Preview
Supreme Co v m; nnsylvanla
‘ d‘-
v a
C0“ 1;I 1;ng ‘1 ' leas For Prothonotary Use Only
''2:1'kflv’
‘ ' W“
; g;
5" a.7 - t
;- Docket No §
05.4,, ARE” 1 Ag? C ounty
"a '1 oa M.)
(3050 0’
The mformatzon collected on thzs form lS used solely for court admmzstratzon purposes ThlS form does not
supplement or replace thefiling and servzce ofpleadmgs or other papers as requzred by law or rules of court
Commencement of Action
S a Complaint D Writ of Summons El Petition
E u Transfer from Another Jurisdiction B Declaration of Taking
C Lea nPlaintiff’s Name (3d Defendant 5 Name
T {e n 1.. Hcm Rurkgg
9 Dollar Amount Requested Uwithin arbitration limits
(I) Are money damages requesmd D Yes 12/N0 (check one) Boutside arbitration limits
N Is this a Class Actwn Slut? El Yes )ZrNo Is this an MDJAppeal? I] Yes H No
A Name of Plaintiff/Appellant s Attorney E
5 Check here if you have no attorney (are a Self Represented [Pro Se] Litigant)
Nature of the Case Place an X to the left of the ONE case category that most accurately descnbes your
PRIAlARY CASE If you are making more than one type of claim, check the one that
you consider most important
TORT (do not Include Mass Tort) CONTRACT (do not mclude Judgments) CIVIL APPEALS
U Intentional D Buyer Plaintiff Administrative Agencies
D Malicious Prosecution D Debt Collection Credit Card D Board of Assessment
B Motor Vehicle a Debt Collection Other D Board of Elections
Nuisance Dept of Transportation
S D Premises Liability E Statutory Appeal Other
D Product Liability (does not Include
E mass tort) a Employment Dlspute
U Slander/Libel/ Defamation D1scr1m1natlon
C D Other D Employment Dlspute Other D Zonmg Board
T D Other
I [:1 0ther
MASS TORT
g a Asbestos
D Tobacco
a Toxic Tort DES
U
U Toxic Waste
Toxic Tort Implant
REAL PROPERTY MISCELLANEOUS
D Other B Ejectment D mmon Law/Statutory Arb1trat10n
B E] Eminent Domain/Condemnation Declaratory Judgment
U Ground Rent Mandamus
a Landlord/Tenant Dispute Non—Domestic Relations
E] Mortgage Foreclosure Residential Restraining Order
PROFESSIONAL LIABLITY U Mortgage Foreclosure Commercial D Quo Warranto
D Dental a Partition D Replevin
D Legal U Quiet Title E’Other
El Medical [:1 Other M“
D Other Professional
Updated 1/1/2011
\E
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE COUNTY
ANDREW HAYMAN
309 Edmonds Avenue
Drexel Hill PA 19026
Plamtiff
v No CV 2022 00 E )[O
BRIAN BURKE LAURA WENTZ MATT
SILVA MEAGHAN WAGNER LISA
FARAGLIA BRIAN ANDRUSZKO and
UPPER DARBY TOWNSHIP
100 Garret Road
Upper Darby Pa 19082
\ Defendants
NOTICE TO DEFEND
You have been sued in court If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in
the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this complai
nt
and notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by an attorney
and filing in writing w1th the court your defenses or obj ections to the claims set
forth
against you You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without
further notice for any money claimed in the complaint or for any other claim or
relief
requested by the plaintiff You may lose money or property or other rights important to
you
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE IF YOU DO
NOT HAVE A LAWYER GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW
THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A
LAWYER
IF YOU CANNOT AFF0RD TO HIRE A LAWYER THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE
TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER
LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FBE OR NO FEE
LAWYERS RFERENCE SERVICE
FRONT AND LEMON STREETS
MEDIA PA 19063
610 566 6625
{é ' ‘
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE COUNTY
:— i
ANDREW HAYMAN 773 *0 E a ‘t
309 Edmonds Avenue ‘1 :5) E“:
Drexel Hill, PA 19026 :4 )3
Plamtiff * N
v No CV 2022 GOQ >10
BRIAN BURKE LAURA WENTZ MATT
SILVA MEAGHAN WAGNER LISA
FARAGLIA BRIAN ANDRUSZKO and
UPPER DARBY TOWNSHIP
100 Garret Road
Upper Darby Pa 19082
———__.—.___—__________ Defendants
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, Andrew Hayman hereby brings the following action in equity against Brian
Burke Laura Wentz, Matt Silva, Meaghan Wagner, Lisa Faraglia, Brian Andruszko, and Upper
Darby Township (the “Defendants”) to invalidate offiCIal actions taken in violation of the
Sunshine Act, and avers in support thereof the following
INTRODUCTION
1 In Pennsylvania, r651dents have a statutory right to know about and participate in
government decision making which is protected by the Sunshine Act
2 Citizens have the right to attend all meetings of public agencies where public
business is discussed and decided and to give comment before action is taken in their names
3 That right of participation and transparency is, in the words of the General
Assembly, "vital to the enhancement and proper fimctloning of the democratic process," because
"secrecy in public affairs undermines the faith of the public in government and the public's
effectiveness in fulfilling its role m a democratic soc16ty " 65 Pa C S § 702
4 The Decision to institute litigation against an employee and the Township is a
grave dec1sion which requires authorization by public vote at a public meeting
5 The Defendants herein purported to authorize filing of a declaratory judgment
action against Vincent Rongione, the Township’s Chief Administrative Officer, docketed at
Upper Darby Township Council v Rongione CV 2022 003821 without a public meeting
6 The authorization was apparently solicited through a series of communications at
a committee meeting and by telephone between individual Defendants and an attorney appointed
by them to represent the Township Council separate from the Township Solicitor Five members
