Docstoc

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS - DOC 4

Document Sample
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS - DOC 4 Powered By Docstoc
					BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
6:00 P.M.

Comm. Steele called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. with the following in attendance:

              Comm. Knepper                  Scott DePoe
              Comm. Ness                     Elizabeth Heathcote
              Comm. Silberstein              Dennis Henry
              Comm. Briddell                 Attorney Steve Hovis


Minutes       On motion of Commissioner Knepper, seconded by Commissioner Ness
              the minutes of February 12th were approved as presented. Vote 4 yes, 1
              abstain (Comm. Briddell not at meeting).

              On motion of Comm. Knepper, seconded by Comm. Briddell the minutes
              of February 13th and February 25th were approved. Comm. Silberstein
              questioned the comments attributed to Doug Schmidt in that he believed
              Mr. Schmidt spoke about a problem with the web site and when he calls
              the office he is told the web site is not working. Comm. Silberstein would
              like to listen to the tape and perhaps amend the minutes. Vote 5 yes. (No
              tape made of February 25th meeting).

Payment of Bills

              On motion of Commissioner Briddell, seconded by Commissioner
              Silberstein, the professional service bills and the following bills for
              February were approved for payment:

                      General Fund                   $ 429,702.24
                      Sewer Revenue Fund               333,686.32
                      Intermunicipal Sewer Fund         11,383.88
                      Capital Reserve                   15,365.50
                      Street Light                         220.19
                      Escrow                               762.94

                      Professional Service
                      Non reimbursable                 $ 6,814.89

                             Total                    $ 791,121.07

Comm.
Ness          The first Monday of the year is when we have our meeting for
              reorganization. We had a meeting Monday, Jan. 7 and back to back with
              that we had a TND meeting. We continued the meeting onto the 8 th . I
March 11, 2008
Page 2

             noticed that we had a commissioner‟s meeting on each side of the
             meeting. To go back to the administration invoices of Stock & Leader, on
             the 7th they had a charge of 4.5 hours, which is correct, and on the 8 th we
             have a charge for 1 hour, which is the BOC meeting sandwiched on each
             side of the TND. When we talk about reimburseable expenses, that night
             from 6:00 until 6:15 and at 6:15 until 9:15 we had a TND hearing, where
             was that money charged to for the solicitor that night? Is that on a line
             item or what? If you go to the administration of Stock and Leader you
             look at professional services on the 7th and 8th , we were here for 3-4 hours
             and the solicitor was here for 3-4 hours and he only charged us for an
             hour. I‟m trying to account what the TND expenses are for TND‟s and the
             only way I can do it is reading the minutes and come up with some time.
             What I‟m trying to find out what the township does for the TND expenses,
             that‟s all I‟m asking.

             Comm. Steele: Is that something we can refer to our finance director for
             an answer?

             Comm. Ness: Yes, that would be fine.

             Comm. Briddell: Would that be a reimburseable expense?

             Fred Krause: That‟s what I‟m thinking.

             Comm. Ness: If you have a reimburseable expense it should be listed as
             such.

             Comm. Silberstein: It was my understanding that expenses associated
             with our solicitor for TND were not reimburseable.

             Comm. Ness: That‟s my question. Which category does it go in? Is it a
             line item?

             Fred Krause: If it‟s a nonreimburseable expense it‟s not included in the
             payment of bills for February because you have not approved them yet.

             Comm. Silberstein: I would like to say thank you I believe that the
             information that came with our packet this month makes it much easier to
             discern where the funds are coming from and I appreciate that.

             Vote 5 yes.
March 11, 2008
Page 3


PRESENTATIONS

Chief
Gross        Chief Gross presented the annual report. The report can be found on their
             web site: www.yarp.org

             Comm. Steele: Are you still trying to hire new officers?

             Chief Gross: We are not taking applications at this time. They were
             closed on March 8. We did have 400 candidates take the written test last
             weekend. We had a real successful recruiting effort. We will be taking
             applications again in January 09.

