Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance Accountability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Device authorization prompts heated debate over past use of borough property
Summary
A council vote on issuing electronic devices split the Yeadon Borough Council and prompted a contentious exchange about a 2015 incident involving alleged overuse of a borough device; one authorization passed and another failed after members disagreed on whether prior findings should bar issuance.
A dispute over issuing borough electronic devices to council members prompted an extended exchange and a failed motion at the Yeadon Borough Council meeting.
Council considered separate motions authorizing borough management to order devices for Councilor Ronald Francis and for Councilor T. Tillia Jones Waters. The council voted to authorize a device for Ronald Francis after the finance director reported he had no outstanding balance with the borough. That motion passed on recorded roll call.
The later motion to authorize a device for Councilor T. Tillia Jones Waters triggered a broader debate about a 2015 incident described in the meeting record as a past overage for data on a borough device. One councilor characterized the earlier matter as "egregious use of borough property" and cited a figure of approximately $1,600; other councilors recalled an earlier internal investigation that, they said, exonerated the person at the time.
President Truhart and other members said the borough has since tightened device policies and now requires signed agreements before issuing hardware. The solicitor and manager explained that, according to counsel, the borough can require return of equipment and tighten procedures going forward but may have limited legal options to force retroactive repayment when documentation is thin.
After debate the vote on the authorization for Councilor Jones Waters failed on a mixed roll call (multiple 'no' votes recorded). Council noted the need to enforce the new device agreement process and to avoid re‑litigating long‑closed personnel matters without full documentation.
The meeting record shows inconsistent numeric references in the exchange — one councilor recalled $1,200 while another cited $1,600 — and members said the borough now requires signed device forms before issuance. The council directed management to ensure that devices are issued only after completion of current procedures.
