Council moves toward appointing own attorney
Some council members are displeased with Edison Twp. attorney’s representation
BY TOM CAIAZZA
Staff Writer

The Edison Township Council introduced an ordinance on Wednesday that would give the council separate legal representation from that of the township attorney.

The municipal counselor would serve solely the Township Council and would remove those duties from the current township attorney, Jeffrey Lehrer. Lehrer would remain as the counselor for the administration.

The ordinance was introduced by Councilman Salvatore Pizzi, who said that the current attorney did not provide independent representation to the council, citing an instance where he claimed appropriate legal counsel was not given.

“The feeling was that we were not getting a true, unbiased representation from our director of law,” Pizzi said.

Pizzi said that he felt the current representation of the council, by Lehrer, was not sufficient, and that the council would be better represented by someone speaking just on the council’s behalf.

“I asked for a legal opinion on what appeared to be bid rigging, and I didn’t get a legal opinion from our attorney,” Pizzi gave as an example.

Pizzi said that he attempted to have the contract with Trikaya, a computer company that contracted with the town, rescinded because he felt the contract was “corrupt and bad.” Pizzi claimed that Lehrer would not look into the situation, which eventually resulted in a court-ordered rebidding of that contract.

“I want an unbiased representation,” Pizzi said.

Council President Robert Diehl staunchly disagreed with the proposed ordinance, saying that it worried him both fiscally and philosophically.

Diehl said that the expense of having a second lawyer, which Pizzi said has been already allocated in the budget adopted that same night, would most likely exceed the $37,500 appropriated for it.

“Although $37,500 is appropriated,” Diehl said, “if you really get into the person really getting started doing some of the things that Councilman [Peter] Barnes spoke about ... that cost will accelerate.”

Beyond that, Diehl said he was not happy with the “genesis” of the position, citing rifts between the members of the council as well as those with Mayor Jun Choi and the administration.

“This seems to be bred from mistrust,” Diehl said. “I think in five years I don’t remember really hearing anything about this until a couple of weeks ago, when there was a problem that we had with some personalities.”

Lehrer questioned the legality of the ordinance, citing case law out of Gloucester County which struck down a similar ordinance saying that the ordinance was invalid.

Lehrer read from the decision in that case saying that under the Faulkner Act, the legislation that allows for the type of governing body found in Edison, the power to appoint the municipal attorney lies solely with the mayor. The case law says that the Faulkner Act provides a structure for the government that includes mayoral appointment of the township attorney.

“The creation of the office of attorney for the council clearly fragments the structure,” Lehrer read from the decision. “Having two attorneys doing duplicative work creates the potential for confusion and even stalemate in the event that the advice given by both differs.”

Lehrer also said that the ordinance the council asked him to prepare and the ordinance read for introduction that night were “vastly different, heads-and-tails different.”

He said that the ordinance he was instructed to draft required the Department of Law to establish the municipal counsel position and that position would be appointed by the director of law and not the council themselves. The legislation introduced on Wednesday puts the appointment power in the hands of the council, with the appointed serving at the pleasure of the council and not the director of law, as Lehrer claimed was the case with the ordinance he was instructed to draft.

Barnes said that it would be possible for the council to craft legislation that would create the office of municipal counselor without “running afoul” of current case law. He said a compromise could be reached that would distinctly separate the roles of both attorneys in the township. Barnes said that this was not a new proposal, that Woodbridge operates under a similar system, and it would only work if the council can “get past the personalities and get to what is good for Edison.”

Councilwoman Antonia Ricigliano supported the legislation, citing an “administration bias” when dealing with the attorney.

“It is virtually impossible to serve two masters,” Ricigliano said.

The introduction, which was initially opposed by Diehl, was passed after Barnes asked for further debate on the topic. The public hearing on the ordinance has been scheduled for the Jan. 10 at the Township Council meeting.