'Denying Scanlan The Mayorship Was Egregious,' Resident Says

To the editor:

All politics is local. And everything local is political. Just ask Wyckoff Township Committeeman Democrat Brian Scanlan.

Last January, Scanlan was denied the chance to serve as mayor by his Republican colleagues even though the deputy mayor (which Scanlan was in 2016) is traditionally voted in the following year by the five-member committee. This was in ways a confounding move by township Republicans; the Wyckoff mayor serves only ceremonial functions and all committee members (including the mayor) have equal power.

Yet in other ways denying Scanlan his chance to serve as mayor made sense. Wyckoff allows for partisan elections. Why wouldn't Republicans use the system to their advantage?

Partisanship is inevitable.

But when it leaves residents unheard, excluded, or willing but unable to serve their community it becomes problematic. The makeup of the Wyckoff Township Committee has been remarkably homogenous, featuring just one Democrat and one woman in nearly 85 years, while families like the Shotmeyers and Galenkamps have held sway for generations.

Denying Scanlan the mayorship was egregious because it ignored his strong bipartisan support. Of the three candidates for township committee in 2011, Scanlan received 39 percent of the vote compared to 33 percent for Republican Douglas Christie and 29 percent for Republican Thomas Madigan. In 2014, Scanlan received 38 percent compared to Christie's 33 percent and Republican Susan Yudin's 28 percent. Only 20 percent of Wyckoff residents are registered Democrats, meaning that Scanlan maintains support across party affiliations.

Republicans are also overrepresented on Wyckoff's boards and commissions. Wyckoff maintains a patronage system wherein the majority party appoints residents to serve on commissions like the Planning Board. Many qualified Democrats and independents hoping to serve their community have been denied the opportunity.

Current appointees are dedicated and Wyckoff is well run. But voter registration data from 2016 reveals that, omitting committee members, 50 (76 percent) of the 66 positions on Wyckoff's nine boards and commissions are held by GOP members. But only 37 percent of Wyckoff residents are registered Republicans. Democrats hold only six (9 percent) of these 66 positions but makeup 20 percent of registered voters, while unaffiliated voters hold just 10 (15 percent) but makeup 43 percent.

This is no accident. Wyckoff's spoils system provides an advantage to the controlling party because serving on local commissions is often a stepping stone to elected office. For instance, all four sitting Republican Committee members served on the Zoning Board of Adjustment (as did their most recent Republican predecessors, including committeeman and Mayor Kevin Rooney, whose wife Haley Shotmeyer Rooney is running for Township Committee). Scanlan, of course, never served on the Zoning Board. Democrats have thus been at a structural disadvantage in cultivating viable candidates for decades.

The township committee form of government does have one advantage: Efficiency. All decisions are made within one legislative body. But it also denies voters the chance to directly elect the mayor. While formal voting takes place at committee meetings, the mayor is chosen behind closed doors by the majority party.

There are pitfalls to giving one individual such significant power. For instance, Washington Township may strip its current mayor of her powers after she allegedly failed to disperse adequate funding for township services.

But allowing voters to directly elect the mayor would eliminate one of the backroom deals that plague local government. An independent mayor may provide the tension necessary for increasing the committee's transparency.

Wyckoff is a town steeped in nostalgia; for its Dutch colonial agrarian identity, its many historic Revolution era homes, and its township committee government which is an offshoot of colonial New England's town meeting format. Originally, townspeople would gather regularly to make decisions; it was government by perpetual referendum. This model was eventually abandoned in favor of a representative group of elected officials.

But Wyckoff's current system bears little resemblance to its historical antecedent. It is as opaque as the original was open. It encourages participation from the few instead of the many. And its leadership at times puts its own preferences ahead of its people's.

Change doesn't come easy in an old town. But looking to our roots might help make inevitable partisanship more productive for the township and its people.

Joseph C. McGowan
Wyckoff, NJ