|
To See How
Everyone Voted
- Click On Links
|
|
The Easton Area School Board has settled its budget impasse for 2010 with a 2.69% increase.
To get to this number, the EASB voted to use $1.35 million of its $27 million reserve fund to
balance the upcoming budget. Each school district department has been directed to cut its
budget by 5%. Is this move good enough for you, the taxpayer?
|
|
Last March, the Colosi Group, represented by their attorney, Piperato (a KMRD principal)
presented their case for a liquor license transfer to the Forks Supervisors. Colosi's expressed
intention was to open a family friendly eatery in the former "My Little Gypsy Rose" restaurant in
June on Route 611 north near the Easton city line. Today, the restaurant remains empty and
instead of "coming soon" signs outside the building, there is a single "AVAILABLE" sign. What
happened?
|
|
Forks Township is considering building a new public works garage. The estimated cost is $3.2
million. According to officials, this is financially the "best of times" to do this since interest rates
are very low. In the estimated numbers, refinancing the current municipal complex loans plus the
new public works garage, will result in added expenses of $20,000 to $25,000 per year. So, what
do you think? Is this the best or the worst of times to finance a new public works garage?
|
|
Our public officials continue to conduct business behind closed doors contrary to state law. Just
look at the recent (EASD) Easton Area School District's hiring of two new employees without the
school board conducting a public discussion and vote. The Sunshine Act, the law designed to
promote transparency in state government, was ignored. Are you bothered by Sunshine Act
violations?
|
|
The Public Works Committee presents a plan for a new (estimated $3.2 million) public works
garage to the Forks Board of Supervisors (BoS) on May 21st at a 6:30 PM public workshop before
the regular 7:30 meeting. The committee proposes using seven acres of the 53-acre Township
land at Newlins and Richmond Roads. This property is destined to be a public park. On April 16th,
a public hearing was held to learn what residents want in this new park. A grant application has
also been filed for professional park design consultation. Is this park land your preferred site for a
DPW garage?
|
|
Campaign signs are all over our town. Some are legal; some are not. State campaign finance law
requires that all campaign advertisements and literature carry attribution about who paid for them.
Penalties for candidates who do not disclose the source of funding can be severe -- from fines up
to $1,000 -- to jail time -- to removal from the ballot. How do you feel about your local candidates
not following the rules?
|
|
Among the candidates running for Forks Supervisor is a part-time Community Center employee.
She works for Community Center Coordinator Don Miller who is soon-to-be a "former" Supervisor.
If this candidate wins both the Primary and again in November, who will be the "boss" -- Don Miller
or the new Supervisor/part time employee?
|
|
If money is power and the Easton Area School District (EASD) takes most of our property tax
dollars, do you consider EASD to be the most powerful local government authority?
|
|
The Express Times recently ran an impassioned editorial against a pending PA Senate bill to
allow municipalities to bypass newspapers in publishing legal notices. The proposed bill permits
municipalities to instead run the legal notices on their own websites. The editorial also urges
readers to contact their Senators (Lisa Boscola and Robert Wonderling) to let them know how they
feel. This is a timely issue considering increased municipal expenses and decreasing newsprint
sources. What do you think about this?
|
|
Forks’ Democratic Committee has just endorsed two write-in candidates for the town’s Supervisor
primary race in May. No other Democratic candidates emerged at filing time for the upcoming race
when the two incumbent Democrats chose not to run for re-election at the last minute. Two
Supervisor seats are up for grabs. Now, there are five Republican candidates – all of whom filed in
time to get on the Primary ballot - as well as two Democratic write-ins. Yes, seven Forks residents
are vying for the two positions. How do you feel about the race now?
|
|
On April 2nd, planned playground equipment for the first of Forks Township's new neighborhood
parks was approved by four of the five Supervisors. There will be a tot lot with play structures,
picnic tables, and a four hoop 3/4 size basketball court. Forks' Chief of Police said that he didn't
foresee any problems with the new park - it will just be another area to patrol. What do you think
about neighborhood parks in Forks Township?
|
|
Forks' May 19th Democratic Primary ballot will be blank. That's right. Not one Democrat stepped
forward for the contest. In contrast, five Republicans are vying for the two November Republican
ballot slots. According to a Christopher Baxter Morning Call blog post, Forks Democratic party
leaders are meeting to explore options. What does this mean to you?
|
|
Money is on everyone's mind - the stock market - joblessness – foreclosures. Here in Forks,
residents of two age-restricted modular home neighborhoods asked the Board of Supervisors to
freeze their property taxes. They reasoned that they do not own the land and a portion of their site
rent and other fees already goes to property taxes. Also, they said that because their homes are
"mobile," the units are not real estate, but are personal property. Supervisors explained that
different tax rates are not possible for different classes of homeowners. What do you think?
Should seniors get a real estate tax break?
|
|
Forks Democrat Supervisors Don Miller and Bonnie Nicholas have chosen not to stand for re-
election in 2009. Neither Nicholas nor Miller made prior announcements not to run. On the other
side, Forks Republicans are fielding five candidates for the two open seats. So what do think of
the absence of candidates for the Democratic Primary?
|
|
In a major decision favoring Forks, Northampton County’s appeals court ruled that Forks’ zoning
enactment process in the KMRD/Kings Mill procedural challenge was valid. In 2007, KMRD
challenged Forks' zoning ordinance process itself - back to 1983. If the process was deemed
flawed for the 2006 ordinance, then all previous ordinances would be examined for errors. This
could have given KMRD exactly what it wanted -- zoning rules in force during 1983. Fortunately, the
County Judge found no procedural mistakes in the current ordinance. Now, KMRD must decide if it
will appeal the case to the next level, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court. KMRD has 30 days
to decide. What do you think? Will KMRD continue and appeal the Northampton County Court
decision?
|
|
With all the talk about recession, the stimulus plan, rising local taxes and ever higher school
taxes, very little is said about state and municipal workers' defined benefit plans and taxpayer
obligations to fund them. Of course, for most private sector workers, pension investments have
shrunk due to the market collapse. Are you concerned about this elephant in the room?
|
|
Forks Supervisors have agreed to provide space to State Sen. Wonderling on two Tuesdays a
month for a few hours in the town’s Community Center so that our senator (and/or staff) can meet
with local constituents to help with their issues. In granting the space, the Supervisors also
agreed to extend the offer to our other elected representatives (Grucela, Dent, Spector, etc.) as
long as no "electioneering" occurs. In fact, there will be black-out dates near elections. What do
you think?
|
|
Municipal election Primary filings are due on March 10th. So far, Forks has only one announced
candidate for the two Supervisor openings. There’s another single filing for the two Easton Area
School Board (the incumbent) Region III seats. Then, there is not one -- that's right, none -- for the
other Township office openings - Tax Collector and Elected Auditor. The incumbents, other than
the announced school board candidate, have not yet declared. What's up with Forks’ public
spirited citizens?
|
|
The economy is in crisis. You, your friends and neighbors worry about lay-offs. You've cut
unnecessary spending. You've turned down your thermostats. You no longer drive unnecessary
distances. Now, to add insult to injury, our Easton Area School District plans to raise your largest
local tax bill by 5.8%. For those paying $3500 in school taxes, this means an additional $203.
Those with a $6,000 tax bill will now face a $6,348 obligation. Will you re-elect any of the current
school board members?
|
|
Another election season is here. Up for grabs in Forks this year are two Supervisor seats, one
Real Estate Tax Collector slot, and one Elected Auditor opening. This means that up to four
names for Supervisor can be on the ballot in the November, two Republicans and two Democrats
- and many more than that can be in the Primary contest for the two parties.
One Republican candidate, David Billings, has publicaly declared his intention to run for
Supervisor. The incumbents have yet to make their announcements. So, how about it... time is
short. Filings are due by March 10th. Will you throw your hat into the ring?
|
|
At last week's Board of Supervisors meeting, the possible reduction in the Forks Quarterly
newsletter to residents from four issues per year to two was mentioned. This would save between
$4500 and $5000 per year. Is this something you would recommend to save money?
|
|
Forks Supervisors voted unanimously to raise the pay rate of attorney Michael Shay (Zoning
Hearing Board solicitor) to $120/hour from $100/hour. The Supervisors' solicitor, attorney Karl
Kline, is now paid $145/hour - up from his 2008 rate of $140/hour. Both lawyers vigorously worked
for Forks in the prolonged 2-plus-year hearings (25) brought by KMRD/Kings Mill zoning
challenges, one as the defense attorney and one as the quasi-judge. The outcome? The
developers lost! Forks won! What do you think about our lawyers new pay raises?
|
|
Forks’ Board of Supervisors held their 2009 re-organizational meeting last week. At the meeting,
the Supervisors re-hired the town’s professional consultants -- solicitor, engineer, auditors, etc..
When consultants are hired, their rates for the year are contracted. One Supervisor objected to not
seeing the rates for professional services until after the yearly budget has been approved. He
asked that in the future those professionals seeking re-appointment (or appointment) submit their
rates during the budget process and not after it. Do you agree? Should professionals wishing to
be retained by the Township for the next year submit their proposed rates in October or November?
|
|
Some bright bulbs at the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) propose a new tax on farm
animals -- like cattle, hogs, pigs, sheep, goats, etc. -- because these ruminant animals pass gas.
Yes, these critters pass methane gas and the EPA sees an opportunity to tax this natural
flatulence as a greenhouse emission. Surely you have an opinion on this EPA proposal!
Forks Township has only one dairy farm left, Klein Farms. Its acreage has just been accepted into the
Northampton County Farmland Preservation Program.
|
|
At the last Supervisors meeting it was explained that a ballot referendum initiative typically arises
from a citizens’ group who seeks it -- and not usually from elected officials. Forks currently has no
farmland preservation fund. Would you support a ballot referendum to fund township farmland
preservation with either an increase in either earned income tax (EIT) or in real estate tax (RET)
rates in Forks?
|
|
On December 18th, a local farmer asked Forks Supervisors for help with the costs to get his land
accepted as a preserved farm (in the Northampton County Farmland Preservation program). The
Board is investigating options for a 2009 ballot referendum to raise farmland preservation funds.
