Continuing Update on the Council Subcommittee on Investigations – It is getting stranger and more delayed: On the “consent agenda” for its February 23, 2016 meeting was – again – a proposed resolution to abolish a Township Council Investigations Sub-committee on Investigations that was created in September 15m 2015 that has apparently met once and took no action and whose membership again on February 23 promised to take no action until the Council’s next, March 8, meeting at which time an amended version of the September resolution will, it was said, be proposed. Nope – no resolution, no discussion, no clue on March 8, or March 22 or April 5, 12 or 19 for that matter. Teaneck residents have seen this scenario or some variation on it played out many times before – urgent action followed by no followup eventually followed by Council amnesia.
In fact, the actual reason for the creation of the Investigations Subcommittee has always been simply hinted – vague allusions backed up by opaque references to things amiss but apparently too sensitive to be described. Indeed, one member and active original proponent of the subcommittee, Councilman Hameeduddin has several times hinted that that the issues that had caused him to support such a subcommittee have either been resolved or in other ways gone away.
(Residents should know that apparently there is no connection between this subcommittee’s purpose and the now long-time and equally secrecy-shrouded investigation into some form of financial and possibly other types of malfeasance in the operations of the Township’s municipal court. Based on several media reports, this involves accusations about felonious events involving more than a single person. Why be conducting this separate investigation – handed over in October to the Township police department by the former County prosecutor? Unknown. Speculation among township residents about possible people, activities and reasons for the slow pace of the investigation continue to escalate. Direct TTT discussion swveral weeks ago with the Prosecutor evelaed that the Prosecutor himself has assigned a full-time expert detective to the case. Part of the other speculation in town results from the fact that the long-time municipal judge Judge Young has not been reappointed though his term ended on December 31, 2015 and the original resolution for his reappointment to be followed b a swearing-in was pulled from the December 15, 2015 council agenda and has never reappeared. (The judge continues to preside at the municipal court.)
Let’s back track on the Investigation Subcommittee At its October 13, 2015 meeting, and before Council did itself again discuss the Investigations sub-committee issue, residents during Good and Welfare raised the alarm about the ad hoc and secretive process Council used on September 17 to create this extraordinary entity (see story immediately below this paragraph). Then — in obscure and opaque commentary during which both the Council and the Township Attorney acknowledged that resolution creating the Investigations the sub-committee was flawed – it was agreed that it is necessary at the very least to narrow the subcommittee’s scope with a second amending resolution. The Mayor specifically said the sub-committee should meet with the Attorney to develop a resolution “amending the charge to the committee”. The Attorney then attempted to persuade the Council members who are not on the sub-committee that the subcommittee would do no immediate harm – but he would not agree that it should not convene again until after the first (September 17) resolution had been amended. Then several Councilman proposed a motion to instruct ths e sub-committee not to meet until after the Council’s next meeting – i.e. until after the resolution had been amended. On that issue, the Council split 3-3, apparently leaving the door open for the subcommittee to meet for the purpose of carrying out what the Mayor had described as “amending the charge to the committee”. (Note: Councilman Katz who had proposed the subcommittee was absent.) But note: there apparently was agreement – with the exception of Councilman Hameeduddin – as early as October 13 that the subcommittee’s mandate needs substantial restructuring.
But on October 27 – the day the attorney was to have proposed a new resolution to amend the original investigations sub-committee resolution – what happened? Nada – nothing! No resolution and no Council discussion. (Note Mayor Parker – a subcommittee member – was absent; Deputy Mayor Katz,who had proposed the original subcommittee resolution and serves on it, presided at this Council 10/27 meeting.)
What happened at the November 10 meeting of Council – it was on the agenda as a Council-listed item. Nada!! – nothing! No resolution and no discussion. (Note Mayor Parker – a subcommittee member – again was absent; Deputy Mayor Katz, who had proposed the subcommittee resolution and serves on it, presided at this Council meeting. Councilman Castle had had to leave early – before Council listed items came up on the agenda.)
