Bellevue's new solicitor is finding out the hard way what it means to earn his retainer in the borough.

Tom McDermott found himself uninformed and on the hot seat as Bellevue Council wrangled over several issues at its twice-rescheduled regular meeting on Feb. 16.

Primary among them was council changing its long-standing and legislatively mandated meeting date because McDermott is unable to attend Bellevue meetings on the first Tuesday of each month. After extended discussion, council voted 5-4 on all three readings of an ordinance that will amend the borough's administrative code to allow council to set any date for its regular council meeting.

Some council members had been critical of the fact that they were not informed before hiring McDermott that he would not be available on the regular meeting date. Council president Kathy Coder confessed, however, that McDermott had, in fact, informed both her and director of administrative services Connie Flasher of his schedule conflict.

"I didn't think it was a big deal," Coder said.

Also not a big deal, apparently, was the advice of former solicitor Michael Georgalas and a considerable amount of state court case law that indicates that the prior council had no right to enter into a contract with a solicitor when newly-elected officials were taking their seats a week later.

Council member Linda Woshner said that individual members of council could be held financially liable if anyone challenged the contract with the solicitor.

Also at issue was McDermott's opinion that it was legal for council to meet on Feb. 9 rather than Feb. 2, which not only was the first Tuesday of the month, but also the date council approved by resolution at its Dec. 30 meeting.

Woshner said that the issue was not whether the Feb. 9 date, which ultimately was postponed because of bad weather, was legal, but,"how legal is it for us to deliberately not meet on Feb. 2?"

Woshner said that two council members had reminded the DAS that council had approved Feb. 2, not Feb. 9, as the meeting date. Council member James Viscusi said that he was given misleading information about when the meeting would be held.

"I was told it would be advertised for the second, and the very next day it was advertised for the ninth," he said.

McDermott said that council can set special meeting dates whenever it wants.

"I think there's a difference between something being unauthorized and something being unlawful," he said.

He admitted that he had not been informed of prior actions taken by council related to the meeting date.

"I wasn't privy to the chronology of events that led to it being scheduled for Feb. 9," he said.

McDermott also was not informed of a 2008 amendment to the borough's administrative code that requires resolutions to be advertised before they are adopted by council. He was not the only one in the dark, however.

The issue arose when council member Jane Braunlich asked if the resolutions on Tuesday's agenda had been advertised. Council member David Gillingham Jr. said that they had been advertised in a daily newspaper, but Flasher admitted that they had not.

Coder said that she had found no borough documents indicating that the advertisement of resolutions was required, and said that other municipalities did not pre-advertise resolutions.

"It doesn't matter what other communities do, it matters what our laws say," Woshner responded.

Braunlich provided the solicitor with a copy of the ordinance, and after reviewing it he advised that council could not vote on any of the resolutions on the agenda.

That did not stop council, however, from voting to ratify a resolution that authorized a tax anticipation loan for 2010, although there was disagreement over whether the loan had to be approved by resolution or ordinance.

The borough's home rule charter said that any indebtedness must be authorized by ordinance. McDermott said that tax anticipation loans generally are considered more administrative in nature, and other municipalities approve resolutions for such loans.

He said that Bellevue had approved its tax anticipation loans by resolution the last three years, and he assumed that this was the correct procedure.

"That's a pretty big assumption," Woshner said.

Council voted 5-4 to amend the administrative code yet again, this time to eliminate the need to advertise resolutions. In favor were Coder, Gillingham, Mark Helbling, Mark Panichella and Lisa Blaney-Stewart. Opposed were Woshner, Braunlich, and James and Susan Viscusi.