One Supervisor has already said "enough" to talk about preserving farms - it's time to help farmers
now. How do you feel? Should the Board pony up money now to help the one farmer who has
asked or wait to until a ballot referendum is approved by voters?
The extra costs include that of an independent appraisal as well as the difference in the money he will receive
versus what the independent appraisal suggests he should receive. Northampton County's program pays for its
two part appraisal - part 1 is the value of the land as farmland and part 2 is the value of the land as developable
land. The difference is what the farmer receives. If there is a second, independent two-part appraisal, the farmer is
paid the average difference (between the farmland value and the developable value.) It is in the farmer's best
interest to get a second appraisal.
|
|
On Dec. 4th, Forks Supervisors donated $17,322 to Suburban EMS because it provided service
during all the turmoil caused when Forks EMS went out of business. The money to fund this
contribution comes from the balance of $20,000 budgeted in 2007 and originally intended for the
now defunct Forks' EMS.
Also on Dec. 4th, Forks Supervisors donated $2,000 to Safe Harbor of Easton, the local homeless
shelter. The money to cover this donation came from the cancelled (but budgeted) Forks
employee Christmas party. This gift was given on behalf of the employees and Supervisors of
Forks Township.
If you were a Forks Supervisor how would you have voted?
|
|
Northampton County voters in 2007 and 2008 strongly supported referenda to conserve open
space, preserve farmland and levy a .5 mil tax increase to pay for it. Now that money ($3.6 million)
which taxpayers thought was dedicated to land preservation is being eyed by Northampton County
Council to balance the 2009 budget. According to the Morning Call: "Council members pointed out
that although their intention for the tax was open space funding, it was not dedicated by law for
open space, and they've always reserved the right to change its use, if necessary." Is that how you
understood the referenda when you voted?
|
|
Forks Supervisors recently revisited its decision to exchange Forks Emergency Medical Squad
subscriptions for subscriptions to Suburban EMS, the Township's sole remaining squad. The
reason for reconsideration? According to the Express Times, Forks EMS has since said it would
repay residents who sent money to the now defunct squad. Some Supervisors felt it would be a
hardship for those who subscribed to Forks EMS in good faith, to now also pay Suburban EMS.
The proposal to rescind the original decision was defeated by a 1:3 vote. Would you have voted to
revoke the original decision to reimburse citizens at this time?
The Public Safety Standing Committee has been asked to review the status of all things EMS and report back to
the Supervisors with a recommendation. The committee will meet on Tuesday, December 2nd at 5 PM. The
meetings are open to the public.
|
|
Recent local newspaper articles have grabbed our attention with all the projected municipal
budget increases for 2009. Forks Township is no exception with its 10% budget increase. Topping
that, the Easton Area School District (EASD) heralded its grandiose plans (to the tune of $84
million) for the next five years’ of capital outlays. Both Forks’ and EASD's plans are set for final
approvals on December 18th. Since you may be just learning of impending tax increases at the
eleventh hour, do you think possible budget shortfall announcements should be made public
sooner?
|
|
The Forks Recreation Board presented its five year plan to the Board of Supervisors on November
6th. The 2006 recreation survey was cited for many recommendations listed in the plan. Just 21%
of Forks households surveyed responded - 1078 to be exact. As first choices, 97 respondents
favored expanding the bike trails, 70 wanted a swimming pool and 58 favored new playground
equipment in the Community Park. The Recreation Board also proposed an "all purpose building"
for Braden Park. The reasoning was that some Forks seniors seek a place for dancing and
aerobics since the Community Center basketball courts, the BoS was told, are not conducive to
those activities. Should the Township build an "all purpose" recreation building?
|
|
The Forks Board of Supervisors on Nov. 6th tabled a swimming pool feasibility study after learning
that it would cost between $20,000 and $60,000. The reasons? It would waste money to do the
study and then not build a pool (at a cost from $2 million to $6 million). It also concluded that now
is not a good time given budgetary constraints and the economy. The feasibility study may be
revisited in the second quarter of 2009. What do you think? Was this the right decision?
The two year old recreation survey has been cited for much of the talk of a community swimming pool. That survey
got a 21% response rate - 1078 to be exact. As first choices on their wish lists, 97 respondents favored
expanding the walking and biking trails, 70 wanted a swimming pool, and 58 favored new playground equipment
in the Community Park.
|
|
We all know how tight our budgets are right now. It's scary out there. Do you believe that this is the
time our Supervisors should be thinking about financing a $6 million township swimming pool?
|
|
In view of the world economic crisis, do you think Forks Supervisors should take precautionary
protection to shield taxpayers?
|
|
KMRD partners (Kings Mill) has initiated talks with the Easton Area School District (EASD) about a
30-35 acre land donation in Forks’ Farmland Protection (FP) zoning district. KMRD partners are
the same developers challenging Forks zoning ordinance as too restrictive. These developers
allege that Forks does not allow what KMRD wants to build - high density townhouses,
apartments and trailer parks. The proposed land donation is part of the same FP zoned land
involved in the lawsuit. Coincidentally, the last session of the KMRD zoning challenge hearing is
scheduled for Monday, October 20th. How does the timing of this possible gift sit with you?
|
|
Only one hearing session remains for the 27-month long Kings Mill/KMRD zoning challenge that
could change Forks’ future forever. This lawsuit alleges that the developers are prevented from
building high-density housing in the Farmland Protection (FP) district because Forks’ zoning is too
restrictive. The developers purchased some FP parcels and took equitable ownership of others.
KMRD knew the properties had zoning designed to protect farmland when they bought it. They are
not farmers and they bought it anyway. Now that they "own" it, they want the zoning changed.
What's wrong with this picture?
Round 25 - the final session - is set for Monday, October 20th at 7:30 PM. Word has it that residents will be
allowed to speak at that final session.
|
|
The last session of the seemingly endless KMRD/Kings Mill zoning procedural challenge hearing
is scheduled for Monday, October 20th at 7:30 PM -- just two weeks away. This concluding round
will mark the 25th session. Whew! On this final night, attorneys for both sides will deliver their
summaries. Then, you -- the ever-patient residents of Forks -- will be offered your opportunity to be
heard. Your testimony will go into the official record of the hearing. After this long drawn out ordeal,
will you be there?
|
|
US financial institutions seem to be falling apart. Here in Forks Township, we have Wachovia
Bank - formerly First Union - formerly Merchants Bank - formerly Easton National Bank & Trust - on
the brink of being bought by another bank. Do you feel threatened by the banking instability - on a
local level?
|
|
Forks Emergency Medical Squad made the news again on Saturday. Suburban EMS of Palmer
(which also serves Forks) is suing for money collected by Forks EMS on Suburban's behalf, but
not paid to them. Is this the end of Forks EMS?
|
|
Forks EMS (Emergency Medical Squad) has stopped communicating with Forks Board of
Supervisors and has not submitted their current financial statements (per the Supervisors'
request). Nor have they provided a plan detailing how they will climb out of their financial abyss.
What do you think? Are they asking to be relieved of their contract with Forks Township?
|
|
The zoning challenge by Kings Mill/KMRD continues on Monday, September 8th at 7:30 PM. It is
possible, but not entirely certain that this is the last hearing session. A good guess is that there
will be at least one more. Still, it has been a long, drawn out process. If you knew it were the last
hearing session, would you attend?
|
|
The on-going KMRD/Kings Mill zoning challenge resumes on Monday, September 8th before the
Forks Zoning Hearing Board. Township attorneys will cross-examine Dennis Glackin, the first of
two KMRD rebuttal witnesses. Glackin has testified that Forks Zoning Ordinance does nothing to
encourage the building of affordable housing. Do you think that zoning should be written to force
developers to build affordable housing?
|
|
Forks Emergency Medical Squad is back in the news. At the August 17th Forks Supervisors
meeting, the Board voted unanimously to put Forks EMS on "financial watch." The squad will be
required to submit current financial statements and a business plan to show how it intends to
achieve financial stability. Forks EMS is already two quarters behind in tax and utility payments to
the Township. They have been sent 35 delinquency notices (on its loan) from the Office of the
State Fire Commissioner. They still owe Suburban EMS $14,362 for services previously provided.
What do you think? Can Forks EMS make it?
|
|
A Solar power array is planned by Crayola on 16 acres of a 128 acre parcel the company owns -
just north of their Forks plant and just west of Kesslersville Road. The solar project will generate
three megawatts of electricity, enough to power 20% of their facility. At the August 14th Planning
Commission meeting, the two neighboring property owners expressed support for the plan. What
do you think? Is it solar time in Forks?
|
|
At the August 7th Board of Supervisors meeting there was a long discussion about how to best
explain the current emergency ambulance situation to Forks residents - website, letter, press
release, etc. In your opinion, what is the best way to inform the public?
At the July 17th Board of Supervisors meeting, the Board designated Suburban Emergency Medical Services
(EMS) as the Township's provider of ALS (Advanced Life Support) services. Forks EMS was retained as the
provider of BLS (Basic Life Support) services. Forks EMS is not certified by the State to provide ALS service and,
by law, the Township must have a designated ALS provider. Before the naming of Suburban as the ALS provider,
Suburban was the ALS provider but was under a billing arrangement with Forks EMS where Forks EMS did the
billing for both squads.. Now Suburban will bill for Suburban's services and Forks EMS will bill for Forks EMS
services - and only one ambulance, instead of two, will be dispatched by the 911 center.
|
|
The KMRD/Kings Mill zoning challenge hearing resumes Monday, August 4th with Round 23. The
hearing has been going on for two years this month. In case you've forgotten, the KMRD challenge
alleges that the Farmland Protection (FP) zoning regulations are "arbitrary, unreasonable and
unconstitutional" and that the Township fails to allow enough space for mobile home parks and
multi-family dwellings. What do you think?
|
|
The Morning Call has announced that it is cutting its newsroom staff by 25% through the
elimination of 35-40 jobs. It is unknown at this time who will be cut. Satellite offices, including
Easton's, will be consolidated and some even closed. How do you feel about this?
|
|
Forks Supervisors voted 4:0 on Thursday, 7/17/08, to designate Suburban Emergency Medical
Services (SEMS) as the Township's advanced life support (ALS) provider. Forks EMS (FEMS) will
continue to be dispatched on all calls deemed by the 911 center as needing only BLS (basic life
support) services. The Supervisors' action, according to some, will reduce FEMS revenue stream
by as much as 50%. SEMS will now handle its own billing. How do feel about the new
arrangement?
