MEDIA – The Upper Darby Township Council is seeking a judgment in Delaware County court to declare its recent action to forfeit the office of the township’s Chief Administrative Officer as lawful.
The Council filed a petition for a declaratory judgment in the Delaware County Court of Common Pleas on June 7 versus former Chief Administrative Officer Vincent Rongione. All parties are of Upper Darby.
“On June 1, 2022, Upper Darby Township Council (Council) voted six to five, that Vincent Rongione had forfeited the office of Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) of Upper Darby Township. Rongione disputes Upper Darby Township Council’s authority to forfeit his office. Upper Darby Township properly advertised and lawfully put on the agenda sufficient notice to the public to comply with [the Sunshine Act],” the petition says.
“Rongione is currently carrying out the role of CAO and directing the department’s personnel. Due to the action of Council being disputed by Rongione, the Upper Darby Police have requested that the Special Solicitor obtain a court order resolving the dispute before they will enforce the action of Council. Without this Court’s final order, the Council has no way to enforce its action.”
The Council explained that they took the action due to its feeling that Rongione lacked sufficient knowledge of Borough accounts and thus, the qualifications of his office.
“On June 1, 2022, there was a legislative meeting of Council. During the meeting, there was a discussion of the mayor’s recent investigation into the finances of the Township. During that discussion, Councilors Brian Andruszko and Meaghan Wagner questioned the CAO on two main topics. The first line of questions was over the alleged overspending of the budget for 2021. The second discussion probed the CAO’s knowledge of specific types of restricted accounts, and the movement of funds in and out of these accounts. At the end of the questioning there was a motion that the CAO lacks the necessary qualifications for his office and therefore has forfeited it under Section 501(c)(1). That section specifically says that if the CAO ‘lacks at any time any qualification for the office as prescribed by this Charter or by law,’ he is to forfeit the office,” the petition states.
“The CAO’s qualifications for office are spelled out, in one sentence, in Section 502: ‘The Chief Administrative Officer shall be appointed solely on the basis of executive and administrative qualifications with a background so as to prepare the appointee to assume the responsibility for administering Township operations.’ Council decided by a vote of six to five that the CAO’s current understanding of restricted accounts, as well as deficient answers to questions about the budget, showed that he lacked the executive and administrative qualifications described in Section 502.’ Council acted rationally and lawfully when it voted to forfeit the CAO’s office.”
The petitioner is represented by Special Solicitor Christopher P. Boggs of the Law Offices of Mark P. Much, in Media.
The respondent has not yet secured legal counsel.
Delaware County Court of Common Pleas case CV-2022-003821
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com