Council declines to authorize residency forfeiture hearing after lengthy discussion

Council members discussed a citizen request to schedule a forfeiture hearing under the Norristown Charter concerning the residency of Third District Councilman Dustin Queenan but ultimately took no action to authorize a hearing.

Council President Rebecca Smith said she placed the item on the agenda after receiving a letter on Sept. 4 alleging Councilman Queenan did not reside in Norristown; she said she attempted to contact Queenan several times before finalizing the agenda but did not receive a response. "Holding a hearing would allow Councilman Queenan to respond, to confirm his residency and to speak directly to both counsel and the public," Smith said when introducing the item.

The municipal solicitor read the office’s legal opinion and requirements under the charter. He told council that while the charter contains forfeiture provisions and a public-hearing process, Pennsylvania case law requires a quo warranto action (commonly brought by the attorney general or county district attorney) for judicial removal. The solicitor said council could hold a hearing and then refer a determination to the district attorney or attorney general if it found disqualification, but that council likely could not, by itself, remove a member from office. "A quareto action must generally be brought by the attorney general or the county district attorney," the solicitor said when describing the legal pathway and referral process.

Councilman Queenan addressed council and denied the allegations. In a prepared statement he said, "I am and I have always been a legal resident of Norristown. My home address is 1100 Astor Street, lies within the district I was elected to serve. I'm a certified candidate for reelection, and I will appear on a ballot this November." He described being the victim of a burglary that left him displaced and said litigation and criminal investigations related to that incident remain ongoing.

Several residents made public comments about the matter during the public-comment period; Mary Ellen DeGregorio confirmed she submitted the letter requesting the forfeiture hearing. Some council members expressed concern about the timing of the complaint in an election year and about leaked personal data; others said the charter and the council’s duties required transparent handling. After discussion, the president called for a motion to authorize a public hearing under section 41.3-312 of the Norristown Charter. No member moved to authorize the hearing after a threefold call, and the council did not schedule a forfeiture hearing.

The solicitor advised that if council did adopt a determination that a member is unqualified, that determination should be forwarded to the district attorney or attorney general for potential quo warranto proceedings; the solicitor also advised council that deliberations on whether to hold a forfeiture hearing would not be appropriate for executive session.

The council’s decision was to take no action to schedule a hearing at this time. The record shows public concern, the solicitor’s legal guidance, the member’s denial of the allegations, and council members’ differing views about timing and definition of residency.