POUGHKEEPSIE – On August 24, 2020, the Poughkeepsie Common Council voted to hire an outside lawyer to serve as a consultant to the council. The attorney was to advise on matters of the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP). Mayor Rob Rolison vetoed the hiring on September 3, 2020.
In his veto message, Rolison said in part “I have been informed by the Director of Planning and the City Administrator that this resolution would authorize the expenditure of taxpayer funds in a manner inconsistent with good governance and fiscal prudence.”
The Council, led by Sarah Salem, did not attempt to override the veto by a vote of the council and sued the mayor instead. Speculation was that Salem did not have the required votes to override the veto and sought a court remedy. The lawsuit alleged that the mayor’s veto was “arbitrary and capricious” and sought to have it overturned.
Supreme Court Justice Hal Greenwald heard arguments from both sides and reviewed the City Charter before rendering his July 9 decision. Greenwald ruled in favor of Rolison. The judge said in part, “it was neither an error of law, nor arbitrary and capricious for Respondent Rolison to veto Resolution R20-68 as made by Petitioner Common Council.” The final decision validated Rolison’s veto powers.
On Thursday, Rolison spoke of the decision, saying “I am pleased that State Supreme Court Justice Hal Greenwald has dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Poughkeepsie Common Council and ruled that my decision to veto the Council’s resolution R-20-68 was ‘neither an error of law nor arbitrary and capricious.’
Democrat Matt McNamara was on the council when the lawsuits began. McNamara is a Democrat, as is Salem along with the majority of the council. McNamara denounced the lawsuit that was filed on his behalf, suing Rolison. “The lawsuit, allegedly filed by the entire Common Council, is completely improper and will likely be dismissed before our holiday decorations are put away, said McNamara. He added “In order for the Council to commence an action against the Mayor of our City, there first must be a vote of the Council, taken at a properly noticed public meeting. That didn’t happen.”
McNamara resigned from the council in June but weighed in on the decision. “As I said from the start, the common council’s lawsuit against the mayor was not authorized by a vote of the council as required. The proper action for any council that is unhappy with a mayor’s veto, is to put the votes together to override. Unfortunately, the leadership of this council, unable to get the votes to override, just decided to sue the mayor. The Court’s decision confirms what the city charter clearly says, that the mayor has veto authority over council resolutions, ordinances, and local laws.”
Salem refused to respond to a text message or an email (sent to her city email address) on Thursday.