of Council including this Plaintiff were excluded from all such communications entirely
7 The litigation was Initiated on June 7, 2022 without public notice or an
opportunity to comment
8 Notice was not even given to the other five elected members of the Township
Council
9 Plalntiff only discovered that the lawsu1t had been filed by the Township on June
15, 2022 when Defendant Wentz mentioned at the Township Council meeting that a hearing on
the lawsuit had been scheduled
10 The Defendants then voted to expel Vincent Rongione, a Township Resident,
from the June 15 2022 Township Council public meeting, which is a further and separate
Violation of the Sunshine Act All Township residents are permitted to attend public meetings of
Council
11 Plaintiff, a resident and elected Council person for Upper Darby Township, has
been forced to turn to this Court to Invalidate the illegal act10ns taken by Defendants and curtail
the Defendants’ pattern of repeated and willful violatlons of the Sunshlne Act
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
12 This Court has original jurisdiction over this Complaint pursuant to 42 Pa C S
§931(a)(l) and 65 Pa C S § 715
13 Venue exists in this Court pursuant to Pennsylvania Rules of C1vil Procedure
1006 and 2103 because this action arose in Delaware County and this is a suit against a political
subdivision located within Delaware County
PARTIES
14 Plaintiff is Andrew Hayman an adult individual and elected council member from
the Fifth District in Upper Darby Township Hayman’s legal address is 309 Edmonds Avenue,
Drexel Hill Pennsylvania 19026
15 Defendant Upper Darby Township is a Pennsylvania municipal corporation and
home rule charter municipality with a legal address of 100 Garret Road, Upper Darby
Pennsylvania 19082
16 Defendant Brian Burke is an elected member of Township Council in Upper
Darby Township With a business address of 100 Garret Road Upper Darby PA 19082
17 Defendant Laura Wentz is an elected member of Township Council in Upper
Darby Township with a business address of 100 Garret Road Upper Darby PA 19082
18 Defendant Matt Silva IS an elected member of Townshlp Council 1n Upper Darby
Township with a busmess address of 100 Garret Road Upper Darby PA 19082
19 Defendant Meaghan Wagner is an elected member of Township Council in Upper
Darby Township with a business address of 100 Garret Road Upper Darby PA 19082
20 Defendant Lisa Faragha is an elected member of Township Council in Upper
Darby Township with a business address of 100 Garret Road Upper Darby PA 19082
21 Defendant Brian Andruszko is an elected member of Township Council in Upper
Darby Township with a business address of 100 Garret Road Upper Darby PA 19082
22 Individual Defendants are all members of Township Council
23 The Township is an "agency" as that term is defined by the Sunshine Act 65
Pa C S § 703
THE SUNSHINE ACT
24 The Sunshine Act requires that the de01s1ons of public agencies be made in public
and subj ect to public comment
25 The General Assembly explained in its findings supporting passage of the
Sunshine Act the "right of the public to be present at all meetings of agencies and to witness the
deliberation, policy formulation and decision making of agencies is Vital to the enhancement and
proper functioning of the democratic process and secrecy in public affairs undermmes the faith
of the public in government and the public's effectlveness in fulfilling its role in a democratic
society 65 Pa C S § 702(a)
26 Accordingly, the General Assembly has declared that it IS the "public policy of
this Commonwealth to insure the right of its citizens to have notice of and the right to attend all
meetings of agencies at which any agency business is discussed or acted upon as provided in this
chapter Id at§ 702(b)
27 Whenever an agency takes any "official action" as defined by the Act, it must do
so "at a meeting open to the pubhc " Id at§ 704
28 In addition, the agency "shall provide a reasonable opportunity" for residents "to
comment on matters of concern, offic1al action or dehberation which are or may be before the
board or council prior to taking official action " Id at§ 710 1(a) (emphasis added)
29 The Sunshine Act contains a narrow exception that allows certain
discussions but not deczswns to occur in private "executive session " 65 Pa C S § 708
30 In addition to expressly limiting consideration of matters in executive
session to mere "discuss[i0ns]," the Sunshine Act filrther specifies that any "[o]fficial
action on [such] discussions shall be taken at an open meeting " Id at§ 708(c)
31 Moreover, when an executive session is held, the agency must announce
the "reason for holding the executive session" at the next public meeting Id at § 708(b)
32 In addition the Township is required to provide the a listing of each matter
of agency business that will be or may be the subject of deliberation or official action at
the meeting agency on 1ts publicly accessible Internet website no later than 24 hours in
advance of the time of the convening of the meeting, post such notice at the location of
the meeting and at the principal office of the agency, and must make available to
individuals in attendance at the meeting copies of the agenda, Wthh mclude a listing of
each matter of agency business that W111 be or may be the subject of deliberation or
official action at the meeting Id at § 709(c 1)
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
33 At the regular scheduled Township Council meeting on June 15 2022, it
was announced by Defendant Wentz that the Township had filed a declaratory judgment
action in the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County seeking a judgment to declare
that Chief Administrat1ve Officer Vincent Rongione had forfeited h1s office and was no
