Bill Text: NJ A4400 | 2014-2015 | Regular Session | Introduced
Bill Title: Establishes fast track hearing for challenges to shared service agreements and municipal consolidations.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Republican 2-0)
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2015-05-11 - Introduced, Referred to Assembly State and Local Government Committee [A4400 Detail]
Download: New_Jersey-2014-A4400-Introduced.html
Sponsored by:
Assemblywoman HOLLY SCHEPISI
District 39 (Bergen and Passaic)
SYNOPSIS
Establishes fast track hearing for challenges to shared service agreements and municipal consolidations.
CURRENT VERSION OF TEXT
As introduced.
An Act concerning municipal consolidations and sharing of services among local units and amending P.L.2007, c.63.
Be It Enacted by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey:
1. Section 34 of P.L.2007, c.63, (C.40A:65-34) is amended to read as follows:
34. a. (1) Any shared service or joint meeting agreement or municipal consolidation shall be deemed in furtherance of the public good and presumed valid, subject to a rebuttable presumption of good faith on the part of the governing bodies entering into the agreement.
(2) Any action instituted that may prevent or delay implementation of a shared service or joint meeting agreement or municipal consolidation shall be assigned to the assignment judge of the vicinage for an expedited hearing. The matter shall be heard on an emergent basis, with limited discovery, to determine whether the proposed shared service or joint meeting agreement or municipal consolidation complies with the provisions of P.L.2007, c.63 (C.40A:65-1 et seq.). If the court determines that the proposed shared service or joint meeting agreement or municipal consolidation substantially complies with the provisions of P.L.2007, c.63 (C.40A:65-1 et seq.), the court shall award the public entity or entities all reasonable litigation costs and reasonable attorney fees.
b. With regard to any responsibilities assigned to the Public Employment Relations Commission pursuant to sections 1 to 37 of P.L.2007, c.63 (C.40A:65-1 et al.):
(1) The commission may promulgate rules or regulations to effectuate the purposes of sections 1 to 37 of P.L.2007, c.63 (C.40A:65-1 et al.).
(2) The commission may establish a fee schedule to cover the costs of effectuating its services; provided, however, that the fees so assessed shall not exceed the commission's actual cost of effectuating those provisions.
(3) Within 14 days of receiving a decision, a party aggrieved by a decision of a mediator or arbitrator assigned by the commission may file notice of an appeal of an award to the commission. In deciding an appeal, the commission, pursuant to rule and regulation and upon petition, may afford the parties the opportunity to present oral arguments. The commission may affirm, modify, correct or vacate the award or may, at its discretion, remand the award to the same arbitrator or to another arbitrator, selected by lot, for reconsideration. An aggrieved party may appeal a decision of the commission to the Appellate Division of the Superior Court.
(cf: P.L.2007, c.63, s.34)
2. This act shall take effect immediately.
This bill would establish a fast track hearing process for challenges to proposed shared service or joint meeting agreements or municipal consolidations. Local units of government are faced with providing high quality services without increasing property taxes. One way a local unit may accomplish this is by entering into agreements with other local units so they can jointly provide a service. Oftentimes, cost savings are realized by reducing overall staffing levels. When jobs are at stake, employee organizations may institute lawsuits to delay or prevent implementation of shared service or joint meeting agreements or municipal consolidations.
Litigants should have their day in court, however, protracted delays based upon specious legal arguments undermine the financial benefits that should inure to local taxpayers when shared service agreements and municipal consolidations are properly entered into.
Under this bill, if a court action is instituted that may prevent or delay implementation of a shared service or joint meeting agreement or municipal consolidation, the matter will be expedited by the assignment judge. It will then be heard on an emergent basis, with limited discovery, to determine whether the proposed shared service or joint meeting agreement or municipal consolidation complies with the provisions of the "Uniform Shared Services and Consolidation Act." If the court determines that the proposed shared service or joint meeting agreement or municipal consolidation substantially complies with the provisions of the "Uniform Shared Services and Consolidation Act," the court will award the public entity or entities litigation costs and reasonable attorney fees.
