Ellicott City Council criticized for abolishing judgeship | News, Sports, Jobs

[ad_1]

Photo by Eric Tichy Ellicott City Judge Marilyn Gerace speaks at Monday’s city council meeting.

The decision of Ellicott Town board members to quietly abolish one of its two elected judges was met with contempt at a closely watched meeting on Monday.

Among the most vocal were Marilyn Gerace and Sally Jaroszynski, the two longtime city judges who criticized administrators for making the decision in executive session and without public input.

“You have failed your constituents, those who elect you to power, by not allowing their voices to be heard,” Gerace said during a speaking privilege at Monday’s city council meeting. “As part of a transparent and accountable democratic process, it is essential that the voice of our citizens, including business owners, taxpayers and stakeholders, are heard and taken into account when decisions are made. that affect our community, public safety and the integrity of the judicial process.

About two dozen people attended the city council meeting, most wearing stickers that read “Save our justice! No resolution 1.”

In March, trustees moved to pass a resolution to abolish Gerace’s elected judgeship for a term that expires on December 31 this year. The resolution was not included on the city council agenda and, according to meeting minutes posted by the city, it was not brought up at their March 13 meeting.

Trustees participated in a half-hour “litigation/staff” executive session before stepping out and voting unanimously to abolish one of the judiciary posts. As a result, the city will be left with only one judge – Jaroszynski – from January 1, 2024.

Gerace and Jaroszynski were further frustrated with how they were notified of the city council’s decision – via email from supervisor Janet Bowman a full day after the resolution was passed and was to be released as a legal notice in The Post-Journal. She said they were “blindsided” by the move.

Part of Bowman’s email, shared with the newspaper, reads: “Council reviewed all city operations and departments to determine how taxpayer dollars could be saved or put to better use. The decision to reduce the number of municipal judges was one that the council carefully discussed and considered.The upcoming election in November presented the board with an opportunity this year which the council said , should be entered.

Although a handful of residents spoke out at Monday’s city council meeting to criticize the decision, council did not address the stance of suppressed justice. Gerace has been a judge at Ellicott for nearly 32 years while Jaroszynski is currently in his 14th year.

In his prepared remarks, Gerace criticized the city council for not including the resolution on the March agenda, preventing the public from being informed that abolition was even being considered.

“You have done a great disservice to the citizens of this community,” Gerace said. “Residents of the Town of Ellicott support the contribution of their tax dollars to support the justice system as it is currently structured.”

The two judges hear hundreds, if not thousands, Gerace estimates, of cases a year in Ellicott City Court. The pair handle a variety of court cases, from routine traffic violations and some civil cases to preliminary hearings for felony cases.

Jaroszynski said the elimination of a judgeship is a “serious blow to an individual’s access to justice and fairness in our community.” She said the move would also place an unnecessary burden on the remaining judiciary – itself – to manage the entire caseload and an already lagging justice system.

“I’m still surprised at how disrespectful it was done,” Jaroszynski said. “It was just completely disrespectful. I’m looking at all these faces in front of me right now and no one approached me; no one asked me about my court; no one asked me about our process; no one didn’t ask about our schedule, why it changed. Nothing.”

Rexford Morgan, a local attorney, and James Rensel, a townsman and former mayor of Falconer, also denounced the decision in comments to the board.

Jason Schmidt, Chautauqua County District Attorney, expressed concerns that Ellicott is moving forward with a city judge. In a letter that was read aloud, Schmidt noted that the Ellicott City Court is one of the busiest in the county and requires two judges to handle arraignments and other “speedy trial” matters that are submitted to court.

“The elimination of one of the two judicial positions in such a busy court could compromise the integrity of our criminal prosecutions by causing longer delays in the judgment of individual cases, increasing wait times for all people. involved, including not only the accused but also the witnesses. and the attorney as well, and the increased court backlog that we all worked so hard to reduce after reopening,” Schmidt said.

“Undoubtedly, these factors could potentially lead to dismissal of cases on statutory and constitutional expeditious trial grounds through no fault of police or prosecutors,” he said. “This, in turn, could undermine public confidence in the justice system and reduce access to justice for our citizens.”

The DA urged the city council to reconsider its decision.

Trustees also heard from the union that represents members of the Ellicott Police Department, many of whom handle City Court security. The union noted that the department is counting on the availability of city justice “at all hours of the day and night for many years to come”.

In a letter to city council, the union said in part, “We believe the elimination of a city judge would be a setback for the future of the town of Ellicott.”

In addition to serving as a city judge, Gerace helped run the county’s central arraignment program at the Chautauqua County Jail. Also known as CAP, centralized arraignment takes place every morning and evening and ensures that anyone arrested is brought before a judge with a public defender available within 12 hours.

Gerace has chaired and coordinated the CAP since its creation in 2018.

A petition opposing the resolution circulated, gathering 325 signatures and filed with the city clerk. As permitted by New York City law, the resolution is subject to a permissive referendum, which allows a resolution to be put on a ballot for a vote.

Gerace filed the petition with the city clerk on April 5. “There’s a deadline now that they have to make a decision,” she said. “If they don’t agree tonight to repeal that, then we have to have a referendum.”

Questioned shortly before the city council adjourned on Monday, the city supervisor acknowledged the contribution of the public. “You’ve given us a lot of information that we need to discuss,” Bowman said.

Bowman seemed open to holding a special meeting of trustees within the next two weeks to review the court ruling, though it’s unclear whether the board is open to overturning the resolution.

Today’s breaking news and more to your inbox

[ad_2]