JEFFERSON TOWNSHIP - Not much of a mystery after all.

A judge last Friday dismissed a suit alleging that the council violated both the state's Open Public Records Act (OPRA) and the Open Public Meetings Act or Sunshine Law in regard to approving and paying employee  salaries.

The man behind the suit was township resident Robert Vander Ploeg Jr.

The intriguing aspect - and perhaps fatal flaw - of this action was the initial reluctance of the plaintiff to reveal his identity. Instead, the suit referred to the plaintiff as "Concerned Citizens for a Better Jefferson." Talk about a nebulous name.

At a hearing a few weeks ago in state Superior Court, Morristown, an attorney for the plaintiff, Marco DiStefano, suggested the plaintiff would face political retaliation if identified. But at the same time, he said he was willing to identify him.

Not so fast.

Leslie A. Parikh, the attorney for the township, said it was too late to do that.

And the judge, Stuart Minkowitz, was in general agreement, although he gave DiStefano time to make his case in a brief.

In a ruling last week, however, the judge was unconvinced of the initial need for anonymity.

He said that "other than bald speculation that Vander Ploeg would have suffered political retaliation if his name was made known," there was no "reasonable explanation" why Vander Ploeg could not have brought the action himself.

Minkowitz also said there was no compelling reason why the suit should be amended after the hearing to include Vander Ploeg's name.

The ruling was a win for the township.

In a statement after the suit was filed, Mayor Eric Wilsusen said in part:

"I believe this civil action is politically motivated, an attempt to embarrass me and my administration for future political ambitions. I find it ironic that a group of supposed “Concerned Citizens” who claim to be concerned about fiscal accountability and transparency would go to the extreme of filing a civil lawsuit, which will incur significant legal fees, only to use taxpayer dollars to defend and then request anonymity. To date, no one has brought any of these alleged issues to my attention in an attempt to remedy them first."

The suit did include some legitimate points, namely that the township was paying some key officials more than the town's own salary guide allowed.

The judge, however, did not seem to consider that - at least it was not addressed in his ruling.

The problem was "lack of standing."

Minkowitz noted that it was never established that the original plaintiff - Concerned Citizens - was a legal entity on its own, and thus, not entitled to file suit.

And more broadly, the judge noted that "anonymous individuals" can not bring claims in Superior Court.

That's something to keep in mind.