             Curfew: This in regard to the county task force effort to standardize the
             curfew laws. With our 8 municipalities there is some disparity with the
             hours. I provided the model ordinance to the township and we support
             that ordinance, certainly we would be willing to work with you if you see
             something you would like to change. We ask that all municipalities that
             we work with standardize the ordinance, so the officers know that the
             same rules apply everywhere they patrol.

             Comm. Silberstein: Do you have many curfew violations?

             Chief Gross: A hundred or so over the municipalities. We issue a fair
             number of warnings with that. Some municipalities have no curfew laws.

Brad
Remig
PFM          2002 Bond Refinancing: Chart showing historical level of interest rates in
             the municipal bond market, showing 40 years back. We are near all time
             lows, which is part of the reason why we are looking at the township
             bonds to see if we could refinance and lower the interest rate and achieve
             some savings. We have been monitoring this bond issue what the level of
             savings are at this point in time. I tried to let you know the different dates
             in the spring of last year when we started to look at the potential to save
             some money by reducing the interest rate on the bond issue. The bond
             issue has about $5.5 million left on it and when we looked at net savings,
             the net savings weren‟t substantial enough to warrant refinancing. We like
             to see 6 figure range for that type of action. In early 2008 the savings got
             better and we brought that to the staff‟s attention and you set the minimum
             savings at $125,000.
March 11, 2008
Page 4

             Over the last 30 days interest rates went rather high, which seems contrary
             to what people are reading about with the Federal Reserve. This sub-prime
             mortgage crisis that you have been reading about has spilled into the bond
             market. Bond insurance is getting substantially higher. People are
             looking a lot deeper into different credit problems the municipal bond
             market has experienced a run up in interest rates over 30 days. Over the
             last week or so you have noticed the charts have come back down, but not
             near the level that we presented staff that made a lot of sense to refinance.
             If we refinanced, we would be below $125,000. We are not quite at your
             level of savings at this point. We are going to continue to monitor and
             won‟t come back until we can save the board at least $125,000.

             I did get a proposal from PNC Bank, but they would not allow you to
             prepay on the loan for 10 years. We have always reserved the right to
             prepay in 5 years. PNC offered an attractive rate, but would not allow you
             to prepay for 10 years.

             We have been provided everything we need by staff and will be ready to
             go when we can obtain the savings that the board required.

             Leader Heights Project Financing: Providing same chart that was given to
             Water & Sewer Authority (W&S) at the February meeting. We are
             working on helping them fund the Leader Heights project. We are
             working with the authority to secure financing for the Leader Heights
             sewer project.

             When a township borrows money it‟s basically doing so on a general
             obligation basis, you pledge your full faith in credit and taxing power. An
             authority doesn‟t have taxing power, so in order to do financing it is a
             little different. One of the things the township has done in the past on
             these sewer project financing is provide a guarantee or co-sign to help the
             credit worthiness of the loan. When you go into the bond market or get
             money from a bank, the stronger the credit of the borrower the better. We
             have always been able to benefit and get the lowest interest rates
             financially because the township has guaranteed those loans. We
             discussed a little with the authority about a couple different finance
             options and they looked at a bank loan or bond issue.

             If you do a bond financing, the interest rates are attractive, but the fees are
             very onerous for the smaller transactions. There is bond insurance
             charges, you need to fund reserve funds, so it gets more expensive to do a
             bond deal.
March 11, 2008
Page 5

             We thought we could save on fees if we do bank financing. The bids are
             coming in the spring, and wanted to let you know what was going on. The
             last refinancing was in 2003. We ran some different scenarios for bond
             deals and bank loans. Where the bond deal seems to make the most sense
             is if the W&S wanted to finance for 15-20 years. The bank looks more
             attractive to the extent that you can pay this off more quickly. In order to
             save a lot of the interest costs, I think the authority is leaning toward the
             bank loan for over 15 years. At the bottom we tried to give an idea of
             what the impact would be per EDU, quarterly and on average. I think they
             will need $3.5 or $3.7 million, it‟s about $7.42 quarterly impact, times 4
             annually about $29.67 per EDU, that‟s about what this is going to cost.