The two squads had a payment agreement in place and according to SEMS, it was violated and therefore no
longer in effect. Insurance regulations permit only one ambulance service to bill for all ambulance services
needed on a call. FEMS was the billing ambulance company and neglected to pay SEMS for all of its services.
FEMS, according to Supervisors, is also behind in its EIT (Earned Income Tax) payments, its electric bills, and its
PEMA loan payments. In total, FEMS' debt is nearly $500,000.
|
|
Forks Supervisors have instructed the Township Manager to conduct a feasibility study for a Forks
swimming pool. The study will take time and the services of outside professionals to gather and
compile data. The study’s progress will be monitored by the Parks & Recreation Standing
Committee. What do you think?
|
|
Forks Emergency Medical Services squad and Palmer's Suburban EMS have been providing BLS
(basic life support) and ALS (advanced life support) ambulance service* to Forks residents since
the Forks squad was revived in April 2007. In several appearances before the Forks Supervisors,
Forks EMS has asked for the Township's 2007 budgeted donation - $20,000. The Supervisors are
withholding their donation until they feel confident that the squad’s financial viability is assured .
What do you think?
*Forks EMS is the designated BLS provider, but is not licensed to provide ALS service, thus the dual contracts.
Medicare regulations allow only one ambulance service to submit invoices. Forks EMS has been submitting the
bills and receiving payments for both its services and for services provided (in Forks) by Suburban. Suburban is
owed money by Forks EMS.
|
|
As the Fourth of July arrives, local cities and towns offer public fireworks displays. These are
wonderful, safe and fun to watch. However, during this holiday period many neighbors skirt the law
by setting off their own backyard fireworks. Some of these informal displays can be elaborate
while others go little beyond a few noise-makers. Do you think that large, noisy backyard fireworks
displays should be allowed with a permit?
|
|
Northampton County now owns the oldest building in Easton, the Backmann Publick House. It
was built in 1753 and was Easton's first court. The Easton Heritage Alliance, which restored and
owned the building, defaulted on its loan. Finally, the County intervened and took over the building
from them. How do you feel about this latest County real estate transaction?
|
|
Forks Supervisors voted June 5th to donate $10,000 (funds from developers for recreation, not
taxpayer dollars) to the parent-run effort to raise money for new playground equipment at Forks
Elementary School. The playground is open to the public during non-school hours. The fields
there are used by the Forks Athletic Association. The Easton Area School District will not pay for
"replacement playgrounds," but has donated $10,000. The group seeks $40,000 for phase I and
$16,000 for phase II. Before Forks' donation, they had raised $34,800. Do you approve of this
donation?
|
|
The Forks Supervisors are considering creation of some "neighborhood" parks. The land is
owned by the Township, but there’s no playground equipment in place. Funds to purchase and
install equipment comes from developer recreation impact fees. This money sits in a dedicated
recreation account -- no taxpayer dollars are needed. How do you feel about the possibility of
neighborhood parks?
|
|
The Easton Area School Board passed a 2008-09 budget that smacks property owners with a
10.37% tax increase – more than twice the inflation rate. These officials are elected, not appointed.
They don’t get as much attention as candidates for Supervisor or higher public offices. Yet, once
elected, they can impact our tax burden more than other elected officials. How do you feel about
that?
|
|
On Saturday May 24th, the Express Times awarded an editorial “TURKEY” to the residents of the
Easton Area School District. Seems only 50 interested people came to the first of three meet-the-
Superintendent-candidates sessions. What do you think makes the public (as the Express Times
called them) "apathetic?"
|
|
The new draft Comprehensive Plan mentions the Forks Town Center District as one that should
be defined, explored and developed. The Plan goes so far as to suggest that a detailed Town
Center Improvement Plan be prepared. What would you like to see there?
|
|
The Kings Mill legal challenge to the Township’s zoning ordinances will be back in front of the
Forks Zoning Hearing Board this Wednesday, May 14th. Urban Research & Development Corp's
Charlie Schmehl continues his testimony on behalf of the Township. All this began in 2004 when
one of the KMRD developers asked (then) Supervisor John Ackerman what the Township would
like to have. Ackerman told him "a public works garage." Since then, we have seen three different
proposals and the land owned (or under the control of KMRD) has increased by 100 acres to 545.
There will be at least one more session where KMRD will cross-examine Mr. Schmehl.
Summations by both sides will follow and then the Board will vote. If you were on the Zoning
Hearing Board, how would you vote?
|
|
The Stockertown/Tatamy bridge over Bushkill Creek has been closed since 2000 due to sinkhole
damage. The bridge was finally dismantled in 2007. PennDOT is reviewing its bridge program
and is considering whether: (1) to rebuild the bridge for vehicles; (2) or just for pedestrians; (3) or
both; (4) or perhaps not rebuilding at all. Letters to the editor of the Express Times argue both for
and against a vehicle bridge. Some say it would alleviate traffic problems and others say it would
create them. What do you think?
|
|
Earth Day was last week. Energy prices are soaring. Consumer energy alternatives like hybrid
cars, solar panels, and windmills are expensive. How are you coping with rising energy prices?
|
|
The Kings Mill/KMRD high-density development zoning challenge resumes before the Zoning
Hearing Board this week. At the last hearing session (March 31), Charlie Schmehl testified in
behalf of the Township that the proposed development "... could affect the Delaware River, which
is replenished in part by groundwater filtered through the mostly undeveloped area." (JD Malone,
Express Times 4/1/08). For many in the audience, this was a new way of looking at the
development. How do you feel?
|
|
The Forks Planning Commission has spent over a year working on the Comprehensive Plan re-
do. Some think it is done, others think it lacks a unifying philosophy. What do you think? Should the
Planning Commission move it forward to the Board of Supervisors or should they take more time
to fine tune it?
|
|
The new Forks Comprehensive Plan (draft) suggests a way to fund open space purchases with a
bond issue. From the Comp Plan draft: "State law allows voters to approve an increase in their
earned income tax ( up to 0.25 percent) or an increase in their real estate tax millage (up to 2 mils)
or an increase in the real estate transfer tax (up to 0.25 percent)." Our Supervisors asked their
Finance & Administration standing committee to evaluate the different ways to finance open space
preservation and report back to them. The intent is to place a referendum on the November ballot.
What do you think?
|
|
The long continuing Kings Mill substantive challenge to Forks' 2006 Zoning Ordinance resumes
Monday, March 31 at 7:30 PM with round 20. (This is not the same as the short two-session
procedural challenge where KMRD hoped to get all Zoning Ordinances back to 1983 tossed out
on technicalities - and lost.) The substantive challenge began formally nearly two years ago.
Briefly, Kings Mill hopes to prove the 2006 Zoning Ordinance invalid because it doesn't allow the
density per acre that they want. It's nearly over - on the township level. The last witness for Forks
will testify and then, presumably at the April 21 hearing, the summaries will be given. After that
there will be a vote by the Zoning Hearing Board. How do you think the absence of Forks residents
at the hearing sessions will be interpreted by the Zoning Hearing Board?
|
|
Round Two of the Kings Mill/KMRD "procedural challenge" hearing should conclude Monday night
(March 24th). If KMRD loses, they say they will appeal the decision to the Northampton County
Court of Common Pleas. If the Zoning Hearing Board rules against the Township, what do you
think should happen?
|
|
Folks who are not registered, but want to vote in The Pennsylvania Presidential Primary, or those
who want to change party affiliation, have only until Monday, March 24th to do so. Meanwhile, the
Easton Area School District has yet to agree to host polling places in the schools. Despite Judge
Freedberg’s ruling last year that they must comply, the school district still hasn’t agreed. How do
you feel about voting in the schools?
|
|
The KMRD hearings that challenge Forks’ zoning ordinance are already proving to be a lawyers’
fest. If you read the summary of the February 18th procedural challenge hearing (www. forksaction.
com) you learned that a third lawyer involved, Ms. Kellie McGowan, is also a principal in the KMRD
partnership. The principals’ list already includes attorneys Dennis Benner and Joseph Piperato
(besides developers, J.T. Maloney/Signature Homes and Nic Zawarski & Sons.) Time may reveal
even more developers/lawyers. What do you think about Forks fighting so many lawyers?
|
|
On March 8th, Forks’ Zoning Hearing Board will hear a variance request to allow a combination car
wash and quick lube in the Town Center (TC) District. It is currently not an allowed use. The owner
of the strip mall wants to build this combo in the parking lot next to the beer store. What do you
think? Would you welcome a car wash along Town Center Boulevard or is it not the right place?
|
|
Williams Township is embroiled in the Chrin request to expand their landfill. Ten Williams
residents have filed suit against the Supervisors claiming that they negotiated with Chrin behind
closed doors, a Sunshine Act violation. Do you agree?
|
|
Kings Mill partners’ (KMRD) "procedural challenge" begins February 18th before the Forks Zoning
Hearing Board. The challenge implies that there were errors of procedure (i.e., advertising, public
hearings, etc.) in the adoption of current and previous zoning ordinances. Therefore, the Kings Mill
project should be regulated by the 1983 zoning. This would allow high density development in the
Farmland Protection District. To prove errors of procedure, KMRD's counsel has requested that
the Township produce all records pertaining to all zoning ordinance adoptions back to 1983. What
do you think about this latest suit?
|
|
There's no doubt that the world of school students has changed from "when we were kids." Now
there are school police and locked doors. Saturday's Express Times carried a short story about
the (EASD) Easton Area School District's own six man police force considering going for state
accreditation. This school force is authorized to carry weapons and make arrests. Do you think that
school police should carry weapons in our schools?
|
|
The Kings Mill/KMRD hearing is set to resume on February 11. Forks is not alone in its legal
wranglings with developers. The Lehigh Valley has been overrun with developer-spawned
lawsuits over zoning regulations that prevent what they want to build - houses in areas not zoned
for residential development. One such suit was dropped last week. The Ashley/Markward
(Marshfield Partners) zoning challenge against Upper Mount Bethel Township (UMBT) has been
withdrawn. It has been replaced by a new (County Councilman Ron Angle endorsed) compromise
plan for 596 houses and an industrial park (instead of the 1257 from the original Marshfield
proposal). In what way does that UMBT suit differ from Forks' travails?
|
|
Northampton County officials have ordered 300 new electronic voting machines. These
refurbished Sequoia (Brand) Voting Systems units should arrive in time for the April primary. The
machines feature a full ballot view, a touch screen and privacy curtain. They do not include a paper
trail. Meanwhile, an injunction has been filed in Court to stop certification of six models of voting
machines, including the ones the County just ordered. The reason for the injunction? The
machines lack a "permanent physical trail" as mandated by the State. Do you trust these new
electronic voting machines?
|
|
In view of all that's transpired lately in our neighboring municipalities, do you think that Forks
Supervisors should be allowed to also have Township jobs?
