Cinnaminson Committee To Refer Brauckmann Investigation To Prosecutor, DCA

CINNAMINSON, NJ — It appears as though the internal investigation into the actions of Cinnaminson Committeeman Don Brauckmann will now be referred to both the Burlington County Prosecutor’s Office and the New Jersey Division of Community Affairs (DCA). Brauckmann is being investigated for official misconduct.

Monday night’s Committee Workshop Meeting at the municipal building began with a closed session that lasted 51 minutes. The meeting then moved out of the back room — where workshops are typically held — into the main council chambers to accommodate the influx of community members interested in the proceedings of this particular session.

At that point, Deputy Mayor William “Ben” Young made a motion to forward the matter to both the prosecutor’s office and the DCA, and Mayor Anthony Minniti seconded the motion. They both voted in favor of the motion.

Howard “Bud” Evans recused himself due to his friendship with Brauckmann, and John McCarthy abstained because he said he didn’t have enough time to thoroughly read the results of the investigation and make an informed vote. It was a 38-page review and he only had three days to read it, McCarthy said.

Following the vote, Minniti left the meeting and Young handled the proceedings for the rest of the meeting.

The motion passed with just two votes, a point of contention for many people in the audience. During the public comment portion of the meeting, residents asked if two votes were enough to pass the motion, but Solicitor John Gillespie refused to answer.

Resident Ken Miller commented that the 2-0 vote was enough to pass the motion, but if McCarthy or Evans had voted no, the motion would die at the table. Gillespie didn’t respond to this comment, and didn’t comment on the vote to Cinnaminson Patch following the meeting.

The public asked for the decision to be tabled, and for committee to vote again when McCarthy was able to make an informed vote, but officials commented that committee can’t table something that’s already been voted on. The subject also couldn’t be revisited because the makeup of the committee changed once Minniti left the meeting.

Brauckmann was the subject of an internal investigation into interactions he is alleged to have had with an employee in the Department of Public Works and an officer with the Cinnaminson Police Department concerning talks of restructuring the leadership of those two departments.

He is also accused of promising to vote to approve Young to the position of Director of Public Works in exchange for getting his wife a job at Rowan College at Burlington County. The investigation concluded that while there was no evidence that Brauckmann’s communication with the employees had an adverse impact on their employment, he did so outside his chain of command and his actions open up the township to possible future litigation.

By referring the matter to the prosecutor’s office, the committee is asking the law enforcement agency to look into possible criminal violations. The DCA will be tasked with looking into the possible ethical violations.
But the public questioned the ethics of the investigation itself, suggesting Minniti should’ve recused himself due to a perceived vendetta against Brauckmann.

“Why shouldn’t the mayor recuse himself because of his vendetta?” Miller asked after Evans reiterated he recused himself because of his friendship with Brauckmann.

“I know he doesn’t like him,” Young said of Minniti’s view toward Brauckmann, indicating Brauckmann had double-crossed the current mayor at some point.

“You just said Mr. Minniti doesn’t like Brauckmann,” resident Marie Birbeck said. “That’s a personal vendetta, and I think you have a personal vendetta against him, too.”

“This is my life, my career,” Brauckmann said during the committee comment portion of the meeting. “This is being referred because of two votes, one from a man who has a vile hatred for me. He’s said it to numerous people. He is clearly conflicted. The other person is a little more soft spoken about it, but this entire investigation is about him not getting the Director of Public Works position. Because of the vote of two conflicted people, this is going to the prosecutor’s office. Ask yourself, is that fair? This whole process looks skewed to me. I feel victimized, and I feel that due process is not being followed.”

A summary of the findings of the internal investigation was presented to committee during its regular meeting on Sept. 25. In response to comments of a personal vendetta due to his election loss at that time, Minniti pointed out that the investigation began in March, three months before he and running mate June Neumann were defeated in the Republican Primary by Ernest McGill — who was also named in the internal investigation — and Ryan Horner.

In an email early Tuesday morning, Minniti reiterated that all five committeemen — including Brauckmann — approved the investigation, and said it was Brauckmann's conduct that necessitated the investigation.

"To ignore the findings in the report would amount to a 'coverup' and constitute a dereliction of our obligation to our town and residents," Minniti said. "Quite simply, if Committeeman Brauckmann is confident that he has done nothing improper? Then he should fully endorse our actions because he will be exonerated. I believe his reaction stems from his finally coming to grips with the gravity of his actions and possible consequences. The political powers in this town, coupled with Brauckmann's small group of vocal supporters, have been placing tremendous pressure on this committee in an attempt to get us to 'cover this up.' It took political courage for us to get through this process and refer the findings to the proper authorities. Brauckmann is doing his best to distract and deflect by blaming his situation on everyone but him. There is no question, however, that the committeeman is where he is because of him and no one else."

Patch file photo