One Question, No Debate: What We Learned About How Council Decisions Are Made in Berkeley Heights

Several residents spoke on various agenda items from the Nokia property to the west side drainage issues, Township funding World Cup events in addition to lack of discussion and deliberation at meeting, with the main theme, overall, being a lack in transparency on highly important and impactful township business.

Although the meeting was pretty tame, fireworks erupted from one simple question asked by NJ21st Contributor John Miguies – why does the public seldom hear discussion or debate over big ticket items on the agenda.

Several council members, with raised voices, asserted that nothing happens behind closed doors or through straw polls. The comments alluded to the notion that, as elected representatives, there should be a level of trust.

Council members were very careful to frame their responses narrowly, emphasizing that any polling didn’t occur among Council members themselves. However, the resident’s question sought to understand whether discussions occur elsewhere (volunteer committees, party committees, or political clubs as examples) — a point not directly addressed despite repeated attempts to clarify.

The question had to be asked multiple times, and the resident’s attempts to clarify or address responses and characterizations by Council members were frequently interrupted, while he was, at the same time, accused of constantly interrupting council members. Officials ultimately responded that any questions they have on agenda items are asked to staff prior to the meeting, and a response specifically on straw polls was provided by three Council Members. One Council Member, Foster, at times responded to the resident’s question with a question.

In speaking with John, he indicated he wanted to hear from the other two Council members and intended to ask whether items were ever discussed in political committees, political clubs, and about the nature of discussions within volunteer committees, but did not have time due to the interruptions.

Both Poage and Illis indicated that they rely heavily on Township Administrator Liza and Mayor Devanney for answers to agenda-related questions, stating that depending on the information provided by staff, they’re comfortable moving forward, while also emphasizing that Council members don’t typically speak with one another prior to votes and don’t deliberate extensively during meetings.

The exchange highlighted what some view as an opportunity for greater transparency. If elected officials have questions about the business and happenings within the township, and those business action items come with multi-million dollar price tags, some residents believe it may be worth having those discussions and information sharing occur in public.

Council members repeatedly stated that they don’t operate like a Board of Education and don’t have committees. However, references were made during the discussion to volunteer committees, and at least one Council member acknowledged that conversations can occur in those settings. This distinction was important, as the resident’s question focused on whether discussions influencing decisions may occur outside of public view, not strictly within formal Council settings.

Devanney cited that she and the Council receive an agenda with ‘explainers’ prior to meetings. An OPRA request has been submitted for these documents to better understand what information is provided to officials prior to public meetings.

Towards the end of the meeting the Township Administrator commented that she and her staff do an excellent job of keeping the Mayor and Council informed of all Township business as the reason the meetings are quick with little discussion on agenda items.

Council members also attempted to characterize several major agenda items, including redevelopment actions and significant emergency spending, as routine business, emphasizing that if such items aren’t approved, “government won’t work.” However, residents have raised questions in the past regarding the basis for certain work, including sewer plant violations, vendor selection and no-bid contracts, reinforcing that transparency isn’t only about whether work gets done, but why, by whom and at what cost.

The exchange drew noticeable tension, particularly in the response to this resident and the question posed, while other portions of the meeting maintained a lighter tone, including praise offered for wastewater employees and their compassion for an injured goose. The contrast between what is discussed publicly at meetings and how decisions are formed was striking to some observers.

Here is a clip of the exchange:

Here is a copy of the Transcript.

Also Read: Nokia Redevelopment Investigation, $16.7M Emergency Spending, and Key Questions