This comes after repeated inquiries from the City Council and after a 2005 lawsuit filed by 2nd Ward Councilwoman Beth Mason.
The lawsuit was recently sent by an appellate court back to the trial court so that the city can provide more information on why they refused to give out certain cell phone users' names.
Roberts said in an interview with the newspaper last week, "If there's not a policy that's hard and fast and easy to understand, there will be one very soon."
At the City Council meeting last week, Mason and other council members agreed to create a committee to explore the usage and distribution of city cell phones, EZ Passes, and municipal vehicles."I don't have an issue with transparency as it relates to these phone records," said Roberts last week. "If I would have been asked at any time during this process, I would have said the same thing. I would have ensured that whatever documents that were not given out, would have been given out."
Mason said in a later interview, "This mayor talks about transparency, but where is it? The administration made a promise that there would be a policy in place in 2005... Here we are in 2008 and that never happened. I, as a taxpayer of this city, have a right to know how my money is being spent."
$6,662 last month alone
The city has entered claims over the past month totaling $6,662.42 for cellular usage. According to England, the city has a workforce of about 500 people, and that includes police and firefighters. Among those employees are 127 cell phones, including two-way radio devices and about 15 phones for emergency use.
That equates to $52.14 per phone over the past month for cellular usage.
Mason also referred to a 2005 article in a local daily newspaper about municipal cell phone usage in Hudson County, pointing out that Hoboken spent 46 times as much as Union City on cell phones over a three-year period.
Also, over that period of time, Hoboken had one phone for every three city employees, as compared to one for every 34 employees in Jersey City and one for every 77 employees in Union City.
Policy issues
Business Administrator Richard England said in an interview last week that he reviews all of the city's cell phone bills in his position as purchasing officer, one of his two positions with the city. If England sees a jump in cost from one month to another, he sends a memo to the individual asking them to review their bill and reimburse the city for any personal calls that were made.
"I think [England's] policy so far is that if there is excessive personal use, it's paid for," Roberts said. England said that he has collected reimbursements in the past.
Court case
Last week, the Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division sent part of Mason's lawsuit against the city back to trial court to be revisited. In the 2005 lawsuit, Mason asked for the cell phone records of city employees. She was given bills with most of the information redacted or blacked out.
The court made allowances for redactions of incoming caller numbers due to confidentiality issues and public safety, but they also remanded the case back to trial court over the release of other information, including phone users' names. Now, the city has to explain to the trial court why they can't give out the names of the cell phone users and other information.
Steven Kleinman, the city's attorney, said, "All of these cases are so incredibly wasteful." He said that since Mason was not awarded any additional information or any legal fees, he didn't see how Mason could claim a victory in the case.
But Mason said she can claim victory at this point, since she was hoping for a remand back to the trial court.
"I never understood why a lawsuit was necessary," Roberts said. "It seems to me that it has more to do with publicity." Mason is rumored to be running for mayor next year.
Roberts, referring to one of Mason's other lawsuits that reduced the cost of document requests, said, "We saved 30 cents on copies and spent $100,000 on lawsuits."
Ad hoc committee
At Wednesday night's council meeting, Mason introduced the idea of a committee to look at cell phones and EZ Pass usage. She was granted permission, and 5th Ward Councilman Peter Cunningham recommended adding municipal vehicles to the oversight list.
Kleinman said in an interview last week, "If the City Council as a body wants to review the records, they can." He said since the council uniformly approved the committee, the city would consider their requests as the wishes of the council as a body.
Kleinman said that unless there was a specific public safety issue, the committee can request any information regarding cell phones, EZ Passes, and municipal vehicles. He said that any information shared with them would be under a confidentiality agreement and that the councilperson would face criminal charges if it is breached.
For comments on this story, e-mail editorial@hudsonreporter.com.
Post a Comment