OPINION

The Reading Eagle

The Issue: Mayor Vaughn D. Spencer and the Charter Board agree to unseal documents about a board ruling.

Our Opinion: That provides scant satisfaction in a matter that has cost the Reading residents at least $200,000.

The latest developments in the ongoing — and unnecessary — dispute surrounding Mayor Vaughn D. Spencer's ill-advised attempt to hide from the public his appeal of a Charter Board ruling against him, as well as the ruling itself, suggest that this sorry chapter in Reading's history might soon be at an end.

Spencer and the Charter Board have reached an agreement to have his appeal and the ruling against him unsealed, meaning the information finally would be available to the public. The deal is awaiting court approval before the information is disclosed.

Here is a brief chronology of the events thus far:

The Charter Board was created to enforce the city charter. It ruled in October that Spencer violated the charter by hiring a half-dozen people for jobs that the board said didn't exist because City Council hadn't created them. It fined Spencer $1,000.

Spencer appealed the ruling to Berks County Court in November, arguing the ruling itself violates the charter and illegally limits a mayor's power to create and fill jobs he believes the city needs.

The Charter Board ordinance contains a clause, since repealed by City Council, that can make its rulings confidential throughout all appeals. Spencer was the first to use it.

As of January he had spent more than $200,000 in taxpayer money for defense attorneys in that and another Charter Board ruling against him, and in the appeals.

Expenditure of public money is a public record, but the city last week denied a Reading Eagle Right-To-Know request for documents showing how much the city has spent since January.

Reporter Don Spatz is appealing the city's denial of his two Right-To-Know requests, seeking documents showing how much money the city has been billed by the Duane-Morris law firm for Spencer's defense, and whether that firm or any other is being paid by taxpayer money in a separate campaign expense investigation conducted by Berks County, of which the mayor is the target.

Foremost at issue is whether the expenditure of public money is a public record, a principle that trumps all the city's protestations otherwise in its attempt to hide from the public how much its mayor is spending.

As we have written previously, Spencer's administration has been woefully short on performance, with one notable exception: He has been very good at spending taxpayers' money to fight rulings by the Charter Board that have not gone his way.

Maybe now that this agreement has been reached, Spencer can focus on the people who elected him, not the people who supported his campaign, and get back to governing.

But more should be done. The entire Charter Board process, from the time a complaint is filed, should be open to the public. That would keep the public informed about any alleged charter violations, and it would reveal the name of anyone who is trying to use such complaints as a means of political harassment.

We'd also like to know why Reading attorney David Brennan was replaced by Wyomissing attorney Elizabeth Magovern after Brennan reported that city codes manager Ron Natale violated the charter because he had not moved into the city within a year of the date when he was hired. Magovern terminated the inquiry into Natale's residency requirement without explanation. The residents deserve one.

We'd also like to see Spencer return the $200,000 to the city coffers. Cash-strapped Reading could do a lot with $200,000.