West Orange Council Rolls Back Vote On Town Attorney Contract

WEST ORANGE, NJ — Should West Orange’s mayor have been allowed to cast a tie-breaking vote on the town attorney’s work contract? And should the town make a change at the helm of its legal team? That was the increasingly contentious debate that dominated a large portion of the latest council meeting.

On Tuesday evening, the council voted to pass Resolution 144-23 (read the full text below). It rescinds Resolution numbers 80-23, 112-23 and 113-23, which narrowly passed a previous council vote on March 21. See Related: West Orange Renews Contract With Town Attorney After Heated Debate

Those resolutions – which are now void – authorized multiple professional service agreements with township attorney Richard Trenk and his Livingston-based firm, Trenk Isabel Siddiqi & Shahdanian P.C.

The contract sets a salary of $42,500 per year, which includes payment for general legal matters, but not for litigation, arbitrated or mediated matters, which would be billed separately and by the hour at the rate provided in the township’s attorney billing guidelines. The council also approved the hourly rate for litigation counsel later in a separate resolution at an hourly rate of $175.

Trenk has served as town attorney since 1998. Mayor Susan McCartney recently appointed him for a four-year term that will expire on Dec. 31, 2026.

McCartney cast a tie-breaking vote for each resolution, which ignited a debate about the legitimacy of her votes, as well as Trenk’s recent track record advising the town on legal matters. Some have commended Trenk’s service as town attorney, citing his three decades of experience; others have insisted it's time for change on the municipal legal team.

• See Related: NJ Supreme Court Rules On West Orange Library Dispute
• See Related: Supreme Court Ruling Won't Deter West Orange's Plans, Mayor Says

According to the resolution passed on Tuesday evening, the mayor’s vote was cast and accepted by the municipal clerk based on advice from the assistant township attorney, who reasoned that it wasn’t in violation of the Faulkner Act.

That may have been the wrong call, the resolution states:

“The resolutions recorded as adopted based on the votes taken, including those of the mayor, who should not have been permitted to vote, were impermissible as a matter of law and whether or not ultra vires and a nullity as a matter of law, should now be rescinded to formally nullify those actions and correct the record of the actions taken at the March 21, 2023 council meeting.”

Councilwoman Susan Scarpa, who previously voted “no” on the March 21 resolutions along with Councilman Bill Rutherford, broke down the controversy prior to Tuesday’s vote.

“I’ve gotten so many calls from the public,” Scarpa said, summarizing the resolution and tie-breaking vote (watch the video below). “A lot of people are confused, and they’ve asked me to just clearly state what the issues are – what happened.”

Patch reached out to town officials for comment on Tuesday’s vote. We will update this article with any reply we receive.

Send news tips and correction requests to [email protected]. Learn more about advertising on Patch here. Find out how to post announcements or events to your local Patch site. Don’t forget to visit the Patch West Orange Facebook page.