             There are other scenarios, but the debt would be longer and more interest
             related to that. I think it‟s the authority‟s inclination to pay this off as
             quickly as possible, and keep the rates as affordable as possible. Typically
             if the authority approves a loan from the bank, we come back to the
             commissioners for a guarantee.

             Attorney Hovis: I think the authority is anticipating accepting bids in May
             and we will know the amount we need to borrow. That would provide an
             opportunity for the authority whatever financing PFM recommends and
             they decide what is in their best interest. At that time they would come to
             this board with an ordinance which would be approving a guarantee of that
             debt as well as going through the process for an additional amendment to
             the lease that is in place. This is a lease back authority. It‟s actually the
             township that operates the collection system. That ordinance would be
             part of the DCED approval process as part of one of the conditions that
             would be provided by the authority financing. We are going to be back
             here with an ordinance and at that point in time, once we are back here it‟s
             basically a done deal. The proposal for the notes has been accepted or the
             bonds have been pre-sold. It is the authority‟s need for the guarantee that it
             be in place, so we can do the application and go to closing.

             Comm. Steele: The information is strictly for our information and review.

             Comm. Silberstein: I believe our solicitor just told us that the W&S
             Authority is going to make the decision on the financing and then come
             back to us for the guarantee?

             Solicitor Hovis: They are making the decision on how to structure, they
             are coming to you there has to be some buy in here. This is a joint effort.
             This is the township‟s sewer system, PFM has come up with a number of
             proposals, the W&S Authority has looked at the proposals. Fred has
March 11, 2008
Page 6

             looked at the proposals. One of the things we can‟t have is after the
             authority approves it, we come back to this board and everyone says “I
             don‟t like this option.” We all need to be on the same page. By the time it
             gets to you for the guarantee it‟s pretty much a done deal in the market
             place.

             Comm. Silberstein: I would think that if we all need to be on the same
             page before it comes back to us with an ordinance that we need to have
             some input into which option is being chosen. This project has already
             grown significantly from what I would call more or less the ballpark range
             of this project two years ago. I‟m not going to open a can of worms
             relative to the decisions made by this board. If we are going to guarantee
             the financing I would like some say in what the option that‟s being chosen
             is going to be.

             Solicitor Hovis: I know the chairman is here, but Fred has reviewed the
             options.

             Fred Krause: Because things change so quickly with the market, right
             now we are looking at the best scenario. At that time it was the 15 year
             bank loan for the authority and township. It‟s based upon what‟s the best
             scenario at the time we decide to do it. We have to keep track of it
             everyday.

             Comm. Silberstein: Which one of the numbers represents the net present
             value of the loan payments? Discounted cash flow. My gut, when I look
             at this it takes into account time value money and my gut is when I look at
             this that the scenario listed as #4, which is the wrap around , where you
             have low money out in the early years and higher money out in the later
             years, especially when you look at the existing debt service we have now,
             that one makes the most sense to me. I suspect the time value of money
             it‟s the least cost to the township. What‟s the net present value of the cash
             flow?

             Brad Remig: The theory of the wrap around is that you are paying interest
             only for 10 years and extending the debt of the authority for 4 more years
             on that, then you would pay off in 2021. I have not run the net present
             value cash flows. I would be glad to provide that.

             Comm. Silberstein: If we have $600,000 for each of the next 10 years and
             we were going to add in $172,000 the reality is we are pretty much
             stabilizing the cash flow out. Am I correct?
March 11, 2008
Page 7

              Brad Remig: Correct. If we go over to the 15 year bank loan, those
              payments remain about the same for 15 years and in 2018 the authority
              would have a debt drop off of $600,000. If you do the wrap around
              instead of dropping it down by $600,000 in 2018 we would be deferring
              that to 2021. I don‟t have a strong preference. I want you to see the
              options. You may have a project in 10 years, you could have a savings in
              10 years, that may be something.

