West Orange Mayor, Council Continue Standoff Over Town Attorney

WEST ORANGE, NJ — A long-running legal standoff over the municipal attorney job continues to simmer between West Orange’s mayor and town council.

West Orange Mayor Susan McCartney penned a letter to the town council on Friday, calling for an end to the ongoing lawsuit, which she says is costing local taxpayers.

Four of five council members replied to her letter on Wednesday, disputing several of her points and urging her to “rejoin negotiations to reach a settlement.”

Read both statements in full below.

Richard Trenk – a director of the law firm, Trenk Isabel Siddiqi & Shahdanian P.C. – has represented the municipality since 1998. His supporters have included West Orange Mayor Susan McCartney, who has issued multiple statements on Trenk’s behalf, pointing to his three decades of experience as an attorney.

However, some council members and residents have been growing increasingly critical of his track record advising the town on legal matters, including several important development projects.

A legal arm-wrestling match has been taking place in West Orange over the township attorney position over the past few years, which has included arguments about a controversial tie-breaking vote from McCartney, and whether the council has the right to withhold payments to Trenk’s law firm.

• Read More: West Orange Mayor Sues Town Council; Trenk Saga Continues
• Read More: Controversy, Lawsuit Over West Orange Town Attorney Drags On

In March 2024, an Essex County Superior Court judge granted a preliminary injunction in favor of McCartney, ruling that Trenk can remain the town attorney until the case is settled for good. He will be allowed to bill the township for “all work necessary” in connection with the job.

On Jan. 6, the saga took another turn when Trenk submitted his retirement as town attorney, pending the appointment of a replacement and a “reasonable transition in the best interests of the township.”

It isn’t clear who Trenk’s replacement will be – or when they will take his place.

• See Related: Trenk To Retire In West Orange; New Twist In Town Attorney Saga

According to the mayor, a Superior Court judge issued another written decision on March 31, ruling that the council can’t act in an unauthorized manner to select township professionals and negotiate professional contracts.

Here’s where things currently stand.

MAYOR: ‘THE TIME FOR LITIGATION MUST END’

McCartney sent the following letter to the town council on April 4:

“On March 31, 2025, the Honorable Annette Scoca, Judge of the Superior Court, issued yet another written Decision with the Court ruling that the Council could not act in an unauthorized manner to select Township professionals and negotiate professional contracts. The time for litigation must end.

“I was hoping the Township Council, especially the newly elected members, would try to work together with me and my Administration to further the interests of the Township.

“The Administration and I continue to seek common ground with the Township Council but continue to be frustrated by the Township Council’s misdirected efforts. Whatever the disparate goals of the Council are, we share a united belief in the strength of West Orange and the need to consider important projects that help everyone in our Township. Arguing over professional services contracts by the Township Council serves no purpose.

“Mr. Trenk has submitted his letter of resignation. Mr. Trenk has served this Township competently, aggressively and with integrity for over twenty-six years. Seeking a compromise, I extended an olive branch to the Council with the intent to resolve the litigation by submitting Requests for Proposals for a new Town Attorney. The Administration received nine qualified proposals. Each candidate was interviewed by a panel, the consensus selections and resumes were sent to the Council. While I was only required to submit one name, I opted to send three, waiving my statutory right to appoint a Town Attorney, again, in an effort to collaborate on the decision for a new Attorney. Only two of the five Council members were willing to conduct interviews with the three candidates. The matter was tabled by the Council at the January 28, 2025, Town Council meeting. The Council majority wished to wait for Judge Scoca’s ruling at the impending March 25th Court date, which brings us where we are today.

“Municipalities are required by law to have legal counsel. This Court Decision is clear, Mr. Trenk will continue to serve during my Mayoral term, despite the Council’s unsubstantiated, disparaging attacks against him, until which time we agree on the new Town Attorney and all other matters are dismissed.

“I hope that this latest Court Decision will cause the Township Council to reconsider its strategy and tactics to end this ongoing litigation expense to our taxpayers. We have great interest in our Town. Great things can be accomplished if we work together, rather than be distracted by the politics of personalities.”

COUNCIL: ‘WE WERE NOT ELECTED TO BE A POTTED PLANT’

Four of five council members replied to McCartney’s letter with a statement of their own on April 9.

The following letter was approved by Asmeret Ghebremicael, Susan Scarpa, Joyce Rudin and Joe Krakoviak (with Michelle Casalino declining to support it).

“The Council disagrees with the preliminary conclusions reached by the Court and is disappointed with the present outcome. The case is not concluded, and the Council majority will continue to pursue its rights in the interest of West Orange residents and with the goal of preserving and exercising its legislative powers now and for the benefit of future Councils. Among those legislative powers held by the Town Council is the statutory “power of advice and consent” which is intended as a check against overreaching by anyone occupying the office of Mayor.