longer employed by the Township
34 Plaint1ff Councilman Hayman had no knowledge of the declaratory
judgment action until Defendant Wentz made this announcement
35 No action had ever been taken in public at a Township Council meeting
authorizing the filing of the declaratory judgment action
36 Councilman Hayman had not even been provided not1ce that any
discussion of litigation was scheduled
37 Councilman Hayman was never advised nor consulted on the decision to
file the declaratory judgment action
38 On information and belief, the six Defendants never provided any notice
to the other five members of the Township Council that they were deliberating on and/or
instructing the attorney to file a declarative judgment action
39 No agenda was ever published on the Upper Darby Township website nor
in the Township Bu1ld1ng which Indicated that any vote would ever be taken to authorize
a declaratory judgment action
40 No announcement was ever made at a public meeting that an executive
session was held regarding the l1tigat1on against Mr Rong1one
41 Plaint1ff Councilman Hayman was never advised of any executlve session
42 A review of the docket shows that on or about June 7, 2022 an attorney
purportlng to represent the Township filed a declaratory judgment action
43 In the same June 15, 2022 meeting, Defendants committed a second
Violation of the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act
44 Defendant Faraglia made a motion to requ1re that CAO V1ncent Rongione
log off from the zoom platform and leave the meeting
45 Defendant Wagner seconded the motion and all six Defendants voted in
favor of the motion to illegally ban V1ncent Rongione from the meeting
46 Rongione is a resident of Upper Darby Township
47 Rongione was not disruptive and merely observed the public meeting
COUNT I DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
Violation of the Sunshine Act by Taking Official Action in a Closed Executive
Session or by telephone poll
Against All Defendants
48 Paragraphs 1 47 are incorporated herem as if fully set forth
49 Under the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act all offic1al action of the Township
must be voted on in an advertised meeting that is open to the publlc
50 The Sunshine Act also requires that any action which may be voted upon
must be published on an agenda at least 24 hours 1n advance which is both posted on the
website of the township and posted in the Township bu11ding
51 Pla1nt1ff Councilman Hayman objected to the cont1nuat10n of this
declaratory judgment action without notice to the public nor a vote in a public advertised
meeting of the Township Council
52 The Township Council cannot take actlon out51de of a public meeting
53 The Pennsylvania Sunshine Act provides that the Coult may invalidate
any action which was taken outside of a public meeting
WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons Hayman respectfully request that this
Honorable Court enter an order declaring the action taken to authorize the litigation at
CV 2022 003821 was invalidly made in violation of the Sunshine Law and that the
litigat1on must be terminated
COUNT II DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
Violation of the Sunshine Act by improperly voting to remove resident Rongione
from the public meeting on June 15, 2022
Against All Defendants
54 Paragraphs 1 53 are incorporated herein as if fully set forth
55 At the June 15, 2022 meeting Defendants committed a second violation of
the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act
56 Defendant Faraglia made a motion to require that Vincent Rongione log
off from the zoom platform and leave the meeting
57 Defendant Wagner seconded the motion and all six Defendants voted in
favor of the motion to remove Vincent Rongione from the meeting
58 Rongione is a re51dent of Upper Darby Township
59 Ronglone was not being disruptive in any way He was just quietly
observing the public meeting
60 On information and belief, the decision to exclude Rongione from the
meeting was motivated by Defendants’ personal animus toward Rongione
61 The Pennsylvania Sunshine Act requires that meetings shall be open to all
residents
62 Additionally, the Sunshlne Act requires that all residents be provided the
opportunity to provide public comment on any action item before a boat is taken
63 By voting to exclude Mr Rongione from the meeting before public
comment had been taken, the Defendants violated the Sunshine Act
64 By excluding a resident from a meeting open to the publlc out of personal
ammus, the Township Council violated the Sunshlne Act
WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons Hayman respectfully request that this
Honorable Court enter an order declaring the action taken to remove Rongione from the
June 15, 2022 meeting was in Violation of the Sunshme Act and enter an Order
prohibitlng Defendants from barring members of the publlc from Township Council
meetings
COUNT III SUNSHINE ACT PENALTY
Imposition of Statutory Penalty for Violation of Sunshine Act
Against Defendants Burke, Wentz, Silva, Wagner, Faraglia, Andruszko
65 The June 15, 2022 meeting was not the first time Defendants violated the
sunshlne act
66 At the June 1, 2022 meetlng Defendant Wagner made a motion to find that
Rongione has forfeited his position as CAO
67 Defendant Andruszko seconded that motion
68 Township Solicitor Sean Killkenny expressly advised Defendants that this
Motion was a Violation of the Sunshine Act because it had not been clearly identified on
the agenda and posted 24 hours in advance of the meeting
69 Defendants deliberately and knowingly chose to proceed anyway contrary
to the advice of the Township Solic1tor