November 30 – Still NO amended investigations subcommittee amending resolution on the December Council meeting agendas – nothing! January – no amendment but discussion/motions to abolish – tabled or tied. February – resolution to abolish removed from the consent agenda.
Where is the Council directed amending resolution? Why has the Township’s attorney not created one as he was directed to do? Is the subcommittee recklessly currently meeting and using its poorly-defined investigative powers? As so often happens in Teaneck, the pubic remains in the dark. AND BY ALL ACCOUNTS, the potential for liability-creating subcommittee action remains – but shrouded in secrecy.
Who would be left holding the bag for liability-creating action? You’ve got it, Teaneck taxpayer – it is you!
Whatever it is that has prompted the creation of this unprecedented Council development remains unstated publicly. Whatever is going on, Teaneck residents clearly have seen/heard neither the last of the subcommittee nor of whatever it is that prompted its creation. Stay tuned. (We have developed a separate TTT page on which you can find video of the several discussions of this issue which occurred in Council on October 13. (click here)
On Thursday night September 17, 2015 Teaneck Council held an ADD-ON Council meeting. It was added to the annual schedule so quietly almost no-one in Town knew it was happening . Tiny crowd. The regular video cameraman arrived 10 minutes into the meeting. 
But in fact that night the Council, with its attorney cooperating, took actions that were, well, let’s say “novel“. Actually, some might say, reckless and ill-advised! In an extraordinary action Council “walked in” and then subsequently dramatically changed “on the run” specifics of a resolution that was to create a 3-member sub-committee (no chair was appointed) which is to utilize a specific provision of state law ( N.J.S.A. 40:48-25 et seq) to “investigate” all township departments”. Just what the sub-committee is investigating remains completely obscure. Among the new subcommittee’s capacities are subpoena power! And its scope? Well, let’s let the resolution itself do the talking: In the resolution’s “whereas clauses” are these words: “as part of a periodic review of said personnel policies and procedures, the Township Council finds it necessary to review all matters within all Departments, including, but not limited to, disciplinary matters”. Hmm… pretty broad! And what powers can it use to help carry out this review? Listen to this: “such committee, when established, has the authority to issue subpoenas ad testificandum or subpoenas duces tecum to any person in this state to appear before it and give testimony or information required”. Wow! Anyone in the state!
So, Teaneck residents might assume, the creation of an unprecedented investigations capacity is a matter and decision that surely had been well discussed in prior Township public sessions, carefully vetted, crafted carefully and compared to how other municipalities have used these aurhorities. Nope. How do we know? By simply watching and listening to how this action unfolded: a drama in the three parts!
Here is the relevant video showing the 3 separate times in that September 17 public session wherein the action to create an Investigation subcommittee took place. It shows that the decision to move forward – not just discuss the issue – came out of nowhere, went through a series of changes and then how it got buried – without any explaining whatsoever — in the consent agenda. Where? When? What? How? and Why? Not a single word of explanation. Please be prepared to shocked!
Below find the only version of Resolution M (Appoint Committee of Township Council to Conduct Investigations) that now appears on the website. (Note: the Teaneck resolution on the website has no author, no reviewer and no recording of the vote in its favor – but it is listed as approved). No copy of this resolution was made available to the public before G&W – or ever that night. It is reported that Council never received a copy of the resolution before it voted for it. And as the video makes clear, the resolution then effectively disappeared into the consent agenda.) And most importantly the website’s version of the resolution can not be said to have been completely publicly read by the attorney since he struggled to respond by accepting Council-member generated word and meaning changes in the version he was reading. The Resolution is nevertheless currently considered an approved action of Council.
But before you read this resolution, you may want to find out what the League of Municipalities advised about the appropriate use of this “investigations”authority that the State gave to its municipalities. You can go right to it by clicking here. And what you will find is that Teaneck took, has taken and/or apparently plans to take NONE of the steps that wise use of the authority would require.