              Comm. Silberstein: It would be helpful to me if you could provide the
              MPD‟s for the cash flow. I would like to make that request of Brad. I
              would like to offer if Brad is coming to the W&S Authority meeting and
              they are going to be addressing the refinancing part I would be more than
              willing to volunteer to attend that meeting specifically for this purpose.

The regular meeting was recessed at 7:00 pm for a public hearing.

PUBLIC HEARING

Harvey &
Winfred
Bradley       Request that two properties be included into the York Township Ag
              Security Area established in 1989. Harvey and Winfred Bradley at 3225
              Honey Valley Road, Dallastown PA

              Comm. Knepper: Served as chair for a committee of five to discuss
              enrolling the farm land into an ag security area. Committeee consisted of
              Emerson Knaper, Richard Anderson, Jimmy Markey and Ed Beck.

              The committee met Feb 8th . The guidelines do dictate the make up of the
              committee. I was very much impressed with the farmers that were there,
              they had great information on the parcel and knew the folks as well. We
              discussed the requirements to approve a property into the ag security area
              and whether this farm would meet that criteria. The criteria is very liberal,
              almost by asking you could be enrolled and having the committee set up.
              After about an hour of discussion and most of that was understanding what
              the guidelines did entail a motion was approved to include the two
              properties into York Township‟s Ag Security Area.. These properties
              consist of 29.5 and 10.95 acres.

              Comm. Silberstein: I would appreciate if Comm. Knepper or Solicitor
              Hovis would explain what this means to the property owner and to the
              land.
March 11, 2008
Page 8


               Solicitor Hovis: In 1989 the Ag Security Area in York Township was
               established. They are attaching their land to a larger area that has been
               added to over the years. As a result of being designated in the Ag Security
               area it would be continued for ag purposes.

               Comm. Knepper: The guidelines don‟t really commit the land owner to
               saying why they want to be added.

               Solicitor Hovis: There are certain protections that go along with this.
               There are certain hoops, that municipal agencies need to utilize to
               condemn property in the ag security area. Will it prohibit us from
               installing a sewer project or main through the property? No. Would it
               require us to jump through some additional hoops and show there are no
               other alternatives for the project? Yes. It provides them some protection.

               Comm. Silberstein: What‟s the benefit to the average taxpayer residing in
               the township?

               Comm. Briddell: Every acre of land in an agriculture zone is about 20%
               of what it is in a residential zone to maintain.

               Comm. Silberstein: Does it restrict the property owner from selling it at
               some point in the future, or how long in the future before it can be turned
               into residential property?

               Solicitor Hovis: No. It doesn‟t prevent them from selling, it doesn‟t
               prevent from development.


Public hearing closed at 7:06 p.m.

Regular meeting brought back to order.

Res. 2008-6
Ag
Security       On motion of Comm. Briddell, seconded by Comm. Ness, Resolution
               2008-6 approving the inclusion of the Bradley property into the York
               Township Ag Security Area was approved. Vote 5 yes.
March 11, 2008
Page 9

PRESENTATIONS

Sally
Holbert      Comm. Ness: Before you begin, is your presentation in regard to the
             TND?

             Sally Holbert: It is in regard to the Heritage Hills timeline. I have a
             timeline to go through……

             Comm. Ness: I don‟t want to infringe upon your right to free speech. I
             would like to point out to you and the board that you are in a TND
             condition use hearing. You have started a hearing. Mr. Hovis in Article 9
             I want to point out that it is Section 908.8 it says that the board or the
             hearing officer shall not communicate directly or indirectly with any party
             or his representatives in connection with any issue involved except upon
             notice and opportunity of all parties to participate, it goes on from there. I
             am under the belief that if you are to talk about the conditional use hearing
             right now that you will jeopardize that hearing. I don‟t want that to
             happen.

             Sally Holbert: I will not be speaking about the conditional use hearing per
             se, other than to inquire as to a date for that public hearing.

             Comm. Ness: That‟s all you are going to ask?

             Comm. Steele: All you want to talk to us about is establishing a time line?
             Is that correct? Meaning you are getting on the commissioner‟s agenda
             for your presentation for a conditional use.

