June 14, 2001 Maidencreek Supervisor's Meeting:
Sale of Real-estate:
Lot number 17 on Spirit Court was auctioned before the meeting. The sale price was $6,000 which was equal to the lowest of the three appraisals. This lot has a sewer right of way cutting through the middle and is not suitable for building. This lot was taken by the township as access for mowing the township land behind the homes on Spirit Court. In practice it was found the township never used this access, and always accessed the land via route 73.
Zoning:
As many of you are aware the Zoning Hearing Board reversed the Schaeffer Farm rezoning. This was done because the meeting location was changed at the last minute. The meeting location was changed because Karl Bolognese heard of the large turn out and wanted to accommodate as many residents as possible. The Zoning Hearing Board viewed the last minute change as a violation of the sunshine law. The ironic thing is that the sunshine law is designed to allow residents to participate in the decision making process. Karl changed the meeting location to accommodate as many residents as possible. In this case the change of location was in harmony with the intent of the sunshine law. However, there were several other procedural errors in the Schaeffer farm Re-zoning, including that the actual draft of the ordinance to re-zone the farm was not available until after the public hearing.
The land owner has made another application to re-zone his land. This application will be sent to the Maidencreek Planning Commission, and the Berks County Planning Commission for their opinions. These opinions will be made available to the board by 7/15/01. The board will hold a special meeting and public hearing on the re-zoning 7/26/01.
Attorney Rich Orwig, desires to appeal the zoning hearing board's decision to the Court of Common Pleas. Since this appeal would not benefit a large number of Maidencreek residents, I don't feel justified in spending taxpayer dollars on this appeal. Rich Orwig feels this is an interesting point of law, and wants to work on the appeal pro-bono (that's lawyer talk for free). All three members of the board authorized him to pursue this appeal.
Noise Ordinance:
An interesting thing has happened with the noise ordinance. It needs to be immediately modified. This ordinance was passed just last month, but areas zoned industrial are exempted entirely from the ordinance. (check out the last sentences of section 3.01) I quote, "This prohibition shall not be applicable in the Industrial (I) zoning district Special Intensified Agricultural (SIA) zoning district, or applicable to any pre-existing non-conforming industrial use within Maidencreek Township." This means that the picnic grove (the primary catalyst for the ordinance) is exempt. The board will have to modify this ordinance for it to have the desired effect. The interesting thing about the township's law firm is that it seems to give me the opportunity to vote on everything twice.
Police:
At the 6/12/01 meeting Sergeant Scott Eaken was appointed Police Chief. Join me in welcoming him to his new role on the force.
New Ordinances to be considered:
There have been many complaints the weed ordinance takes too long to enforce. It requires notification via certified mail etc. By the time the process is complete the weeds have long since gone to seed. The board is considering a property maintenance code. This is a standard code used in other townships. I have not studied the test, but will keep you informed. We will know more about this at the next meeting.
The board is considering an ordinance that will allow us to pump out failed septic systems, and bill the property owner. This ordinance is intended to protect the neighbors, who would be at risk of having sewage leak onto their property. I support this ordinance. The case of the Martin Retirement Village shows how inadequate our existing township methods are in dealing with failed septic systems.
Mandatory Recycling:
Maidencreek Township will be required to participate in mandatory recycling within approximately two years. This is a partially funded mandate from the state government. There are grants (902 and 904) available that cover about 90% of the cost.
The cost is about $17,000 for the bins at each home, and $75,000 for the truck. That's the better part of $100,000. The township can plan on paying about 10% of that. The thing I can't help but wonder is if this will do any good. A truck this size could burn nearly a quart of fuel for each mile it travels. It will have to travel every road in the township once per week. The entire truck will require maintenance, and have to be replaced in about 10 years. Considering all the plastic and metal in the truck as well as oil and fuel, will this truck save as many resources at it uses?
This whole thing reminds me of a conversation I had with a man selling recycled toilet paper. His product was made from recycled newspaper. It had the same texture as toilet paper, but it was a brownish gray color. As I recall it sold for about 3 times the price of Scott paper. I asked him, "If you captured enough of the market to get your volumes similar to those of Scott paper, could you reduce the price to that of Scott paper?"
He replied, "No, that would never happen. We have to do so much processing on this newspaper to make it into an acceptable toilet paper, we could never match their price even at high volume."
This lead me to my next question. "If you do that much processing, did it ever occur to you use more resources making newspaper look like toilet paper than Scott uses in making trees look like toilet paper? This being the case, it is more environmentally responsible not to buy your recycled paper, but buy Scott."
I fear this mandatory recycling is like the recycled toilet paper. It feels environmentally responsible, but the environment (along with the tax payer) is actually getting the short end of this deal.
Trash Hauling:
One method the township can use for the recycling is to purchase the truck and containers, and then contract out the pick up to an outside firm. The truck would then be leased to this firm. A spin off of this is that the township may want to also bid the various neighborhoods for trash pick up. This may result in a savings, since one hauler would enjoy the contract for an entire area. It would also reduce wear and tear on our roads, since the trash trucks ( currently from several haulers each week) are among the heaviest traffic they see. Mandatory Recycling may provide the catalyst for township contracted trash removal. Overall it may save us all money. We have about two years to make this decision, but I would appreciate your opinions. There is wisdom in a multitude of counselors.
paid
for by Roy Timpe