Hopatcong Fires Back at Health Board Suit

Hopatcong's mayor and council fired back at the borough board of health Tuesday, filing a motion with the state Superior Court to dismiss a when it created an ordinance that assumed the board's power of appointing health department employees.

In a 10-page statement to Judge Thomas L. Weisenbeck, Mayor Sylvia Petillo and the council, represented by attorney Richard W. Wenner of Courter, Kobert & Cohen, said the lawsuit was "moot" since the council passed a new law restoring the board's ability to hire the employees, as per state statue.

But Petillo and the council weren't done. The statement also said the board didn't have the ability to sue and, even if it did, the board didn't properly advertise the February meeting during which it voted to give President Mariano Gianni authority to speak with a lawyer and to pursue legal action.

"For the foregoing reasons," the statement, signed by Wenner, says, "it is respectfully requested that this Court grant the Borough's motion to dismiss the Hopatcong Board of Health's Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

On Wednesday, Gianni said he was confident in the board's lawsuit.

"We're not backing down," he said. "I can tell you that."

Councilwoman Estelle Klein, the liaison between the board and the council, said she disagreed that the suit should be tossed. Klein, a former 10-year board member, has advocated for the suit in recent weeks.

"I disagree with it," she said. "But let them make their point. They're allow to make their point."

Last week, board of health member Joel Servoss said the lawsuit was "foolish" and that both sides should settle their differences face-to-face, outside of the courtroom.

In February, the council passed an ordinance that handed the power of appointing health department employees to the borough. The move drew the ire of the board of health, which then filed a March 15 lawsuit claiming the council not just broke state laws by usurping its power, but also violated the Open Public Meeting Act and Civil Service laws in the process.

In April, the council replaced the ordinance in question with a new one that said the board would still have appointing powers, which rendered the lawsuit's main argument "moot," according to the statement.

The statement also said local boards "most decidedly" don't have the power to prosecute an action against a municipality based on the circumstances the board presented in its suit. The statement said boards could only sue when seeking injunctive relief, in the name of the state, and only to "abate a nuisance hazardous to the public health."

Finally, the statement said the board of health advertised in the New Jersey Herald the date the February meeting was to occur, but didn't mention a time or place—key elements to following Open Public Records Act guidelines.

Hopatcong also recently said it planned to establish a volunteer health advisory committee for public outreach and said it planned to fill upcoming vacant board of health postitions with council members.