When a proposal is rejected, common sense would tell you that the rejection has ended the matter. Not in Northampton County government. The exact opposite may in fact be true, at least as far as budgets are concerned. By a 7-1 vote, Northampton County Council on Nov. 6 rejected Executive John Brown's $334 million spending plan for next year.

Council's lawyer told them it's illegal. Their intent was to force the executive to present a new budget. But in the upside down world of Home Rule Charters and county budgets, they may have unwittingly approved it.

Line of Credit

Their action followed a determination by solicitor Phil Lauer that the budget violates the Home Rule Charter requirement of a balanced budget. Brown had proposed balancing a budget with a $20 million line of credit. But the Home Rule Charter prohibits using borrowed money for operational expenses in the absence of an emergency. Lauer also advised that the absence of details concerning the interest rate and terms of repayment for this line of credit may be contrary to the Administrative Code.

"I happen to disagree," responded Brown, based on previous county practice. He noted that the county borrowed money in 2005 for open space and that a bond refinance in 2012 included money that went to the general fund. But he told council he'd amend the budget to remove the line of credit and instead use money from the general fund.

Problem solved.

New budget needed?

But to Lamont McClure, who claimed that council was tied into a "procedural knot", the problems were just beginning. He noted that the Home Rule Charter contains no provisions under which the executive can amend his budget. It also bars council from revising the executive's revenue projections. So he argued that Brown must submit a new budget, which would have to be re-advertised and circulated among every municipality in the county.

Council President Peg Ferraro asked Brown if he could do that in time for adoption in December, and he shrugged.

"This is part of the problem," McClure said. "We don't get to make up the rules as we go along ... We can't just wave a magic wand."

Even Lauer balked at McClure's proposal, noting it would be difficult to have a brand new budget ready in December. Peg Ferraro echoed a concern over time constraints.

"I don't think you ignore the law because there's time constraints," McClure said. "There's been too much ignoring the law around here."

Revise projections?

In previous budgets, executives have often revised revenue projections, a point that Peg Ferraro made.

"It's not something that hasn't been done," she said. "We just need a revised revenue amendment."

While the Home Rule Charter has no express provision authorizing the executive to amend his own spending plan, it fails to expressly ban it. Council, however, is barred from interfering with the executive's revenue projections and thus has no authority to remove the $20 million line of credit from the budget on its own motion, even if it is deemed illegal.

Re-advertise?

In addition to the question whether an executive can amend his own budget, McClure expressed concern that the public has been misled that the Budget includes borrowed money, and believed at that time that the only way to cure that problem would be with a new budget.

Seth Vaughn, in his11th month on council, agreed that an amendment removing the line of credit "would in a sense be deceptive to the electorate." He believes that a brand new budget would protect the county from "potential litigation."

Under the Home Rule Charter, council has the authority to amend any ordinance after a public hearing, with no further need to advertise the matter.

Playing politics

Councilman Mat Benol called McClure's proposal nothing more than an attempt "to throw more slings and arrows at the executive.

"Nothing is being hidden," Benol said. "All the meetings are recorded. Everything is out there."

"I take umbrage at your saying this is a political mudslinging deal," Council member Ken Kraft told Benol. "That's just nonsense ... It's helping the process along"

Peg Ferraro, a veteran of many councils who knows that executives routinely adjust their revenue projections, was the sole council member to vote against rejecting the budget. All other council members, excepting an absent Glenn Geissinger, voted to reject.

Enact rejected budget?

Under Northampton County's Home Rule Charter, the executive's budget goes into effect if council fails to approve or amend it by Dec. 16. Even if council votes to reject the budget, it is deemed adopted unless they replace it with one more to their liking.

Brown, who has been at odds with council, could simply do nothing and the budget he's already proposed, legal or not, will be deemed approved Dec. 16.

The Home Rule Charter may actually prohibit him from submitting a new plan at this time, even if he wanted to do so, He is required to submit his budget no later than 75 days before the next fiscal year, and that time has already passed.

So by rejecting the budget, county council may have actually approved it.