Court Opinion

ID: 9697626
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 19:23:22.300849+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:33.782475
License: Public Domain

DISSENTING OPINION BY
Judge PELLEGRINI.
I join with Judge Cohn Jubelirer’s excellent dissent but write separately to note that this court, by allowing a 40 year contract to be entered into by a public body, essentially allows public authorities to be captured by and serve private interests rather than be controlled by and serve public interests. As we recently stated in County of Venango v. Housing Authority of County of Venango, 868 A.2d 646 (2005):
Authorities are public bodies entrusted with public funds and they carry out public responsibilities. While the General Assembly wanted authorities insulated from day-to-day politics, by making the “appointing power” elected officials, it recognized a principle at the core of a representative democracy — elections should make a difference and the public bodies should be answerable to the electorate. If the electorate is dissatisfied with how an authority’s board is carrying out its public responsibilities, then it can vote out of office the elected officials that appointed the members of the board. (Footnote omitted.)
*731Now, through the device of a long term contract, whether it be 40 or 100 years, a “captured” authority cannot be recaptured and the wishes of the electorate can be ignored.
Judge COHN JUBELIRER joins this dissent.