June 10, 2002 Maidencreek Meeting:
Length of Meetings:
This meeting ended at 1:30 AM 6/11/02. This was in part due to the many issues before the board including the billboard issue addressed in the executive session.
Shorter Meetings:
The trick is to have shorter meetings without reducing the quality of our township government. Peoples' issues must still be heard. We spent 2 hours on public comment, much of this was useful, however, we can accomplish the same result in less time. We will try the following:
Public comment on each motion as it is voted on.
While the normal business is conducted Engineer's Report etc. a clip board will be circulated. Residents will be encouraged to write their questions or issues on the clip board.
Treasurer's report, and road report will no longer be read. Copies will be available to the public, and only highlights will be discussed in the meeting.
At the “New Business” portion of the meeting, the public comments will be read from the clip board. Members of the public will be encouraged to participate in the discussion of the issues on the clip board. The board will take any action that seems necessary.
The Solicitor:
By all reports I have received, and from what I have observed, the new Solicitors, Gene Orlando and John Fielding, are coming up to speed nicely. We have started identifying and filling the gaps. In the short term this means more work for everyone involved in the township, but over the long run this should save the township time, and yield a better more consistent government.
For example, the board previously has waived land development plans for smaller almost trivial modifications to property. Gene has pointed out that this invites trouble. A person may intend a seemingly trivial change to property, but then it grows and takes on a life of its own. The township is then faced with many negative externalities for neighboring residents. With the plan waived, the full scope of the changes were never really known or considered. I hate to see residents bogged down in red tape, but many of our nagging issues today are the result of waivers in the past. We will make land development plans as painless as possible, but waivers will be very hard to get.
Traffic:
On 5/9/02 your board asked the engineer to study the data PennDOT took on their 222 survey to see if the data shows any benefit to timing the lights at 73 and Tamarack. If we can improve the back up at the lights on 222, we can reduce the cut through speeding traffic shown in the table above. It may be that since the light at Tamarack triggers on demand, cut through traffic may make the back up worse. Timing the light will increase the time to leave the development making cut through less desirable, but this is only speculation. Hopefully, the data will give clear direction on how to improve this. The analysis is still ongoing.
Martin Retirement Village:
The Water Authority and Township finally have all LOCs and the plans have been released.
June 17, 2002 Maidencreek Workshop Meeting:
Recycling is mandated for communities exceeding 5,000 people. According to the year 2000 census our population is now 6,553 people. Maidencreek has until March of 2003 to implement a recycling plan for the entire township.
The following check list was developed:
The burning Ordinance will have to be updated to prohibit burning any recyclables.
A recycling ordinance will have to be passed. This will include residential as well as commercial property. Drafts of both of these are expected in July.
Township wide recycling is mandated. The supervisors must decide if they want to include township wide trash pick up. This issue has various pros and cons.
Pro:
Fewer Trucks will be on our roads, giving less wear and tear.
Economy of scale should give us lower cost.
Con:
You will no longer have the freedom to choose your trash hauler.
Smaller haulers will be harmed if the Township goes with only one or two haulers for the entire community.
We will have to go out for bids. Either for recycling only or recycling and trash.
Recycling containers will be purchased.
We will investigate if recycling must come out of the real estate millage, or if it can be a flat charge per household.
The irony in this meeting was that you had me (who is usually totally free market oriented) advocating a township wide trash pick up plan. I do favor breaking the township up into smaller areas and bidding them separately. This would encourage the smaller haulers to bid, and help keep some competition. Normally I would favor keeping trash hauling private, but in this case my free market instincts are being eclipsed by my desire to see the efficiency of fewer trash trucks on the road, and lower prices for most residents. Rough numbers indicate a typical family might save about $108 per year with township wide trash pick up. Recycling by itself is expected to cost $5 per month. The typical family pays about $20 per month for once a week trash pickup. That's a total of $25/month with private trash pickup. A quick quote for budgetary purposes showed once a week trash pickup with recycling costing $16.00 per month on a township wide basis. That is a $9.00/month (or $108/year) savings over the private trash hauling. That is in addition to any savings we get in road maintenance. This is one area where Gloria and I appear to disagree. It is this diversity of opinion that will make this new board likely to render better decisions than the old board.
Since the original posting of June 17, 2002 Maidencreek Workshop Meeting...
Several people have written.
Our newest supervisor Gloria Kemmerer writes:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like Roy, I am concerned about the impact that the mandated Recycling program will have on the taxpayers of Maidencreek Township. We just differ in our perspective to achieve the same goal. I am concerned that to limit trash pickup in our entire Township to one or two haulers could impact the very livelihood of the smaller companies who currently service us. They would ultimately lose all their accounts in Maidencreek. I feel that this is unfair. Also as smaller companies are driven out of business by the larger haulers, less competition could lead to higher prices a few years down the road. We might be saving initially, only to lose out later.
Then there is the issue of how many times residents want/need their trash picked up. The household that needs trash picked up only once a week should not be forced to pay for twice a week pickup. On the other hand, if a family really needs their trash picked up twice a week, they shouldn't be limited to once a week either.
Right now if you are dissatisfied with your hauler, you can fire him and get someone else. If the Township chooses your carrier for you, there is no assurance that you will like its services any better than one you have chosen.
The only mandate the Township has right now is to start a Recycling program. It would be my choice to start with Recycling only and then, in the future, re-visit the possibility of Municipal trash collection if it appears necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I received several emails on this issue. The majority are for municipal wide trash pick up, but differ as to what they want. Some have one time a week, and would experience a savings with the example above. Others need two pick ups per week, and still others pay right now by the bag, and any municipal wide plan would be an extra expense for them. It is clear a “one size fits all” plan will not please all. There is still the advantage of the wear and tear on the roads. My mind is not totally made up on this issue. It may be for Bob Kopfer to be the deciding vote. Bob was not at the workshop meeting.
It is likely the most controversial portion of this will be the decision on whether to include trash pick up. Please give me the benefit of your opinion.
paid for by Roy Timpe