Unhappy with the number of regular meetings some members have missed, Bowmanstown Borough Council is poised to pass an amendment to its compensation ordinance that docks duly elected council members if they miss regular monthly council meetings.

This is an unusual step as best as I can determine. In the more than 60 years that I have been covering local government, this is the first time that I can recall such a punitive measure to force attendance.

I have been trying for the better part of a month to get a callback from Rick Habacivch, director of communications and learning strategy of the state Association of Boroughs, to determine whether this is unprecedented among Pennsylvania boroughs, but he has not returned my calls.

According to its official agenda, council is scheduled to adopt the amendment to the ordinance at tonight’s meeting.

I find this to be an extraordinary move for elected officials to take to ensure that members perform their duties as determined in their oath of office.

The ordinance will indicate that no compensation ($100) will be paid in any month to a council member who fails to attend a regular meeting unless the member is absent due to illness or due to the death or illness of an immediate family member.

Councilwoman Kara Scott, who cast the lone vote against the amended ordinance, suggested that the section about illnesses be removed because of the possible difficulty of confirming absences for this reason.

Will council members be required to get a note from their doctor or health provider? Supposed a member has a 24-hour bug but did not need to see a doctor; in this case, would a verbal explanation suffice?

What about other reasons, which I would consider legitimate? Suppose a member had to travel to a faraway destination for an important family function such as a wedding or the birth of a grandchild? Would council members be cut a break? How about missing a meeting because of a family vacation? I mean there are so many variables.

What about other non-regular meetings that members attend, such as committee meetings, attendance at other governmental meetings, ribbon cuttings and so on. Would attendance at one of these in a month amortize a missed regular council meeting?

Most states give local governing bodies the option to set attendance policies with penalties that include removal from office, but Pennsylvania is not one of them. Almost all states give more options for getting rid of municipal officials with the exception of Pennsylvania, Mississippi and Utah.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled that the state constitution allows an elected official to be removed from office only through impeachment, conviction of a felony, perjury or misbehavior in office. Missing meetings is not misbehavior in office.

It seems to me that there are more practical alternatives. For starters, each of these seven council members took an oath of office at the start of each of their four-year terms.

They have a responsibility to honor this commitment, which includes fulfilling all of the duties expected of a borough council member as laid out in the Borough Code.

For those who do not and fail to respond to explaining to their constituents and colleagues why they are not performing their duty, the other council members can censure the member for nonperformance, but can’t do much more.

Any council member who is no longer able or willing to perform his or her legislative and constitutional duties should resign and allow another borough resident to be considered for this important position.

If the offending member resists all efforts to perform his or her duties, despite the efforts and urging of constituents and colleagues, the electorate will have the ultimate say if that person seeks re-election.

I believe that the idea of docking pay for nonattendance at a specific meeting opens a can of worms that can lead to legal and other complications.

By Bruce Frassinelli | tneditor@tnonline.com

The foregoing opinions do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editorial Board or Times News LLC.