70 At the June 1, 2022 meetlng, Defendants voted in Violatlon of the
Sunshine Act
71 That June 1, 2022 Sunshine Act Violation has been raised in the
underlying litigation
72 The Sunshine Act provides for Penalties to be imposed against Officials
who intentionally violate the Sunshine Act Section 714 provides
§ 714 Penalty
(a) Fines and costs Any member of any agency who participates in a
meeting with the intent and purpose by that member of Violating this
chapter commits a summary offense and shall, upon conviction, be
sentenced to pay
(1) For a first offense, the costs of prosecution plus a fine of at least $100
and in the discretion of the sentencing authority, of not more than $1 000
(2) For a second or subsequent offense, the costs of prosecution plus a
fine of at least $500 and, in the discretion of the sentencing authority, of
not more than $2 000
(b) Payment An agency shall not make a payment on behalf of or
reimburse a member of an agency for a fine or cost resulting from the
member's violation of this section
73 Thus, pursuant to the Sunshine Act, council persons who act intentionally
in Violation of the Sunshine Act may be fined individually for their actions
74 The fine for a first offense is up to $1000 The fine for a second offense is
up to $2000
75 Herein, against the advice of the solicitor, the Defendants committed at
least three violations of the Sunshlne Act in just the first half of June
76 Defendants have expressed no remorse and taken no action to rectify their
misdeeds
77 Perhaps blinded by animus, Defendants have intentionally and
purposefully met and voted in knowing Violation of the Sunshine Act
78 The law expressly provides that the Township may not pay these fines for
the 1ndiVidua1 council persons
79 Council persons must pay fines individually
80 Accordingly, Defendants are personally responsible for any fine levied
against them
81 The actions of Defendants have been clearly calculated 1n brash Violation
of the Sunshlne Act and contrary to the advice of their Solicitors
82 This willful disregard of the Sunshine Act merits max1mum penalties to
dissuade future violations of the Sunshine Act
83 It is clear that without penalty Council W111 continue over and over again
to Violate the Sunshine Act
84 Because these actions are the second and third violations of the Sunshine
Act in just one month, upon conviction, the Court may impose the maximum fine of
$2,000 for each Violation against each Defendant
85 Accordingly, because the Defendants acted willfully with the intent and
purpose of violating the Sunshine Act, despite warn1ng by the Solicitor, The Court should
refer this matter is to the Delaware County District Attorney’s Office for prosecution
under Section 714 of the Sunshine Act 65 Pa C S § 714
86 The Sunshine Act also provides for the Defendants to pay for Plaintiff 5
reasonable attorney’s fees and costs where the actions of the Defendants are willful
Section 714 1 provides as follows
§ 714 1 Attorney fees
If the court determines that an agency willfully or with wanton disregard
Vlolated a prov15ion of this chapter, in whole or in part, the court shall
award the prevailing party reasonable attorney fees and costs of litigation
or an appropriate portion of the fees and costs If the court finds that the
legal challenge was of a fn'volous nature or was brought with no
substantial justification, the court shall award the prevailing party
reasonable attorney fees and costs of litigation or an appropriate portion of
the fees and costs
87 Herein, the Defendants clearly acted without regard for their obligations
under the Sunshine Act, even after being wamed by the Solicitor
WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons Hayman respectfully request that this
Honorable Court refer this matter to the District Attorney for prosecutlon as a Summary
Offense with individual fines in the amount of $4,000 against each 1ndividua1 Defendant
and Order that Defendants shall pay Plaintiff 5 reasonable attorney’s fees and costs
g_—\‘
Aéw Hayman, Pro Se
VERIFICATION
Andrew Hayman states that he is the Plaintiff in this matter He states that the facts in the
foregoing Complaint are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information,
and belief
subj ect t0 the penalties for unsworn perjury
§§drew Hayman
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE COUNTY
ANDREW HAYMAN
309 Edmonds Avenue
Drexel Hill PA 19026
Plaintiff
V N0 CV 2022
BRIAN BURKE LAURA WENTZ MATT
SILVA MEAGHAN WAGNER LISA
FARAGLIA BRIAN ANDRUSZKO and
UPPER DARBY TOWNSHIP
100 Garret Road
Upper Darby Pa 19082
Defendants
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
I certify that this fillng complies with the provisions of the Case Records Public Access
Policy of the unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania that require filing confidential information
and documents differently that non confidentlal informatlon documents
rew Hayman
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE COUNTY
ANDREW HAYMAN
309 Edmonds Avenue
Drexel Hill PA 19026
Plaintiff
v No CV 2022 005010
BRIAN BURKE LAURA WENTZ MATT
SILVA MEAGHAN WAGNER LISA
FARAGLIA BRIAN ANDRUSZKO and
UPPER DARBY TOWNSHIP
100 Garret Road
Upper Darby Pa 19082
Defendants
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
1,Andrew Hayman, hereby certify that I sent a true and correct copy of the foregoing as
filed with the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County thxs date by hand delivery on July 14,
2022 to the following
Brian Burke Lisa Faraglia
100 Garret Road 100 Garret Road
Upper Darby Pa 19082 Upper Darby Pa 19082
Laura Wentz Brian Andruszko
100 Garret Road 100 Garret Road
Upper Darby Pa 19082 Upper Darby Pa 19082
Matt Silva Upper Darby T0wnsh1p