A voter referendum to change Lower Macungie from a second class township to a first class one was initiated
because of the $2.5 million embezzlement by a working Supervisor. (In a first class township, Supervisors are not
allowed to hold other township jobs.) Moore Township's residents are not happy with their three working
Supervisors. Easton's new mayor's wife was appointed to City Council. Bath's mayor was arrested for stealing from
her church. Her replacement mayor was cited for a road rage incident. Etc.
|
|
At the recent meeting of the Forks Elected Auditors the three auditors (elected residents) set the
rate of pay for Supervisors who hold other Township jobs. They voted to hold wages at current
rates – no raise. One auditor pushed for more than the 4% that the rest of the Township
employees were given. Audience members loudly disagreed. The resulting two to one vote froze
current rates. Do you agree with this decision?
|
|
You've read in the local press about the plight of Williams Township residents. They are angered
that the Supervisors they elected are not saying "no" to Chrin's landfill expansion proposals there.
Williams’ citizens are frustrated that those Supervisors who sought their votes promised to fight
the landfill expansion may now be willing to compromise with Chrin. Do you think that something
similar could happen here in Forks?
|
|
This week's Express Times legal notices include five properties up for sheriff's sale in Forks
Township. What do you think about that?
|
|
The local newspapers have been covering Forks EMS' financial struggles. Most recently, on
December 20th, the Board of Supervisors decided to withhold payment of a $20,000 donation to
the squad despite its being a 2007 budget item. The Board reasoned that the last time a check
was sent, the squad's doors closed within days of its receipt. The Board will wait until 2008 to
make a decision on whether to make the donation. Some Supervisors doubt that Forks Township
is big enough to support its own EMS squad. Do you agree?
|
|
Northampton and Lehigh Counties are working on creating a regional Lehigh Valley Health
Department. Is this something you think will be beneficial to you in Forks Township?
|
|
The Easton Area School District (EASD) plans to move students from schools scheduled for
remodeling (Paxinosa & March) to the Easton Middle School until the renovations are completed.
EMS is less than a block from the recent triple murder site. Previously, some parents objected to
the move because of the disruption to their children's schooling. However, since the murders,
parents are alarmed about the safety of their children. If you were (or are) those parents whose
kids are being uprooted from Paxinosa and March schools, what options are you exploring?
|
|
At last week’s on-going zoning challenge hearing, an expert witness for Forks testified that the
Kings Mill and Weis Market projects will add 18,000 vehicle trips per day to Township roads. Right
now, 14,000 vehicles travel Sullivan Trail daily. If all the new traffic uses Sullivan Trail, the daily
vehicle count would jump to 32,000. However, not all of this new traffic will use Sullivan Trail.
Estimates are that perhaps 13,000 to 15,000 trips will be on other township roads. Also not clear
is if the anticipated additional 4,000 trips per day in/out of the new Fort James III industrial park
were included in these figures. In any event, given that Forks traffic will congeal to a crawl, do you
have a secret way in and out of the Township to avoid the congestion?
|
|
The holidays are just around the corner. The Kiwanis Club is sponsoring the Forks Christmas tree
lighting. Stuffed toys are being accepted by the Forks Police Department. What could be better?
|
|
Kings Mill is back in residents’ thoughts as the zoning lawsuit hearings resume on November
26th with another scheduled for December 17th. The Township is still presenting its witnesses.
Yet the real estate market remains stagnant Do you think that the developers will ever give up and
go away?
|
|
Forks’ two recently elected Supervisors take office on January 2, 2008. Both are finishing terms on
other Forks boards -- Erik Chuss on the Planning Commission and Bob Egolf on the Zoning
Hearing Board. A review of all the town’s appointed board members reveals that there are two
seats to be filled on the Planning Commission, two on the Zoning Hearing Board and one on the
Recreation Board. Would you consider serving on one of these boards?
|
|
Voting is the topic of talk this week in Forks! The League of Women Voters Guide to Election 2007
was finally published by the Morning Call on 11/1/07. It's also available online, too. The sad fact is
that not many registered voters actually go to the polls. Less than 1300 registered Forks voters
cast ballots in the May 2007 Primary. These voters determined our current ballot choices. If you are
reading this, it's likely that you are a voter. Now, the question is: Why do you think people don’t
vote?
|
|
The election is a week away. Three of the four Supervisor candidates have blogs. They post their
thoughts and ideas about Forks Township - for you to read. Are you reading these blogs to learn
more about the candidates before you vote on November 6th?
|
|
With the election only two weeks away and the Kings Mill suit still alive, what other issue positions
do you want to hear about from the four candidates for Forks Supervisor?
|
|
The Kings Mill hearing resumes Monday night with another witness for the Township. The election
is 3-plus weeks away. The four candidates for Supervisor oppose high density development in the
Farmland Protection district. Do you feel you have enough information about/from each candidate
to make your two choices on election day?
|
|
At their October 4th meeting, Forks Supervisors rejected by a single vote a resolution to join Kings
Mill partners’ in an indefinite suspension of current litigation to work out some sort of
"compromise settlement." Many residents attended the proceedings and all who addressed the
Board expressed strong opposition to any halt in the current legal process. It proved to be a good
night for Forks’ citizens who disagree with the Kings Mill plan. How do you feel?
|
|
The final weeks of the 2007 Forks Supervisors’ race are here! The two winners in the November
election will face daunting challenges when they take the oath of office in January 2008 – among
them several in-progress lawsuits! What are the most important issues to you in the meantime?
|
|
Northampton County is suing the Easton Area School District because the EASD wants to deny
voters use of schools as polling places. The County wants to continue using the public facilities
and the schools claim it's a security concern. What do you think?
|
|
Kings Mill partners recently filed another challenge against Forks Township’s zoning. Now they
allege that all zoning enacted since 1983 is invalid. The new challenge forces the township to
prove that it has followed the letter of the law in all zoning processes back to 1983. Apparently,
Kings Mill prefers 1983’s zoning and has submitted a new plan for their 545 acres to conform to
housing densities allowed back then. In those days, quarter-acre lots were permitted. The upshot
is that Kings Mill partners continue to pressure the Township to spend money in legal defense
costs. Why do you suppose that is?
|
|
The T-Mobile cell-tower-in-the-park proposal was turned down by the Board of Supervisors last
week. Supervisors Howell, Nicholas, and Hoff voted against it. Supervisors Ackerman and Miller
voted for it. The audience applauded the decision. What reasons do you think prompted Miller and
Ackerman to want a cell tower in the park?
|
|
The terms of two members of Forks’ Board of Supervisors expire at yearend 2007. Until then,
many issues will come before the Board. For instance, there are legal challenges – the Weis
Market appeal, the Kings Mill multiple appeals and challenges. How each issue will be decided is
important to Forks' residents. Each issue will result in major changes to our quality of life in the
form of traffic, housing density and taxpayer costs. So, this week's question is: When is a lame
duck Supervisor dangerous?
|
|
Riverview Country Club developer Gary Strausser earned a disdainful Express Times TURKEY
award (8/25/07). He was slammed for cutting down the Township-owned giant maple trees on Old
River Road as well as for trying to muscle Forks into taking over maintenance of Riverview's as yet
unfinished roads. Now Forks’ Board of Supervisors is considering suing him. If you had cut the
Township's trees, what do you think the Township would mete out as punishment?
|
|
The developer of Forks’ Riverview Golf & Country Club, Strausser Enterprises, recently cut down
eight healthy, stately old maple trees (five that belonged to the township and three on Strausser
property). Apparently, the trees were blocking the view of the river from the 12th hole of the golf
course. The tree cutting incident made front-page, headline news in the local press last Thursday.
The tree downing was also hotly discussed at last Thursday’s Supervisors meeting. Most sadly,
the trees will be missed by everyone who drives by the Frost Hollow/N. Delaware Drive (Rte. 611)
intersection and those who live in the neighborhood. One of the Strausser Enterprises’ crew
members who was sent there to do the deed told the neighbors that the township had ordered the
cutting. Chutzpah? Who knows? The fact remains that years ago the Township informed
Strausser's representative at a public meeting that the trees belonged to the Township.
Furthermore, the representative was told the trees were NOT to be taken down. The Supervisors
are now deciding the appropriate punishment. What do you think?
|
|
Round 14 of the Kings Mill legal challenge convenes Monday, August 13 at 7:30 PM in the Forks
Municipal Building. Potentially important testimony from the City of Easton and Lower Mount Bethel
Township will be presented. Representatives from these neighboring municipalities will describe
the impact of such a huge project as Kings Mill will have on them as well. Do you think that we
should care what our neighbors think?
|
|
The vote in last week’s FAC survey showed that just 20% of you feel that the Board of Supervisors
will not compromise with Kings Mill, the developers who plan to plant high-density housing in
Forks' Farmland Preservation District. The other 80% of you aren't so sure. Now that we know what
you BELIEVE will happen, we are asking what you HOPE will happen. How do you WANT to see
Forks’ future resolved?
|
|
The Kings Mill issue goes on and on. You know the one - 3000 plus homes on 500 plus acres in
the Farmland Preservation district. How long after the Zoning Hearing Board's ruling and the court
ruling on the inevitable appeal before the Supervisors give in to the developers' whims?
|
|
You know that Forks is embroiled in a protracted fight to resist high density development in the
Farmland Preservation district. You know that the hearings, boring as they’ve been, are important
to the court rulings to come. You also know that we are not alone; other communities are in similar
fights. The lack of attendance at the hearings by Forks’ residents may appear to the powers-that-
be that no one gives a damn. Such sparse attendance could indirectly affect the outcome, not of
the hearing, but of the Township's possible decision to stop "bleeding money" in its defense. How
do you think residents can show interest in the outcome?
|
|
Forks' attorneys for the Kings Mill zoning challenge have reportedly reached out to nearby
municipalities for input on how a project as big as Kings Mill would impact them as well. If Easton,
Tatamy, and Stockertown agree to respond what do you think they will say?
|
|
"Affordable Housing" is a term you will find all over the newspapers lately. In the Kings Mill
partners' zoning challenge, the claim is that Forks "needs" high density, affordable housing.
