Exeter offers no public apology over meeting
July 27, 2010 | Filed in: Sunshine
Act | Open
meetings
MATT HUGHES | The [Wilkes-Barre]
Times-Leader
EXETER – Borough residents hoping for an apology for being locked out of a council meeting April 6 will have to wait at least a little longer. None was given at Tuesday’s meeting of the borough council.
Borough Solicitor Peter Moses said the council’s offering a formal apology was one method that council might use to rectify a Sunshine Act lawsuit filed on behalf of borough residents barred from entering the meeting. The suit remains in litigation, however, Moses said.
Plaintiffs in the case claim doors were locked when the council chambers reached its capacity of 65 at the meeting, at which controversial plans to allow Walmart to build a store in the borough were discussed.
Borough resident George Best, a plaintiff in the case, said he is seeking “an admission of guilt,” on the borough’s part, but no monetary damages other than court costs and attorney fees.
“I just want them to admit what they did was wrong,” Best said.
“They knew they shouldn’t do it and they went along with the meeting anyway,” he added.
When questioned, council Chairman Richard Murawski said public notice would be given should the council decide to offer a public apology.
Borough residents opposed to the store’s construction will also have to wait a few more weeks to see if the retailer’s development might be halted or limited by a new zoning ordinance governing big box stores.
Council said changes have been introduced into the proposed ordinance, necessitating that council hold a new public hearing on the matter. Murawski said the hearing will most likely be scheduled for September.
EXETER – Borough residents hoping for an apology for being locked out of a council meeting April 6 will have to wait at least a little longer. None was given at Tuesday’s meeting of the borough council.
Borough Solicitor Peter Moses said the council’s offering a formal apology was one method that council might use to rectify a Sunshine Act lawsuit filed on behalf of borough residents barred from entering the meeting. The suit remains in litigation, however, Moses said.
Plaintiffs in the case claim doors were locked when the council chambers reached its capacity of 65 at the meeting, at which controversial plans to allow Walmart to build a store in the borough were discussed.
Borough resident George Best, a plaintiff in the case, said he is seeking “an admission of guilt,” on the borough’s part, but no monetary damages other than court costs and attorney fees.
“I just want them to admit what they did was wrong,” Best said.
“They knew they shouldn’t do it and they went along with the meeting anyway,” he added.
When questioned, council Chairman Richard Murawski said public notice would be given should the council decide to offer a public apology.
Borough residents opposed to the store’s construction will also have to wait a few more weeks to see if the retailer’s development might be halted or limited by a new zoning ordinance governing big box stores.
Council said changes have been introduced into the proposed ordinance, necessitating that council hold a new public hearing on the matter. Murawski said the hearing will most likely be scheduled for September.