100 Garret Road 100 Garret Road
Upper Darby Pa 19082 Upper Darby Pa 19082
Meaghan Wagner Christopher Boggs
100 Garret Road Law Offices of Mark P Much
Upper Darby Pa 19082 341 Baltimore Avenue
Media PA 19063
By. g 2;? M A
An Hayman
Preview
Supreme Co v m; nnsylvanla ‘ d‘- v a C0“ 1;I 1;ng ‘1 ' leas For Prothonotary Use Only ''2:1'kflv’ ‘ ' W“ ; g; 5" a.7 - t ;- Docket No § 05.4,, ARE” 1 Ag? C ounty "a '1 oa M.) (3050 0’ The mformatzon collected on thzs form lS used solely for court admmzstratzon purposes ThlS form does not supplement or replace thefiling and servzce ofpleadmgs or other papers as requzred by law or rules of court Commencement of Action S a Complaint D Writ of Summons El Petition E u Transfer from Another Jurisdiction B Declaration of Taking C Lea nPlaintiff’s Name (3d Defendant 5 Name T {e n 1.. Hcm Rurkgg 9 Dollar Amount Requested Uwithin arbitration limits (I) Are money damages requesmd D Yes 12/N0 (check one) Boutside arbitration limits N Is this a Class Actwn Slut? El Yes )ZrNo Is this an MDJAppeal? I] Yes H No A Name of Plaintiff/Appellant s Attorney E 5 Check here if you have no attorney (are a Self Represented [Pro Se] Litigant) Nature of the Case Place an X to the left of the ONE case category that most accurately descnbes your PRIAlARY CASE If you are making more than one type of claim, check the one that you consider most important TORT (do not Include Mass Tort) CONTRACT (do not mclude Judgments) CIVIL APPEALS U Intentional D Buyer Plaintiff Administrative Agencies D Malicious Prosecution D Debt Collection Credit Card D Board of Assessment B Motor Vehicle a Debt Collection Other D Board of Elections Nuisance Dept of Transportation S D Premises Liability E Statutory Appeal Other D Product Liability (does not Include E mass tort) a Employment Dlspute U Slander/Libel/ Defamation D1scr1m1natlon C D Other D Employment Dlspute Other D Zonmg Board T D Other I [:1 0ther MASS TORT g a Asbestos D Tobacco a Toxic Tort DES U U Toxic Waste Toxic Tort Implant REAL PROPERTY MISCELLANEOUS D Other B Ejectment D mmon Law/Statutory Arb1trat10n B E] Eminent Domain/Condemnation Declaratory Judgment U Ground Rent Mandamus a Landlord/Tenant Dispute Non—Domestic Relations E] Mortgage Foreclosure Residential Restraining Order PROFESSIONAL LIABLITY U Mortgage Foreclosure Commercial D Quo Warranto D Dental a Partition D Replevin D Legal U Quiet Title E’Other El Medical [:1 Other M“ D Other Professional Updated 1/1/2011 \E IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE COUNTY ANDREW HAYMAN 309 Edmonds Avenue Drexel Hill PA 19026 Plamtiff v No CV 2022 00 E )[O BRIAN BURKE LAURA WENTZ MATT SILVA MEAGHAN WAGNER LISA FARAGLIA BRIAN ANDRUSZKO and UPPER DARBY TOWNSHIP 100 Garret Road Upper Darby Pa 19082 \ Defendants NOTICE TO DEFEND You have been sued in court If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this complai nt and notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by an attorney and filing in writing w1th the court your defenses or obj ections to the claims set forth against you You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without further notice for any money claimed in the complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the plaintiff You may lose money or property or other rights important to you YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER IF YOU CANNOT AFF0RD TO HIRE A LAWYER THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FBE OR NO FEE LAWYERS RFERENCE SERVICE FRONT AND LEMON STREETS MEDIA PA 19063 610 566 6625 {é ' ‘ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE COUNTY :— i ANDREW HAYMAN 773 *0 E a ‘t 309 Edmonds Avenue ‘1 :5) E“: Drexel Hill, PA 19026 :4 )3 Plamtiff * N v No CV 2022 GOQ >10 BRIAN BURKE LAURA WENTZ MATT SILVA MEAGHAN WAGNER LISA FARAGLIA BRIAN ANDRUSZKO and UPPER DARBY TOWNSHIP 100 Garret Road Upper Darby Pa 19082 ———__.—.___—__________ Defendants COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Andrew Hayman hereby brings the following action in equity against Brian Burke Laura Wentz, Matt Silva, Meaghan Wagner, Lisa Faraglia, Brian Andruszko, and Upper Darby Township (the “Defendants”) to invalidate offiCIal actions taken in violation of the Sunshine Act, and avers in support thereof the following INTRODUCTION 1 In Pennsylvania, r651dents have a statutory right to know about and participate in government decision making which is protected by the Sunshine Act 2 Citizens have the right to attend all meetings of public agencies where public business is discussed and decided and to give comment before action is taken in their names 3 That right of participation and transparency is, in the words of the General Assembly, "vital to the enhancement and proper fimctloning of the democratic process," because "secrecy in public affairs undermines the faith of the public in government and the public's effectiveness in fulfilling its role m a democratic soc16ty " 65 Pa C S § 702 4 The Decision to institute litigation against an employee and the Township is a grave dec1sion which requires authorization by public vote at a public meeting 5 The Defendants herein purported to authorize filing of a declaratory judgment action against Vincent Rongione, the Township’s Chief Administrative Officer, docketed at Upper Darby Township Council v Rongione CV 2022 003821 without a public meeting 6 The authorization was apparently solicited through a series of communications at a committee meeting and by telephone between individual Defendants and an attorney appointed by them to represent the Township Council separate from the Township Solicitor Five members of Council including this Plaintiff were excluded from all such communications entirely 7 The litigation