Further, they claim to be the development team to build it here. Their intent is to build it in the
Farmland Preservation (FP) District, the area specifically zoned low density. Omega Homes once
planned “affordable housing” apartments for their Penn's Ridge project, but abandoned them in
favor of more profitable condos and townhouses. Meanwhile, Forks officials maintain that Forks is
"built out" - all the land that is not in the FP is spoken for. Do you think that Forks should relinquish
its farmland to absorb all the gentlefolk needing "affordable housing" just because the developers
want to build it here?
Not so incidentally, according to Pennsylvania's Municipal Planning Code (MPC), prime agricultural lands "shall"
be protected. The soils in the FP are indeed prime - some of the best in the country! Yet, developers continue to
cite Forks FP land as undeveloped - implying that it serves no useful purpose in its current state, that of growing
food.
|
|
The Planning Commission seeks resident involvement in the re-do of the Forks Comprehensive
Plan. Resident committees are being formed at the PC meeting on June 26th. Do you have good
ideas for the future of Forks? Will you volunteer your thoughts and guidance?
|
|
The Supervisors took a tour of the proposed cell tower site in the Forks Community Park the other
night. From the enthusiasm of those-in-the-know who described the 150 ft. tower and the 150 ft.
"fall zone" needed all around it, it sounds like a done deal. However, it has not yet been up for a
vote by the Board of Supervisors. If you are for or against the cell tower site, will you write/email/call
members of the Board to let them know how you feel? If you don't let them know, they assume that
you are indifferent.
|
|
Recently some parents in the Pleasant Valley School District pulled their children out of two Polk
Township schools. The reason? - A Cingular cell tower (with a 30 year lease) near the schools!
PVSD wants the money. The parents fear the exposure. If a cell tower is permitted to be
constructed in Forks' community park, will you keep your children away from the site?
|
|
The Primary Election vote is not yet official, but so far it's looking good for the four candidates
highlighted on the FAC website. They are all new to "formal politics," but not new to public service.
Two of these outstanding Forks residents will be representing you on the Board of Supervisors
next year. Which among Forks’ many pressing issues do you want to see tackled first?
|
|
T-Mobile, the wireless telephone company, has approached Forks’ officials for permission to
"rent" a site in the Community Park for a 150-foot-tall cell tower. The site chosen by T-Mobile is
between the new garage in the park and the old Laneco property -- that is, between the Municipal
Building and the Community Center. The "rental" rate to the town will be somewhere between
$10,000 - $18,000 per year for five years. What is your reaction to this proposal?
|
|
Voting on Tuesday is NOT restricted to registered party voters. Registered Independents may vote
on ballot referenda. This Tuesday voters are presented with the opportunity to make their decision
regarding “Act I” – a referendum to raise Earned Income Tax rates instead of raising school taxes
over the next few years. Do you have any idea what this Act will do? Do you think you'll pay more or
less total school taxes if it passes?
|
|
The May 15th Primary Election is just around the corner. Democrats have two votes and two
candidates – an easy choice. Republicans have a field of four from which to pick their two
favorites! We will only ask about the Republicans here. Of the four Republican candidates, which
pair do you prefer to see run in the General Election campaign? (The pair combinations are listed
alphabetically.)
|
|
Primary Election Day arrives in a couple of weeks -- May 15th. Those who vote that day select the
November General Election candidates. In 2006, 19% of the State's registered voters cast ballots
in the Primary. Why do you vote in the Primaries?
|
|
The Kings Mill zoning appeal is once again on deck for Monday night. There's a Primary Election
scheduled for May 15th. Do you know where each of the six candidates stand regarding this
ongoing lawsuit?
|
|
Imagine for a moment that a certain Forks’ Supervisor wants to compromise with the Kings Mill
developers to settle the lawsuit alleging that the town’s zoning is too restrictive. (Kings Mill
proposes over 3,000 dwelling units on 500+ acres in the Farmland Preservation (FP) District).
Imagine, too, that this same Supervisor reasons that a compromise will give the Board control
over the project. What do you think? Does a compromise gain or relinquish control?
|
|
In two weeks, the League of Women Voters is hosting a Forks Supervisor Candidates' Forum. Do
you think it's important to attend and learn about how the candidates propose to help you, the
voters/residents of Forks?
|
|
The League of Women Voters is sponsoring a public Forum for the declared Forks Supervisor
candidates on Sunday, April 22nd at 7:30 PM. Five of the six candidates have agreed to participate
in the evening's question and answer session. Questions will originate from the League, from the
press, and from the audience. The non-participating candidate? Why Supervisor John Ackerman!
Will Mr. Ackerman's decision to reject this opportunity for you to get to know more about him win
your vote in the Primary?
|
|
Here we are, going into Round 5 (on Monday, March 26th) of the residents’ appeal of zoning
ordinance 298, the ordinance that allows a grocery use in the Economic Center. After the wealth of
testimony so far, how do you now feel whether or not this is spot zoning as the challengers
charge?
|
|
Big commitments have been made on Forks’ behalf by Forks’ Supervisors: (1.) Forks is extending
its contract to offer fire department service to Stockertown through the end of 2009. Stockertown
will pay $1250/mth for fire and emergency services. (2.) The Township has allowed Forks EMS to
begin offering Basic Life Support (BLS) - but not Advanced Life Support (ALS). Palmer's Suburban
EMS will continue to serve Forks' ALS needs - from a site in Tatamy. If you were a Supervisor, how
would you have voted?
|
|
Forks owns some currently unused capacity at the sewage treatment facility. There's only enough
for one large project, either Fort James III (industrial) or Kings Mill (residential). Which do you think
should get it?
|
|
By now, you may have already read about the 19-acre land sale by Forks Supervisor John
Ackerman (and his brother Don) to commercial developers J.G. Petrucci for $1.7 million.
Ackerman has served as a Forks Supervisor for one term (6 years). He is running for office again.
How will this land deal affect your vote?
|
|
The zoning appeal of Ordinance 298 - the one that allows a grocery as an additional use in the
Economic Center district - is on tap for Monday night. The appellants, all Forks residents, allege
that the ordinance constitutes spot zoning and should be invalidated. How do you hope this
comes out? You may select more than one response.
|
|
Round 9 of the Kings Mill zoning challenge continues Monday night, Feb. 19th, at 7:30 PM before
the Zoning Hearing Board at the municipal building. The developers are proposing 3,000+
dwelling units on some 540 Forks acres. Now hang on folks, this preamble gets complicated. If
you want to cut to the chase, just read the last sentence of this paragraph and select your answer.
(Last Thursday, Feb.15th, the Board of Supervisors rejected a more modest proposal from the
same developers: Kings Farm – 180+ single family homes on 440+ acres. The developers vow to
appeal this BoS rebuff). Last August, these same developers (KMRD partners) also showed a
concept plan to the Planning Commission calling for 800+ units on 440+ acres. These same
pesky developers have two more options under the new zoning ordinance – three-acre minimum
lots or one-acre clusters with equal open space. (The clusters would give them the same density
as the rejected Kings Farm plan and the three-acre minimum lots would cut that density by about
one-third.) So, given all the options – and given that something's going to be built in the Farmland
Preservation District – which would you rather see?
|
|
Kings Farm and Kings Mill - what's the difference? Kings Farm is the plan proposed by developers
Zawarski & Maloney under the old zoning ordinance. It calls for 190+/- single family homes on 2-
acre lots in the Farmland Protection (FP) District (400-plus acres of it). Kings Mill, on the other
hand, conforms to no current or past zoning ordinance. It calls for 3,000+ dwelling units
(apartments, townhouses, trailers, etc.) on approximately 500 FP acres. The developers
(Zawarski, Maloney & Benner) are now challenging Forks' zoning ordinance restricting
development in the FP to 3-acre lots or 1-acre clusters with equal open space. Kings Farm will
soon be voted on by the Board of Supervisors. The Board is to decide whether the plan is kaput or
may continue (by accepting the developers’ offer of a time extension until 7/31/07). At issue is the
fact that the developers have not yet completed one of the required steps so that the plan can be
reviewed by the township engineer. The incomplete work? Percolation tests! Why do you think the
developers, who have had over a year since filing their plan, have not completed this essential
planning step?
|
|
Forks’ retail future is up in the air. In the north section of town across from the airport, there will
either be a Weis Market or a CVS drug store. The decision on which one depends on the outcome
of the residents' appeal of the zoning change that allows a grocery. According to one of the
comprehensive plan crafters, the original intent allowed uses that were beneficial to employees
working in the nearby industrial parks. So, if CVS is the winner, what other retail uses would you
like to see on the site? (Multiple choices allowed.)
|
|
Kings Mill (Benner/Maloney/Zawarski) will re-appear before the Zoning Hearing Board on Monday,
January 29th at 7:30 PM. The Township has yet to present its case against the challenge. Rumors
abound that Mr. Benner is asking Forks officials to compromise. This may or may not be true.
