Photo: Wikimedia

A New Jersey Supreme Court committee has proposed a series of rule changes that, if adopted, would make it clear that private citizens can file criminal complaints, including those alleging official misconduct against public officials, in municipal court.

The court will accept public comment on the proposed rule changes, recommended by the court's Working Group on Private Citizens Complaints in the Municipal Courts, until April 2, according to a Feb. 21 notice to the bar from Appellate Division Judge Glenn Grant, acting director of the Administrative Office of the Courts.

The proposed amendments seek to clarify that such citizen complaints can't be turned away by the local courts.

The rule changes, the first since 1988, could have an impact on a Basking Ridge couple who for months have been trying to file official misconduct charges against Bernards Township leaders in connection with the township's decision last May to pay $3.25 million to settle litigation over its denial of an application to build a mosque.

The couple, George and Maya Schenk, have been trying for months to file official misconduct complaints against Mayor John Carpenter and Deputy Mayor John Malay in Bernards Township Municipal Court. Those efforts have been unsuccessful thus far.

According to documents provided by a Newark solo who has been following the saga, Kevin Orr, municipal court officials have told the Schenks that their complaints must be filed with local police, while the police have referred them to the Somerset County Prosecutor's Office.

According to Orr, the couple alleges that the mayor and deputy mayor improperly used their influence to include in the settlement a clause that would shield them from personal liability for making derogatory statements about Muslims in emails.

The Schenks, along with a number of other local residents, are challenging the township's settlement with the Islamic Society of Basking Ridge, whose application to build the mosque was initially denied in 2015.

Orr said the Schenks, who he does not represent, and others are challenging the settlement, and the township's decision to allow the building of the mosque, based on concerns about overdevelopment.

“There is a lot of ugly bigotry surrounding this, but that's not the case here,” Orr said. “There are a whole slew of people who oppose this for legitimate land-use reasons.”

Lawsuits challenging the agreement are pending in both state and federal courts. One, filed by the Thomas More Law Center in Michigan, said the settlement should be rejected because the local planning board refused to take comments from local residents who wanted to talk about Islam and Muslims. The lawsuit says Islamic groups are “waging a stealth jihad within our borders.”

The Schenks, who have been representing themselves, are out of the country until May and were unavailable for comment.

Malay referred questions to the township attorney, John Belardo, of Morristown's McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter, who was away from his office and unavailable for comment. Carpenter did not respond to an email seeking comment.

The terms of the settlement call for the township to pay $1.5 million to the Islamic Society and another $1.75 million for its legal fees and costs. Also under those terms, the town agreed to the appointment of former U.S. District Judge Joel Pisano, now with Walsh Pizzi O'Reilly Falanga in Newark, as a special master to resolve disputes over remaining regulatory approvals for the mosque project.

Orr, a general practitioner, said the proposed rule changes should make it clear that the township municipal court should accept complaints like Schenks', as well as any other complaint filed by a private citizen.

The working group's proposals chiefly involve Rule 7:2.1(b). The key proposed change would provide that “every complaint by any person should continue to be accepted for filing,” adding that the mere acceptance of a complaint by the court does not equate to a finding of probable cause.

Other rule changes would clarify what constitutes probable cause to issue a complaint or warrant; state that judges and municipal court administrators and deputy administrators can issue complaints or summonses in most non-indictable cases when the allegations are made by private citizens; mandate that any charges filed in municipal courts alleging offenses of wrongdoing by public servants, political party officials, candidates or nominees and judicial nominees be reviewed and approved by the county prosecutor's office before complaints or summonses; and that any private complaints alleging an indictable offenses also be reviewed by the prosecutor's office before any action is taken.

Luisa DeLeon, the judiciary's municipal court administrator, declined to comment.