Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Legal basis for hiring counsel questioned; PSATS guidance and code sections cited
Summary
Attendees and legal observers disputed whether the auditors can select and hire a named law firm under section 906 of the Second Class Township Code, or whether the court would appoint counsel; speakers urged rewriting the resolution to match statutory procedure.
Members of the public and one attendee who identified herself as a licensed Pennsylvania attorney said the resolution's language may misstate the auditors' authority under the Second Class Township Code and cited PSATS guidance that court appointment, not direct selection of a named firm, is the usual path under section 906.
A resident (speaker S6) and other attendees noted that because the township engages a CPA firm for audits, some statutory audit powers may be modified and the resolution should be narrowed or corrected. One attendee summarized the point: "the court would appoint an attorney," arguing that the resolution should not name a specific law firm as the board's retained counsel.