Should the Township begin talks on a compromise?
|
|
Forks Zoning Officer Tim Weis testified as a witness for the Township before the Zoning Hearing
Board in the residents' appeal of Ordinance 298, the amendment that allows a grocery store in the
Employment Center. Under oath, Mr. Weis said that he did not receive a copy of the grocery store
traffic study. The PC discussed the preliminary traffic study at its April 13th meeting and asked the
developer for additional traffic data. Now it turns out that Township Engineer Fred Hay received a
copy of that expanded report in August. What do you think happened?
|
|
Forks has Elected Auditors and WE elect them. Their only function is to set the wages of
Supervisors employed by the Township. They audit nothing. They meet on the first Wednesday of
the year following the Board of Supervisors' Re-organization Meeting. Obviously the Board should
not and cannot set their own wages. Still, there’s danger that this little band of elected residents
(3) will do something foolish as evidenced by this year’s astronomical wage hike (55%) for Don
Miller, Community Center Coordinator and member of the Board of Supervisors. What should be
done about this major mistake?
|
|
A disservice has been done to Supervisor Donald Miller by the Forks Township Elected Auditors.
They raised his wage as Community Center Coordinator by 55% and put him in the unenviable
position of having to refuse the money or resign as a Supervisor (and keep the money). Surely in
good conscience, he cannot do both. If you were Miller, what would you do?
|
|
The new year is only 2 weeks old. What do you think the Board of Supervisors' resolution(s)
should be? (Multiple choices allowed.)
|
|
In 2004, when Supervisor Don Miller was appointed "Recreation & Community Center
Coordinator" by his fellow members on the Board of Supervisors) his salary was set at $25,000.
There was public outcry at that night’s meeting. He was (and still is) a Supervisor and he was
appointed to an unadvertised position. Nor was there competition for the job. The implication at
the time was that since he was a Supervisor, the salary would stay low. The Elected Auditors, who
set the rates for Township-employed Supervisors, twice raised his pay (in 2005 & 2006) in line
with the percentage increases given to all municipal employees... until now that is. This year, the
auditors gave Miller a whopping 55% raise, from $27,600 to $43,000. As a Forks citizen and
taxpayer how do you feel about this?
|
|
Pennsylvania's rich land history has been featured in an article in the Morning Call by Frank
Warner (http://forksaction.com/Files/MCall_Rich_Land_History_112506.pdf - copy and paste into
your browser to read the article). Why do you suppose that the fertile soil in Pennsylvania -
especially Forks Township - must be paved over today?
|
|
A new sign went up on the Municipal Building last week announcing that it houses the TOWNSHIP
OF FORKS. The Police Dept. and the Community Center signs refer to FORKS TOWNSHIP.
Admittedly, Forks faces more important and more immediate issues (e.g., King's Mill zoning
challenge and the citizen's challenge to Ordinance 298), but this confusing official identity does
merit some discussion. Which title do you prefer to call the buildings in our municipal complex?
|
|
The Kings Mill (Zawarski, Maloney & Benner) zoning challenge again comes before the Forks
Zoning Hearing Board, Monday, December 18th. The developers are expected to continue their
"path of growth" arguments that Forks’ Zoning Ordinance is exclusionary. This means our
ordinance doesn’t provide for trailer parks and paving over the last acre of Forks open land. If the
Township succeeds in fending off this zoning challenge, will our being in the "path of growth"
change? Will our growth end? What do you think?
|
|
FAC (at the request of a regional economic development group) conducted an email poll of its
mailing list members to see what they would like to see on the vacant Laneco property. It's pretty
clear that no one wants another pizza restaurant! A link to the results is to the right.
|
|
The vacant Laneco property is an eyesore missed by no one traveling Sullivan Trail. There it sits,
in what is supposed to be Forks’ town center. Suppose we could revitalize it! What would you like
to see there? Remember, the land is deed restricted (courtesy of its former owner, Giant) and
nothing competing with Giant is allowed.
|
|
The Kings Mill (Maloney, Benner, Zawarski) zoning challenge hearing resumes Monday (12/4) at 7:
30 PM. This developer partnership wants to "grow" Forks Township by 3000 plus homes in the
Farmland Preservation District. They allege that Forks is in the "path of growth." What do you think?
|
|
KMRD, LP (Zawarski, Benner, & Maloney) will appear again before the Forks Zoning Hearing
Board on December 4th. The hearings will likely continue until mid-2007. Why do you suppose the
crowds have stopped coming?
|
|
Thanksgiving approaches. We have much to be thankful for. On the municipal level, we can be
grateful that our Forks' officials are waging a legal battle against the Kings Mill proposal. These
adversaries (Benner, Maloney and Zawarski - the players in KMRD, LP) plan 3,000+ homes on
545 acres in Forks’ Farmland Preservation District. After three months of tedious hearings, how do
you think the fight is going?
|
|
The League of Women Voters is holding a workshop for people who want to run for local offices
on November 18th from 8:00 AM to 12:30 PM. Will you attend and consider learning more about
running for Forks Supervisor? There are 2 seats up for grabs next year.
|
|
Forks Township is hosting the Blue Mountain Youth Soccer tournament this weekend. Our parks
are full. Our park employees have done their jobs. Does this make you proud?
|
|
Forks Action Committee purposely continues to identify the individuals/companies behind the
KMRD, LP (Kings Mill) zoning challenge. We do so in order that the real perpetrators are not
forgotten in the long legal battle ahead. These individuals seek to destroy Forks’ quality of life with
their high-density over-development scheme. The associates, by name, are: Nic Zawarski and
Sons Developers Inc., Nic Zawarski and Sons Development Corp., Bucks-Lehigh Land Company
(Dennis Benner), LLC, and J.T. Maloney/Signature Homes. Question of the Week: Do you think
exposing these people by name is a good idea?
|
|
A group of Forks residents has challenged the grocery zoning change voted on by the Board of
Supervisors. This group says that the Supervisors are engaged in illegal spot-zoning. In fact,
these residents feel so strongly that they are putting up their up their own money to fund the
appeal. They’ve hired high-profile attorney Gary Asteak to handle the appeal before the Forks
Zoning Hearing Board. The hearing is Monday, October 23 at 7:30 PM in the Municipal Building.
Question of the Week: Do you think the Supervisors erred and favored a developer or do you think
that they voted in the best interests of the township?
|
|
Before Congress adjourned, the House passed a bill to allow developers (e.g., Kings Mill &
partners) to bypass local courts and go directly to Federal court if they dispute local zoning laws.
The initiative now awaits Senate action when Congress reconvenes after the November elections.
Fortunately, time remains to contact Senators Santorum and Specter as well as Santorum’s
opponent Casey. Let them know what you think of H.R. 4772 (titled the Private Property Rights
Implementation Act of 2006). If you were able to question them about this act to strip away our
town's zoning laws, would you vote for the candidate who is against this bill?
|
|
Kings Mill & partners will appear at the Zoning Hearing Board on Monday, October 16 at 7:30 PM in
the Forks Community Center. This time, it is the Township's turn "at bat" in this quasi-judicial
proceeding. Last time, the challengers (Kings Mill, et al) presented "expert" witness testimony
about the soil quality in the parcels involved. Some three hundred residents and concerned folks
were in attendance; not quite as many as the first hearing, but still a sizeable crowd. How many
people do you think will attend the upcoming session?
|
|
The nation’s big developers are pushing Congress to pass the Private Property Rights
Implementation Act of 2006. The proposal gives developers the right to go directly to Federal court,
bypassing State courts, if they disagree with local zoning. Wow, they must be thinking of Forks! We’
re fighting the biggest zoning issue ever to hit town. Kings Mill (& partners) seeks high density
zoning in our Farmland Preservation District and they’re taking us to the Zoning Hearing Board
(Court)?? to get it. As Forks' farmland goes, so does Pennsylvania's. (Check www.forksaction.
blogspot.com for a link to a 9/29 NY Times editorial about the Act). This week’s question: Should
the Federal Government decide local zoning issues?
|
|
In past eras, peasants rose up and tried to overthrow kings. There was even a Tea Party in Boston
that rocked the world! Now, Forks faces a zoning challenge that may change the way farmland
preservation efforts are treated statewide. This zoning challenge by Kings Mill (& partners) is much
bigger than just our town. Zoning challenge hearing dates continue on Mondays, October 16th and
October 30th. The grocery store zoning challenge convenes on Monday, October 23rd. Where will
you be on Monday nights in October?
|
|
Residents (who take our surveys) indicate their greatest concern is Kings Mill & partners
challenge to Forks’ zoning ordinance. The judicial ruling from this challenge may ultimately affect
every parcel of preserved farmland in the entire State. It is truly a momentous issue. The case may
take five years to run its legal course. If the Township wins (and Forks’ zoning ordinance is
upheld), will you be upset when Kings Mill demands to build their original “by-right” plan of 187
houses in the Farmland Preservation District?
|
|
After more than a year of surveying readers, FAC wants to know which issues remain of greatest
concern to you?
|
|
Welcome to our 52nd survey question - a full year of concerned readers responding to issues
facing Forks. Guess what our first question was? You got it, Kings Mill! A year later, we are still
threatened with loss of the Farmland Preservation District to the same developers. What upsets
you most about this?
|
|
At last Monday night’s (8/21) zoning challenge hearing, Forks’ Zoning Hearing Board was advised
that the four initially listed plaintiffs are now merged under a single applicant name -- KMRD, L.P.
The original application submitted last June was signed by attorney Dennis Benner for Bucks-
Lehigh Land Company, LLC; Terry Zawarski for Nic Zawarski and Sons Developers, Inc.; Terry
Zawarski for Nic Zawarski and Sons Development Corp.; and an illegible signature for KMRD, L.P.
At last week’s meeting, Forks resident Jim Wideman publicly asked the Zoning Hearing Board to
identify the KMRD partners. He felt that this new name was an attempt to disguise the names of
the companies and individuals involved (for their benefit.) What do you think the partners stand to
gain by uniting under the KMRD, LP umbrella?
|
|
This week, we learned of an ongoing police investigation of an "unauthorized entry" into our town
hall on the weekend of July 7th. It occurred, coincidentally, while the security camera system was
out of service. We’ve also learned that one or more township employees misused the town’s
membership card with Sam’s Club to make tax free purchases for personal use. Finally, we also
have Round One of the zoning challenge on tap Monday (8/21/06) at 7:30 PM. Which is the most
important to you?
|
|
SITUATION: Last Monday night saw the kick-off for the big hearing -- the Kings Mill partners'
challenge to Fork’s zoning ordinance. Hundreds came. The meeting lasted a few moments, then
adjourned on a technicality. Someone forgot to notify landowners whose properties are within 300
feet of the Kings Mill parcels that there was to be a hearing. The meeting will now be re-convened
Monday, August 21st at 7:30 PM -- and there will be more sessions after that, too.
