Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Records topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident accuses borough of withholding records and favoring officers in promotions; council denies wrongdoing
Summary
At public comment a resident accused borough staff of refusing OPRA requests, charging excessive fees and orchestrating promotions in the police department; council leaders responded that record determinations follow state guidelines and said closed session personnel matters are handled per law.
A longtime resident told the Pompton Lakes Borough Council that town officials have repeatedly refused to answer emails, withheld information requested under the Open Public Records Act and charged excessive fees for records, and accused the borough of protecting officers implicated in a widely viewed video.
"You have willfully refused to answer emails and questions at public meetings and withheld information requested through the Open Public Records Act," Helane Zablocki (S4) said, and accused officials of charging fees from "$300 to $939.40 to $4,000" and described a demand that a requester pay thousands upfront.
Zablocki also alleged a pattern in police promotions, saying the borough "skipped over" candidates and suggesting test waivers favored particular officers; she said the conduct "smells like corruption." The resident said she has 27 emails exchanged with the Civil Service Commission and suggested the council had not disclosed them.
Mayor (S2) and other council members pushed back on allegations of impropriety. Mayor (S2) said decisions about OPRA fee determinations and waivers are guided by attorneys and state rules and that the borough follows those procedures, adding, "If you're not happy with how that is, you should take that up with the state." The mayor also noted that closed session discussions are used to protect privacy on personnel matters until they are ready for public release.
Council indicated it will follow up on specific procedural questions, that the borough attorney will confirm compliance with state law and that minutes will be reviewed for accuracy. No formal disciplinary action or evidence of unlawful conduct was recorded on the meeting record; the matter remained in the public‑comment stage at the end of the meeting.
Next steps: residents requested corrections to minutes and public records; council asked staff and the borough attorney to review the OPRA procedure and the minutes referenced by the speaker.
