meeting times because of work and family obligations. 

​

Witt said he could not speak to the justification for the decision, but said it is a challenge for any council to align their schedules.

Melewsky expressed the majority of council has the authority to set meeting times, and that technically, the statute does not spell out a set of rules for scheduling because she feels it should go without saying. 

​

“I’m not suggesting they’re intentionally trying to schedule dates to exclude council members, but that’s really something that elected officials need to avoid,” she said. “This is not their career –– they have to work within the boundaries of council’s lives and families. Everyone who is elected has to be the voice of the public, and if they can’t participate, then they aren’t able to use the voice they’ve been given by the people.”

​

Witt expressed it’s imperative that all five members of council are fully engaged, and said the mayor’s return is a “good thing.”

​

“It looks like the city is going to have five active council members,” he said. “That’s what this city is going to need moving forward.”

​

This original story is protected by a paywall. ​