SURVEY QUESTION: Do you think that the Kings Mill partnership is contesting the zoning
ordinance (and proposing a grandiose project for the Farmland Preservation District) figuring that
Forks is averse to litigation and will compromise back to what Kings Mill asked for last year –
namely, 800-plus homes on nearly 400 acres in the FPD?
|
|
One of the Kings Mill partners donated $18,000 to the Township a few months ago. When does a
developer's gift raise suspicion?
|
|
Kings Mill vs. Forks Zoning - It's down to the wire folks. KM wants to turn 25% of Forks' prime
farmland into dense-pack development. They want to add 3,042 dwelling units. This new crowd
will bring twice that in cars to our roads. This crowd will bring 8,000 new students to our schools.
This crowd will need infrastructure improvements, including sewer and water. Can you afford this
development?
On Monday, August 7 the Forks Zoning Hearing Board will conduct the first of two scheduled hearings to take
testimony from the Kings Mill developers and from Forks officials and residents, on what's right and what's
allegedly wrong with Forks' Zoning Ordinance. The meeting will be held at 7:30 PM in the Community Center, a
space big enough for all to attend. Pass the word! Come to the meeting!
|
|
At the last Supervisors’ meeting residents learned that Forks' revenue from developers' fees will
end when the last of the approved projects (another 1,497) are started. This revenue stream has
helped Forks keep earned income taxes in check for years. Residents also learned that unless
dense building is allowed in the farmland preservation district (a la the Kings Mill zoning
challenge), commercial development must increase or our income taxes will soar. For the
township to keep taxes to minimal increases which method would you prefer: changing FP District
zoning to allow Kings Mill and its 3,042 dwelling units or soliciting more commercial ventures?
|
|
The August 7th zoning challenge countdown continues! Kings Mill (& partners) will come before
the Forks Zoning Hearing Board at 7:30 PM in the Community Center (not the normal meeting
room). The developers will argue that Forks' farmland preservation zoning is too restrictive and
that they should be allowed to build 3,042 dwelling units on their FP acreage. Many residents are
outraged at the potential stress on Forks’ infrastructure from such a massive project. How do you
feel?
The testimony presented that night (and also from the subsequent meeting on August 21) will, if the challenge
goes to the next level, end up in the Northampton County Court of Common Pleas. It will be the only testimony
considered by the court. No new evidence/testimony will be allowed. What you have to say is vital.
|
|
In four weeks, the Zoning Hearing Board will consider the Kings Mill zoning challenge – 3,042
homes (apartments, condominiums, townhouses, and a mobile home park) in Forks’ Farmland
Preservation District. The Kings have purchase rights to 545 acres, fully 1/4 of the entire District.
There are no sewer lines allowed in the FPD. Do you think that this grandiose proposal is simply a
ruse so that they can settle for a "more reasonable" size development with sewer and water
thrown in at the Township's expense?
There are two scheduled hearing dates, August 7 and August 21 at 7:30 PM. Both will be held in the Community
Center and NOT in the Municipal Building.
|
|
Forks traffic! We all cope with it these days. Last week’s flooding forced residents to seek alternate
routes out of Forks. Bushkill Drive was closed. Route 611 was closed. Easton’s downtown
entrance ramps to Route 22 were closed. The Easton/Phillipsburg free bridge was closed. The
Belvidere Bridge was closed. Do you think this is a foretaste of what’s to come as more homes
are built in Forks?
|
|
The public is invited to express their views on the grocery store amendment to Forks’ new Zoning
Ordinance on Thursday, June 29th at 7:00 PM. After hearing public testimony, the Board of
Supervisors will vote whether to make an exception to their brand new ordinance. Are you upset
that the Town fathers are already making changes to our new Zoning Ordinance which effects the
entire Employment Center district without knowing which supermarket they are voting it for?
|
|
The public hearing for the grocery store zoning amendment variance will be held by the Forks
Board of Supervisors at 7:00 PM on Thursday, June 29th. The proposed, but unidentified
supermarket would be located at the Sullivan Trail/Uhler Rd. intersection. (Forgot about it didn't
you?) - Now factor in these other occurrences happening here in Forks: (1) The Kings' partnership
is challenging our brand new zoning ordinance (calling for 3,042 dwelling "units" in the Farmland
Preservation (FP) district; (2) Fort James III industrial park is projecting 4,000 more trips a day
through the new Uhler/Braden intersection (mostly from Sullivan Trail). Will this change your
opinion on the zoning amendment for a grocery store at the Uhler/Sullivan intersection?
|
|
It's the talk of the township! Kings Mill returns! Now, the developers want to put 3,052 dwelling
units on 441 of their 545 acres in the Farmland Preservation District. The Kings are challenging
Forks’ Zoning Ordinance. Their proposal will initially be heard by either the Zoning Hearing Board
or by the Board of Supervisors in the next 45 days. Forks Solicitor Karl Kline foresees a prolonged
court battle that may last into the next decade if we fight. What do you think? Should the Township
fight? Or should we work out a compromise to give the developers what they really want
(something less than they are asking) and save the taxpayers the cost of a long, costly court battle
|
|
According to the newspapers, Forks will soon have its own "dog park." The Township Engineer (a
dog owner?) has said that the cost of fencing will be minor. The acre or so that it will occupy is
already owned by the Township (aka taxpayers). What do you think? If a dog park is something
Forks needs, do you want your tax dollars to fund it?
|
|
Forks is growing! We now even have a hardware store to call our own. Soon we will have a place
to get a bite to eat after 10:00 PM. One of the resources Forks does not yet have is a branch of the
Easton Public Library. Do you feel that a branch library is essential to a well-rounded community,
even if Forks taxpayers would have to fund it?
|
|
A member of the Forks Recreation Board recently resigned and the opening will be advertised.
Here’s why this is important: According to Supervisor Don Miller, the Recreation Board bylaws
indicate that it appoints its own people to fill vacancies. However, Township Solicitor Karl Kline
disagrees. He says that Recreation Board members are appointed by the Board of Supervisors.
The BoS will hold an interview workshop at 7 PM before one of its June meetings. Do you think the
Recreation Board should amend its bylaws since they seem to be contrary to Township policy?
|
|
The Planning Commission voted 5:2 (it was 5:1 last month) to recommended a zoning change to
allow a supermarket (any grocery store - the word "upscale" is now gone) on the southeast corner
of Uhler & Sullivan. Planners did question traffic volume on the roads involved. One said it would
create a traffic nightmare. Another noted that he traveled north on 115 recently and it was mess. A
third thought that a single structure on the three lots is better than three separate stores and would
probably draw fewer cars. The PC chairman simply said that he’s in favor of it (and that the PC will
work with the developer to fix the traffic issues.) The developer was asked if the 4,000 trips per day
for the intersection of Uhler & Braden (the new road into the Fort James III industrial park) was
considered in their traffic study. The developers’ representative said “no.” Do you think that it's still
a good project for that intersection?
|
|
Grocery again - What's the big deal? Well, pressure is being exerted on our elected and appointed
officials by the developer who wants a swift zoning change amendment to allow an unnamed
grocery store in the EC district. The developer has said that time is crucial and if Forks doesn't
decide right now for a grocery store, they will construct a CVS and some other small retail
operations on their 3 lots. (Makes you wonder how CVS feels about this, doesn't it?) The developer
offers flattery too - like "Forks demographics support an upscale store" and "all of the prospective
tenants are looking at a site in Nazareth but "prefer" Forks," They promise to ameliorate the traffic
conditions at the Uhler/Sullivan intersection. In return, our Board must decide now. Once changed,
the zoning ordinance will allow ANY grocery store in the EC (Employment Center) district that
meets the criteria in the amendment. If you were a Supervisor, how would you feel about this sort
of pressure from developers?
|
|
Several Forks residents have been talking about an extreme decline in the number of deer in the
Township this year (compared to last.) Theories abound about poisoning. One person said that
he saw a pile of 16 carcasses near a treeline, another said that deer have turned up dead in his
yard, and still others have simply said that they are not seeing the numbers that they are used to
seeing. Maybe it was a good season for hunters in Forks last year? Maybe Mother Nature is
thinning the herds? Or, maybe someone really is poisoning them? - Our unofficial deer survey
question is: What have you observed?
If you find a suspicious deer carcass, pleases report it to the Pennsylvania Game Commission at 610-926-3136.
|
|
The Board of Supervisors unanimously adopted a resolution to assess school impact fees on
developers. At the 4/20/06 BoS meeting, two activists for impact fees made a persuasive case to
charge developers the real costs of accommodating new students in our school systems. Don
Dal Maso and Richard Cowell presented the concept and noted that both Lower and Upper Mount
Bethel Townships have already passed resolutions. Washington Township is looking at it as well.
The costs to build new schools hits all of us. “They come. We pay.” Do you think the BoS did the
right thing?
There are currently two bills before our State House to do just this, HB 2550 and HB 2564. Both bills are
endorsed by Rep. Rich Grucela from (Martins Creek.) Both have similar aims but one is much more specific with
fewer "exceptions" than the other.
|
|
Grocery vs. drugstore - again with that question! The Planning Commission met 4/13/06 and the
first item on its agenda was the grocery store zoning change (for the property on southeast corner
of Sullivan Trail and Uhler Road.) The developer is anxious to get approvals and has six possible
"high end" tenants vying to get a piece of our $55K median income(s). The developer presented
the PC with its "industry standard" traffic study. A glitch? Yes, there is one. A 2.2% growth factor
was provided to them by PennDot (as typical.) Well, we all know that Forks has grown 44% since
2000 - far from typical. The developer predicted an additional 165 car trips (for the grocery store)
going north on Sullivan Trail during peak traffic hours, weekdays 7-9 AM and 4-6 PM and Saturdays
from 11 AM - 1 PM - that's one lane, one direction. After an hour of
presentation/questions/discussion, the PC voted to move the zoning question to the Board of
Supervisors for its consideration. Per the developer, the zoning change has to be approved before
possible tenants will be named. Once the zoning is changed, ANY enterprise that fits the new
definition will be allowed to build anywhere in the EC district. The question: If you were a
Supervisor, how would you vote?