“As for your self-serving letter, it is unfortunate that it fails to reflect the several overtures undertaken by the Council to come to terms with you over professional appointments. In our view, your description of what has transpired conveniently ignores that you have failed to respect and embrace the advice and consent role of the Council embedded in our laws and municipal code. That authority requires, among other things, that the Council be vigilant and informed when it performs its legal duty in offering its “advice and consent” when considering and voting on an appointment advanced by the Mayor. Put another way, we were not elected to be a ‘potted plant’ in the room.

“With the above for perspective, the Council majority respectfully offers facts and context below, which we believe more accurately reflects the situation than assertions in your letter.”

Mayor’s Statement – “The time for litigation must end”

“That has actually long been true. The Council conveyed to the Mayor shortly after the November election results were certified its agreement that the ‘litigation must end’ -- and repeatedly since then, the Council has tried multiple face-to-face discussions with the Mayor towards that end. In the Council majority’s opinion, we do not believe that the Mayor has been true to that objective. As recently as the court appearance March 25, 2025, when the Court allowed the parties an additional two days to negotiate before rendering her ruling, the Mayor chose not to come to terms or even counter a bona fide offer from the Council majority.”

Mayor’s Statement – “Arguing over professional services contracts by the Township Council serves no purpose”

“While the Mayor may be of that view, she misses the mark. What the Mayor calls ‘arguing over professional services contracts’ is at the heart of the checks and balances embedded in our law. What she calls ‘arguing’ is the give and take of municipal government. Just as she wishes for respect for her ‘executive powers,’ the Council as an institution wishes for the Mayor to display equal respect for the Council’s ‘advice and consent’ role its lawful authority to approve municipal expenditures emanating from professional contracts -- some of which the municipality continues to pay without formal approval by the Council. This regrettable tension and conflict between the Council and the Mayor does serve a purpose – it is called representative local government.”

Mayor’s Statement – “Mr. Trenk has submitted his letter of resignation”

“The Mayor mischaracterizes the municipal attorney’s status. The incumbent submitted a notice of his retirement conditioned on the Township Council approving a replacement for him. According to the Court’s preliminary Order to which the Council is bound, he serves until the disposition of the pending litigation and further Order of the Court, or until a settlement on the choice of his successor is reached. The fact is that the incumbent Town Attorney has not resigned, and he, along with his law firm, continues to act as Town Attorney despite the Council majority’s belief that this role, while this litigation is underway, poses a conflict of interest between him, his law firm and the Council. The Mayor knows there is a path to resolving the selection of a successor Town Attorney, having participated herself in efforts to resolve our differences. Indeed, she has even exhibited some modicum of respect for the Council’s advice and consent role on this very issue. So, we are puzzled that we cannot come to terms with her knowing that the incumbent is on his way out by his own choice.”

Mayor’s Statement – “…despite the Council’s unsubstantiated, disparaging attacks against him (Trenk)”

“We know not what the Mayor speaks of here. The law makes provision for a Council to remove a municipal officer for cause. The recent dispute heard by the Judge addressed the authority of the Council to hire an independent, non-conflicted lawyer to provide professional advice in determining whether and how to exercise its power of “removal for cause.” The Council expects such a lawyer to do so prudently, informed and substantiated by credible evidence, and to do so without predetermining outcomes or expressing any views publicly. For those very reasons the Council has been careful to not discuss anything publicly relating to the specific merits, but only to process. Yet, when the Council sought to pursue its removal authority with the assistance of independent legal counsel, the Mayor chose to ask the Court to deprive the counsel of that professional assistance. Regrettably the Court agreed, saying the hiring by the Council of its own lawyer for this purpose was not permitted by law or by the Court’s own previous Order in the case. This issue has yet to be fully litigated and remains an important principle at stake in the litigation. Ironically, the Mayor’s application to deprive the Council of its own independent counsel to provide advice for removing a municipal officer for cause, in our view, deprives the Council, and those we represent, the tools to effectively exercise that power.”

Mayor’s Statement – “I hope that this latest Court Decision will cause the Township Council to reconsider its strategy and tactics to end this ongoing litigation expense to our taxpayers”

“The Council re-affirms its sole objective: To best serve the Township and residents by exercising its legal, statutory and ordinance authority and responsibilities. That includes a negotiated settlement of the litigation and working towards a more normal functioning municipal government. We again urge the Mayor to join us in achieving that goal. Recall that it was the Mayor who initiated this litigation.”

Mayor’s Statement – “Great things can be accomplished if we work together, rather than be distracted by the politics of personalities”

“The Council agrees with that statement. But we question the Mayor’s accuracy when – despite the Township CFO’s statement at the March 25, 2025, Council meeting that the Council would have the mayor’s 2025 proposed budget by the end of March -- we still don’t have it. Under the Faulkner Act that guides our municipal government, our Council cannot exercise its authority to review/revise/approve the municipal budget until the mayor submits it. West Orange may very well be the last municipality in Essex County to not yet provide the draft budget to its governing body.”

Send local news tips and correction requests to eric.kiefer@patch.com. 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.