was Initiated on June 7, 2022 without public notice or an opportunity to comment 8 Notice was not even given to the other five elected members of the Township Council 9 Plalntiff only discovered that the lawsu1t had been filed by the Township on June 15, 2022 when Defendant Wentz mentioned at the Township Council meeting that a hearing on the lawsuit had been scheduled 10 The Defendants then voted to expel Vincent Rongione, a Township Resident, from the June 15 2022 Township Council public meeting, which is a further and separate Violation of the Sunshine Act All Township residents are permitted to attend public meetings of Council 11 Plaintiff, a resident and elected Council person for Upper Darby Township, has been forced to turn to this Court to Invalidate the illegal act10ns taken by Defendants and curtail the Defendants’ pattern of repeated and willful violatlons of the Sunshlne Act JURISDICTION AND VENUE 12 This Court has original jurisdiction over this Complaint pursuant to 42 Pa C S §931(a)(l) and 65 Pa C S § 715 13 Venue exists in this Court pursuant to Pennsylvania Rules of C1vil Procedure 1006 and 2103 because this action arose in Delaware County and this is a suit against a political subdivision located within Delaware County PARTIES 14 Plaintiff is Andrew Hayman an adult individual and elected council member from the Fifth District in Upper Darby Township Hayman’s legal address is 309 Edmonds Avenue, Drexel Hill Pennsylvania 19026 15 Defendant Upper Darby Township is a Pennsylvania municipal corporation and home rule charter municipality with a legal address of 100 Garret Road, Upper Darby Pennsylvania 19082 16 Defendant Brian Burke is an elected member of Township Council in Upper Darby Township With a business address of 100 Garret Road Upper Darby PA 19082 17 Defendant Laura Wentz is an elected member of Township Council in Upper Darby Township with a business address of 100 Garret Road Upper Darby PA 19082 18 Defendant Matt Silva IS an elected member of Townshlp Council 1n Upper Darby Township with a busmess address of 100 Garret Road Upper Darby PA 19082 19 Defendant Meaghan Wagner is an elected member of Township Council in Upper Darby Township with a business address of 100 Garret Road Upper Darby PA 19082 20 Defendant Lisa Faragha is an elected member of Township Council in Upper Darby Township with a business address of 100 Garret Road Upper Darby PA 19082 21 Defendant Brian Andruszko is an elected member of Township Council in Upper Darby Township with a business address of 100 Garret Road Upper Darby PA 19082 22 Individual Defendants are all members of Township Council 23 The Township is an "agency" as that term is defined by the Sunshine Act 65 Pa C S § 703 THE SUNSHINE ACT 24 The Sunshine Act requires that the de01s1ons of public agencies be made in public and subj ect to public comment 25 The General Assembly explained in its findings supporting passage of the Sunshine Act the "right of the public to be present at all meetings of agencies and to witness the deliberation, policy formulation and decision making of agencies is Vital to the enhancement and proper functioning of the democratic process and secrecy in public affairs undermmes the faith of the public in government and the public's effectlveness in fulfilling its role in a democratic society 65 Pa C S § 702(a) 26 Accordingly, the General Assembly has declared that it IS the "public policy of this Commonwealth to insure the right of its citizens to have notice of and the right to attend all meetings of agencies at which any agency business is discussed or acted upon as provided in this chapter Id at§ 702(b) 27 Whenever an agency takes any "official action" as defined by the Act, it must do so "at a meeting open to the pubhc " Id at§ 704 28 In addition, the agency "shall provide a reasonable opportunity" for residents "to comment on matters of concern, offic1al action or dehberation which are or may be before the board or council prior to taking official action " Id at§ 710 1(a) (emphasis added) 29 The Sunshine Act contains a narrow exception that allows certain discussions but not deczswns to occur in private "executive session " 65 Pa C S § 708 30 In addition to expressly limiting consideration of matters in executive session to mere "discuss[i0ns]," the Sunshine Act filrther specifies that any "[o]fficial action on [such] discussions shall be taken at an open meeting " Id at§ 708(c) 31 Moreover, when an executive session is held, the agency must announce the "reason for holding the executive session" at the next public meeting Id at § 708(b) 32 In addition the Township is required to provide the a listing of each matter of agency business that will be or may be the subject of deliberation or official action at the meeting agency on 1ts publicly accessible Internet website no later than 24 hours in advance of the time of the convening of the meeting, post such notice at the location of the meeting and at the principal office of the agency, and must make available to individuals in attendance at the meeting copies of the agenda, Wthh mclude a listing of each matter of agency business that W111 be or may be the subject of deliberation or official action at the meeting Id at § 709(c 1) FACTUAL BACKGROUND 33 At the regular scheduled Township Council meeting on June 15 2022, it was announced by Defendant Wentz that the Township had filed a declaratory judgment action in the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County seeking a judgment to declare that Chief Administrat1ve Officer Vincent Rongione had forfeited h1s office and was no longer employed by the Township 34 Plaint1ff Councilman Hayman had no knowledge of the declaratory judgment