Will we look back at tonight’s Town Council vote on Resolution 2025-29 and view it as a rare outlier? Or through the clarifying lens of history, will we see this vote as the harbinger of a new alliance?
On January 27, 2025, we witnessed Council member DiFolco join Council Members Astor and Burkus to defeat a resolution that would have given Mayor Banks new authority over the tone and content of residents’ free speech at Council Meetings.
The noted Resolution [printed in full below] was unpopular with residents who rose to speak against it with unanimity. The predominant objection was that, during a time specifically set aside for residents to speak, the Mayor could interrupt comments he deemed “repetitive”, “disruptive”, “truculent”, and “slanderous or defaming”. Further, he could move to have people silenced or removed. All residents rising to speak against the Resolution said it was clearly in violation of the 1st Amendment.
Minority Exclusion Replaced by Consensus
To put this vote into proper perspective, we need to acknowledge that Council member Lew Brown was absent and that the recently seated political team of Brown/Banks/DiFolco generally votes as a block of three. This generally means that the Brown/Banks/DiFolco team does not need votes from Astor or Burkus to pass legislation. But tonight with Mr. Brown absent, the Council was forced to seek a wider consensus in order to make progress on votes. This consensus was achieved with the majority of business, but there were notable exceptions when Astor and Burkus were able to wield strong influence over the evening’s business.
The Consent Agenda.
Resolution 2025-29 was grouped with about 12 other resolutions that were to be voted on with a single vote called the Consent Agenda. But the rules on this vote allow council members to have items removed from the “single vote” and be acted on in isolation. This was achieved by Council Member Burkus for 2025-29.
Council Member DiFolco moved to table the resolution instead of voting on it, but Astor and Burkus voted against tabling. It should be noted that a tabled Resolution can be brought back at a later date to be voted upon. So 2025-29 had to withstand an immediate vote with just the four members present. That vote occurred with DiFolco joining Astor and Burkus to vote No. Mayor Banks voted Yes and the Resolution failed.
Below is the full language of the Resolution.
TOWNSHIP COUNCIL OF MOUNT HOLLY TOWNSHIP BURLINGTON COUNTY, NEW JERSEY RESOLUTION NO. 2025-29
PUBLIC COMMENT DURING TOWNSHIP MEETINGS
During the open portion of the Mount Holly Township Council meeting, the Council pursuant the New Jersey Open Public Meetings Act N.J.S.A. 10;4-12 provides the public with an opportunity to offer comments. A municipal governing body shall be required to set aside a portion of every meeting of the municipal governing body, the length to be determined by the municipal governing body, for public comment on any governmental issue that a member of the public feels may be of concern to the residents of the municipality. N.J.S.A. 10:4-12.
Public participation and comment shall be governed by the following rules to maintain order and prevent disruption of Mount Holly Township Council meetings. Members of the public who attend Council meetings in-person will have an opportunity to comment. Each speaker will have a maximum of three (3) minutes to speak and should limit comments to governmental issues that may be of concern to the residents of the Township of Mount Holly.
The speaker will be directed to conclude their remarks once the speaker's time has expired. A speaker may not speak more than once during the same public comment period unless recognized by the Mayor.
No time may be yielded to a speaker by another speaker.
The Mayor will acknowledge speakers in the order in which they appear by seating row at any given meeting. Speakers will address the Council from the podium and are asked to begin their remarks by stating their name and address on the record. All comments should be directed to the Mayor and Council and not the public in attendance. The Council is not obligated to answer questions or respond to comments from members of the public during the public comment period. Speakers should expect the Council, Township employees, and Township Professionals to refrain from engaging in a dialogue, except to the extent necessary to clarify the speaker's comment. The allotted time for speaking from the podium is the method to address the Council during the public comment period. The Council will not entertain questions or comments called out from the audience. Again, public participation is intended to allow members of the public the opportunity to address the Council on issues of public concern and not as a forum for two-way dialogue with Council Members. The Mayor or his designee may respond to questions either at the end of the public participation session, or responses may be provided at a later time. Speakers and members of the public should always maintain proper decorum and shall make their comments in a civil manner. Personal attacks, obscenity, derogatory or slanderous remarks will not be tolerated. The Mayor or designee may interrupt any speaker or terminate any individual's speaking privilege if the speaker's comments are disruptive or obscene. If warranted, an individual may be cautioned that a personally directed statement may be considered slanderous or defaming and that the individual may be liable for his/her statement. Attempts to hijack or filibuster the proceedings, repeated interrupting or badgering the Mayor or Township Council or officials with repetitive and truculent speech, or other disregard for the rules of decorum will not be tolerated and may subject the individual or group to removal from the meeting. If necessary, the Council meeting will be adjourned.