For the second time in seven months, a proposal to reimburse New Castle County President Paul Clark for legal fees was shelved Tuesday.
Clark had been requesting reimbursement for $12,780 he spent on lawyers after former aide Danielle Catarelli filed a 2008 complaint with the Attorney General's office saying Clark had her do campaign-related tasks on county time. (The AG's office ultimately ruled that the infraction was too minor to warrant criminal charges.)
The decision to table came after a contentious Finance Committee meeting Tuesday afternoon, during which Councilman Robert Weiner (R-Chatham) spent more than 20 minutes imploring his fellow council members to vote against reimbursement, with a frustrated Clark defending himself along the way.
Weiner came to the meeting armed with a packet of legal memos, code citations, news clippings, and something that caused some consternation among his fellow council members - Clark's campaign finance report.
Clark paid for his lawyers using campaign funds, it was revealed, though Clark said it was always his intention to replenish his campaign account should he be reimbursed.
But the revelation prompted enough questions among the 13-member council that Clark elected to delay the vote.
Councilman Timothy Sheldon (D-Pike Creek), for one, said the campaign revelation gave him pause. He questioned whether the county's indemnification laws could require Clark to reimburse the account.
Weiner, however, said he's convinced the measure was tabled because Clark "didn't have the votes."
"Council did not feel taxpayer money should be given to Paul Clark which would personally enrich him because he never paid a penny out of his pocket," Weiner said.
Clark, in turn, called Weiner's characterization "a political stunt." He said the fees were a legitimate campaign expense because the allegations were political in nature and came in the midst of his re-election campaign.
He also said he's committed to ultimately getting an up-or-down vote.
"What happened to me could happen to any county employee," he said. "And that's what this is all about. I believe if you've met all the standards, you're entitled to have some protections."