action until Defendant Wentz made this announcement 35 No action had ever been taken in public at a Township Council meeting authorizing the filing of the declaratory judgment action 36 Councilman Hayman had not even been provided not1ce that any discussion of litigation was scheduled 37 Councilman Hayman was never advised nor consulted on the decision to file the declaratory judgment action 38 On information and belief, the six Defendants never provided any notice to the other five members of the Township Council that they were deliberating on and/or instructing the attorney to file a declarative judgment action 39 No agenda was ever published on the Upper Darby Township website nor in the Township Bu1ld1ng which Indicated that any vote would ever be taken to authorize a declaratory judgment action 40 No announcement was ever made at a public meeting that an executive session was held regarding the l1tigat1on against Mr Rong1one 41 Plaint1ff Councilman Hayman was never advised of any executlve session 42 A review of the docket shows that on or about June 7, 2022 an attorney purportlng to represent the Township filed a declaratory judgment action 43 In the same June 15, 2022 meeting, Defendants committed a second Violation of the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act 44 Defendant Faraglia made a motion to requ1re that CAO V1ncent Rongione log off from the zoom platform and leave the meeting 45 Defendant Wagner seconded the motion and all six Defendants voted in favor of the motion to illegally ban V1ncent Rongione from the meeting 46 Rongione is a resident of Upper Darby Township 47 Rongione was not disruptive and merely observed the public meeting COUNT I DECLARATORY JUDGMENT Violation of the Sunshine Act by Taking Official Action in a Closed Executive Session or by telephone poll Against All Defendants 48 Paragraphs 1 47 are incorporated herem as if fully set forth 49 Under the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act all offic1al action of the Township must be voted on in an advertised meeting that is open to the publlc 50 The Sunshine Act also requires that any action which may be voted upon must be published on an agenda at least 24 hours 1n advance which is both posted on the website of the township and posted in the Township bu11ding 51 Pla1nt1ff Councilman Hayman objected to the cont1nuat10n of this declaratory judgment action without notice to the public nor a vote in a public advertised meeting of the Township Council 52 The Township Council cannot take actlon out51de of a public meeting 53 The Pennsylvania Sunshine Act provides that the Coult may invalidate any action which was taken outside of a public meeting WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons Hayman respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter an order declaring the action taken to authorize the litigation at CV 2022 003821 was invalidly made in violation of the Sunshine Law and that the litigat1on must be terminated COUNT II DECLARATORY JUDGMENT Violation of the Sunshine Act by improperly voting to remove resident Rongione from the public meeting on June 15, 2022 Against All Defendants 54 Paragraphs 1 53 are incorporated herein as if fully set forth 55 At the June 15, 2022 meeting Defendants committed a second violation of the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act 56 Defendant Faraglia made a motion to require that Vincent Rongione log off from the zoom platform and leave the meeting 57 Defendant Wagner seconded the motion and all six Defendants voted in favor of the motion to remove Vincent Rongione from the meeting 58 Rongione is a re51dent of Upper Darby Township 59 Ronglone was not being disruptive in any way He was just quietly observing the public meeting 60 On information and belief, the decision to exclude Rongione from the meeting was motivated by Defendants’ personal animus toward Rongione 61 The Pennsylvania Sunshine Act requires that meetings shall be open to all residents 62 Additionally, the Sunshlne Act requires that all residents be provided the opportunity to provide public comment on any action item before a boat is taken 63 By voting to exclude Mr Rongione from the meeting before public comment had been taken, the Defendants violated the Sunshine Act 64 By excluding a resident from a meeting open to the publlc out of personal ammus, the Township Council violated the Sunshlne Act WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons Hayman respectfully request that this Honorable Court enter an order declaring the action taken to remove Rongione from the June 15, 2022 meeting was in Violation of the Sunshme Act and enter an Order prohibitlng Defendants from barring members of the publlc from Township Council meetings COUNT III SUNSHINE ACT PENALTY Imposition of Statutory Penalty for Violation of Sunshine Act Against Defendants Burke, Wentz, Silva, Wagner, Faraglia, Andruszko 65 The June 15, 2022 meeting was not the first time Defendants violated the sunshlne act 66 At the June 1, 2022 meetlng Defendant Wagner made a motion to find that Rongione has forfeited his position as CAO 67 Defendant Andruszko seconded that motion 68 Township Solicitor Sean Killkenny expressly advised Defendants that this Motion was a Violation of the Sunshine Act because it had not been clearly identified on the agenda and posted 24 hours in advance of the meeting 69 Defendants deliberately and knowingly chose to proceed anyway contrary to the advice of the Township Solic1tor 70 At the June 1, 2022 meetlng, Defendants voted in Violatlon of the Sunshine Act 71 That June 1, 2022 Sunshine Act Violation has been raised in the underlying litigation 72 The Sunshine Act provides for Penalties