The full traffic report is on file at the Municipal Building for any of you wanting to know more, like the data for
other travel directions! Also, if zoning is not changed to allow a grocery store in the EC, then that corner will
become home to a CVS drugstore. That is a certainty. This is an either/or issue.
|
|
At the BoS meeting on 4/6/06, Supervisor David Howell talked about a new Forks Township
quarterly publication (coming in late spring or early summer). At that same meeting Police Chief
Greg Dorney reported the latest traffic statistics for the Bushkill/Arndt intersection. It has occurred
to us that we never know what the (police report) statistics are for the Township in general. What
do you think, should the new "quarterly" give us that information?
|
|
The joint meeting on March 28th included discussion of fine tuning the Comprehensive Plan (last
updated 10 years ago). Planning Commission chair, Vito Tamborrino suggested that there be just
one large public meeting, after the PC has done its work, for public comment. Planner Erik Chuss
(not there but he sent a letter for consideration) thought the plan should be done in groups with
citizen participation - the groups would include representatives of homeowners associations,
businesses, farms, residents, etc. What's your preference for this important guiding document?
Topics to be addressed in the comp plan re-do include traffic, trails, the Farmland Preservation district, the
river/creek districts, and the recreation plan.
|
|
Forks' Solicitor Karl Kline recently warned the Planning Commission to "be careful how wide you
open the door." Kline was referring to the possibility of amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow a
yet unidentified big, new supermarket to be built on the corner of Sullivan Trail and Uhler Road.
What a good warning it is! For instance, what happens if the new "upscale" grocer pulls out AFTER
the Zoning Ordinance has been amended to accommodate it and the next retail venture (that fits
the new-new zoning) asks for its building permit - and it’s a store of lesser quality than our present
GIANT supermarket?
|
|
Until a week ago, Forks’ Police only issued warnings to drivers who didn't stop at the new 4-way-
stop at the Bushkill Drive/Arndt Rd. intersection. One week ago, they began issuing tickets. In the
first week they issued 33 citations for ignoring the stop sign - one was a school bus, two injury
accidents, two DUI arrests, two drug arrests, one firearm removal and one officer nearly run down
by a car going through the intersection at 60 mph. Chief Dorney reported that PennDot plans to
remove the flashing warning signs soon. Dorney requested that Forks ask PennDot to adhere
stop strips and/or reflective markings on the pavement or give the Township permission to do it.
The estimated cost is $1000. What do you think should be done?
|
|
It's the talk of the town - a new grocery store is eyeing Forks Township! Will we no longer be GIANT
hostages? It all depends on whether the Board of Supervisors amends the ink-is-hardly-dry new
zoning ordinance. The targeted location is not zoned for "big box" retail. It is zoned EC
(Employment Center.) So, what do you say? Should the zoning amendment to allow a new grocery
store be written?
The location is the corner of Uhler Road and Sullivan Trail, diagonally across from the Wachovia Bank. As we all
know, traffic there is a really big issue. RACINO may be down the street in Palmer and no doubt many folks will
desert Giant in favor of the new store. Folks from Stockertown, Lower Mount Bethel, Tatamy, College Hill, etc. will
want to shop there too.
|
|
We learned a bit more about the "process" during the PC workshop on 2/28. We learned that
developers have meetings with the "staff" (Engineer, Township Manager, Zoning Officer, Solicitor)
when plans are initially proposed for a project. We learned too, that the PC chairman attends
these meetings. The meetings are a necessary part of the planning process and are not public
meetings. Some residents have noted that these "private" meetings may be a time when "deals"
are made. What do you think the best solution would be to remove the hint of suspicion from these
necessary meetings? (Multiple selections allowed.)
|
|
PADot installed a 4 way stop at the Bushkill Drive/Arndt Road intersection. What do you think about
it?
|
|
The new Zoning Ordinance contains a controversial major change to the minimum lot size in the
Farmland Preservation District (FP), from 2 acres to 3 acres. To entice developers to "cluster"
build, there is a provision that allows them to build on 1 acre lots providing that 50% of the total
tract is kept as open space. Which of the following most accurately represents your view on this
issue?
Incidentally, the "open space" can be occupied by traditional farms, horse farms, tree farms, golf courses, etc. - just
no housing developments. It will remain "private" land (unless donated to or purchased by the government.)
|
|
The Liquor Control Board has cited Big Woody's for gambling machine payouts and for serving
minors. If its reputation concerns you, you should let the LCB know (mailto: ra-lbLicensing@state.
pa.us). Like other institutions, the LCB may not be aware of public opinion if the public doesn't
speak up. So, how concerned are you?
FYI. the BoS recently approved Big Woody's (sports bar) liquor license transfer request. If approved by the LCB,
they will open for business in Forks newest commercial development on Sullivan Trail.
|
|
On Thursday, February 2, 2006 our Board of Supervisors approved the liquor license transfer
request by Big Woody's (4:1 vote - Howell voted "no"). Next it goes to the PA Liquor Control Board
for a ruling. How happy are you that Forks will be home to another pizza restaurant?
On a scale of 1 to 5 (with 1 being the most pleased you can be) rate how happy you are that Forks may be the
home of another pizza restaurant.
|
|
Kings Mill, LLC is baaaack - with new plans to be unveiled at the PC meeting on 2/9/06 at 7:30PM.
According to their representative, Atty. Dennis Benner, there are 185 homes on 500 acres. Yes, the
plot(s) grew and the houses shrunk. Will you tell your friends, neighbors, and any "zealots" you
may know about the meeting?
This is the same Atty. Dennis Benner who presented the plans at the August 2005 meeting in the Community
Center. In a recent Express Times article by Sarah Mausolf about the Zoning Ordinance Hearing, he labeled some
Forks citizens "zealots."
|
|
If you saw a team of surveyors in a farm field (say on Richmond Road and Newlins Road East) in
the FP district, you would think:
By the way, surveyors were indeed sighted in that field on the northeastern corner of Richmond and Newlins for
about a week in mid-December. A neighbor asked what they were doing. They were "mum."
|
|
Two recent letters-to-the-editor (Express Times 1/11/06 and 1/15/06) from Forks residents
complained of long delays in the cashing of tax payment checks. Do you think delays like this have
an adverse impact on the finances of the township and/or the EASD?
|
|
Do you think that the Palmer race track/slots parlor development project next door to Forks will
have an adverse effect on us?
|
|
Bushkill Township has created an open space preservation fund that supplements County funds
when the County comes up short in its efforts to purchase landowners' development rights (of
undeveloped land.) Bushkill voters agreed to an increase in their income tax rate from 1% to
1.25% to fund this open space program. Are you willing to pay similar additional Forks income
taxes to create a similar supplemental fund for the purchase of development rights as a way of
preserving open space?
|
|
Would you encourage, support, and agree to the costs if township officials try to assess school
impact fees on developers of new housing projects?
Any attempt to assess school impact fees on developers will likely result in lawsuits from these
same developers and thus will cost some big money... hundreds of thousands of dollars. Still, it will
probably be MUCH less than the cost of a new school building.
|
|
Should one of those benefiting from a pay increase be allowed to vote ON the increase?
The Forks Township 2006 budget vote is stalled and requires a special meeting on 12/29/05
where it must be passed. At issue is whether the directors and managers should get a 4% or a 3%
increase.
|
|
Neighboring municipalities are dealing with many of the same issues as Forks. Do you think
Forks Township should send a representative to their public meetings as standard procedure?
|
|
The Township is growing. Open fields are sprouting houses and offices and businesses. The
CVS proposal and the developer of the business park are hoping to put in a drug store, a drive-
thru fast food restaurant and possibly a food store or strip mall near the Uhler Rd and Sullivan
Trail intersection. To think about too are the proposed new interchange on Rt. 33 at Tatamy and
RACINO, the proposed horse track/slot parlor in Palmer Township on the other side of Tatamy.
Rank some of these possible reasons for liking it on a scale of 1- 5 with 1 being your most
important.
Rank some of these possible reasons for not liking it on a scale of 1-5 with 1 being your most
important.
|
|
We saw from last week's survey responses that both short term and long term suggestions for
improving open government in Forks included a "citizens advisory committee." This is a great idea.
We also saw that one individual suggested a "resident observer in meetings with developers."
Another great idea for sure. Not on the list of things to select from however, was televised public
meetings. This was an oversight. So what do you think... Should Forks Township meetings be
televised?
|
|
Our website visitors have spoken! The most important issue (of the most important issues that is)
to them is Open Government! Here are some choices for how that can come about. Which do you
think will be the most effective course of action in the short run? - And, which in the long run?
|
|
David Howell is very aware of what is important to us, open space, open roads, open government,
and sound financial planning. Let's help him to get started. Which is most important to you right
now? Rate them 1-5 with 1 being the most important.
|
|
By now most of you know that some thief in the night has been stealing Howell For Forks
Supervisor signs. This is your chance to rate the sign thieves.
|
|
The election is November 8, 2005. You are going to the polls. You feel fully informed of the issues
facing the Township. You are confident in your choice because:
(select as many as apply)
|
|
Forks is at a important crossroad in its growth. An election for Supervisor is just around the corner.
How important is it to you to KNOW how a candidate thinks about Township issues before you
cast your vote?
|
|
A - Did you know that an elected member of the Board of Supervisors serves a 6 year term?
B - Do you find yourself voting against a candidate rather than FOR a candidate in local elections?
|
|
If a developer builds a detention pond to a specification which later proves to be inadequately
sized, should that developer be required to expand the detention ponds capacity?
|
|
Currently none of the township department heads live in Forks Township. Should there be a
residency requirement for future hires of management personnel?
|
|
Will the fact that Board of Supervisors Candidate Leon (Lee) Fisher has thus far refused all public
debate with his opponent affect your vote?
|
|
Is Forks Township heading in the right direction?
|
|
How long before the Board of Supervisors caves to developers' whims and changes Farmland
Preservation requirements?
|
|