to be imposed against Officials who intentionally violate the Sunshine Act Section 714 provides § 714 Penalty (a) Fines and costs Any member of any agency who participates in a meeting with the intent and purpose by that member of Violating this chapter commits a summary offense and shall, upon conviction, be sentenced to pay (1) For a first offense, the costs of prosecution plus a fine of at least $100 and in the discretion of the sentencing authority, of not more than $1 000 (2) For a second or subsequent offense, the costs of prosecution plus a fine of at least $500 and, in the discretion of the sentencing authority, of not more than $2 000 (b) Payment An agency shall not make a payment on behalf of or reimburse a member of an agency for a fine or cost resulting from the member's violation of this section 73 Thus, pursuant to the Sunshine Act, council persons who act intentionally in Violation of the Sunshine Act may be fined individually for their actions 74 The fine for a first offense is up to $1000 The fine for a second offense is up to $2000 75 Herein, against the advice of the solicitor, the Defendants committed at least three violations of the Sunshlne Act in just the first half of June 76 Defendants have expressed no remorse and taken no action to rectify their misdeeds 77 Perhaps blinded by animus, Defendants have intentionally and purposefully met and voted in knowing Violation of the Sunshine Act 78 The law expressly provides that the Township may not pay these fines for the 1ndiVidua1 council persons 79 Council persons must pay fines individually 80 Accordingly, Defendants are personally responsible for any fine levied against them 81 The actions of Defendants have been clearly calculated 1n brash Violation of the Sunshlne Act and contrary to the advice of their Solicitors 82 This willful disregard of the Sunshine Act merits max1mum penalties to dissuade future violations of the Sunshine Act 83 It is clear that without penalty Council W111 continue over and over again to Violate the Sunshine Act 84 Because these actions are the second and third violations of the Sunshine Act in just one month, upon conviction, the Court may impose the maximum fine of $2,000 for each Violation against each Defendant 85 Accordingly, because the Defendants acted willfully with the intent and purpose of violating the Sunshine Act, despite warn1ng by the Solicitor, The Court should refer this matter is to the Delaware County District Attorney’s Office for prosecution under Section 714 of the Sunshine Act 65 Pa C S § 714 86 The Sunshine Act also provides for the Defendants to pay for Plaintiff 5 reasonable attorney’s fees and costs where the actions of the Defendants are willful Section 714 1 provides as follows § 714 1 Attorney fees If the court determines that an agency willfully or with wanton disregard Vlolated a prov15ion of this chapter, in whole or in part, the court shall award the prevailing party reasonable attorney fees and costs of litigation or an appropriate portion of the fees and costs If the court finds that the legal challenge was of a fn'volous nature or was brought with no substantial justification, the court shall award the prevailing party reasonable attorney fees and costs of litigation or an appropriate portion of the fees and costs 87 Herein, the Defendants clearly acted without regard for their obligations under the Sunshine Act, even after being wamed by the Solicitor WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons Hayman respectfully request that this Honorable Court refer this matter to the District Attorney for prosecutlon as a Summary Offense with individual fines in the amount of $4,000 against each 1ndividua1 Defendant and Order that Defendants shall pay Plaintiff 5 reasonable attorney’s fees and costs g_—\‘ Aéw Hayman, Pro Se VERIFICATION Andrew Hayman states that he is the Plaintiff in this matter He states that the facts in the foregoing Complaint are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief subj ect t0 the penalties for unsworn perjury §§drew Hayman IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE COUNTY ANDREW HAYMAN 309 Edmonds Avenue Drexel Hill PA 19026 Plaintiff V N0 CV 2022 BRIAN BURKE LAURA WENTZ MATT SILVA MEAGHAN WAGNER LISA FARAGLIA BRIAN ANDRUSZKO and UPPER DARBY TOWNSHIP 100 Garret Road Upper Darby Pa 19082 Defendants CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE I certify that this fillng complies with the provisions of the Case Records Public Access Policy of the unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania that require filing confidential information and documents differently that non confidentlal informatlon documents rew Hayman IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE COUNTY ANDREW HAYMAN 309 Edmonds Avenue Drexel Hill PA 19026 Plaintiff v No CV 2022 005010 BRIAN BURKE LAURA WENTZ MATT SILVA MEAGHAN WAGNER LISA FARAGLIA BRIAN ANDRUSZKO and UPPER DARBY TOWNSHIP 100 Garret Road Upper Darby Pa 19082 Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1,Andrew Hayman, hereby certify that I sent a true and correct copy of the foregoing as filed with the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County thxs date by hand delivery on July 14, 2022 to the following Brian Burke Lisa Faraglia 100 Garret Road 100 Garret Road Upper Darby Pa 19082 Upper Darby Pa 19082 Laura Wentz Brian Andruszko 100 Garret Road 100 Garret Road Upper Darby Pa 19082 Upper Darby Pa 19082 Matt Silva Upper Darby T0wnsh1p 100 Garret Road 100 Garret Road Upper Darby Pa 19082 Upper Darby Pa 19082 Meaghan Wagner Christopher Boggs 100 Garret Road Law Offices of Mark P Much Upper Darby Pa 19082 341 Baltimore Avenue Media PA 19063 By. g 2;? M A An Hayman