             Sally Holbert: The hand out that you have lays out our conditional use
             application process in a time line format. We have been trying to set a
             date for the last three months. We thought it was relevant at this point to
             go through the overview of the application process….

             Comm. Silberstein: I would like to get a ruling from our solicitor on the
             point that Comm. Ness has raised.

             Solicitor Hovis: Are we sticking to the fact that you want to establish a
             time frame for the hearing date?

             Sally Holbert: Yes.
March 11, 2008
Page 10

             Solicitor Hovis: You are looking to the future for a hearing date? Why
             don‟t we stick to that?

             Comm. Ness: If I may…. you could really say that‟s an issue. If you are
             talking about time lines, the other party should have been notified that
             they should have been here.

             Solicitor Hovis: We don‟t have a hearing date established. At some point
             a hearing date needs to be established. Typically we ask the applicant if
             they are available on that date in a fashion similar to this. We don‟t have a
             public hearing to go into without advertising a public hearing but for the
             mere purpose of establishing a hearing date, I don‟t think it falls into 908.8
             provisions that you are looking to. When we are talking about testimony
             that will be part of a hearing and testimony as well as the basis of the
             decision. Establishing a hearing date is never going to be part of the record
             relevant in whether they‟ve meet the requirements of the ordinance.

             Comm. Ness: I understand what you say, Mr. Hovis, but I want to point
             out to you, but every time else we have done this, we have simply gone to
             the applicant and said what day do you want to be here? We‟ve never had
             a presentation before the board for a charette or anything else.

             Comm. Steele: I‟m not sure she wants to make a presentation. She wants
             to ask to get on our schedule.

             Sally Holbert: I was going to briefly express our effort to establish the
             date and we have provided dates….

             Comm. Ness: I would like to point out again if she wants to establish a
             date, she should just simply ask for a date, or she should have asked for a
             date from staff. She didn‟t have to come in front of the public here and do
             that.

             Sally Holbert: May I provide clarification? We have been
             communicating with staff trying to get a date established for the
             continuation of the public hearing. We were directed by staff to appear to
             get that date established or to make you aware that we are trying to get a
             date established to continue the hearing that was started September 17,
             2007.
March 11, 2008
Page 11

             Comm. Silberstein: I would like to ask a question of our staff. I would
             like to ask why when we received the packet of information it said that
             Heritage Hills was going to be here and there was no information provided
             why they were going to be here. If staff asked them to be here they clearly
             knew what the topic was.

             Comm. Steele: Down in the commissioner‟s agenda there is a topic called
             hearing officer. When we get to that point in the evening we will address
             the hearing officer issue whether we as a board will have a hearing officer
             for Heritage Hills. We are sitting here with resumes from attorneys that
             have volunteered their services to be hearing officers. We are going to
             need to decide what we are going to do, which I believe is directly related
             to Heritage Hills and put them on a calendar. At this point we do not have
             parties identified.

             Comm. Silberstein: There was a conditional use hearing started already.

             Comm. Steele: I think the plan was changed, and I think they have to start
             over.

             Comm. Ness: If they have to start over they have to start the process all
             over. That‟s what the ordinance states. If she is here tonight for whatever
             I don‟t know, I would suggest that Sally would make an application for a
             new conditional use hearing and make a date and start the process all over.

             Comm. Steele: If you will allow us to proceed we will get back to
             establish a time line.

             Sally Holbert: As a point of clarification, we‟re not here to start the
             process over. In fact I had wanted to give you an overview of where we
             have been in the process. We did start a public hearing September 17 for
             this project and wish to continue that public hearing from the Sept. 17 th
             date. Point of clarification we weren‟t here to ask for a new public
             hearing to start the process all over.

             Solicitor Hovis: It‟s your opinion, as a representative of the applicant, that
             previous testimony will be part of the ultimate record for the Heritage
             Hills TND application.

             Sally Holbert: Yes, that‟s correct.

             Comm. Steele: I believe if you wouldn‟t mind, give us a break and we
             will come back to you.
March 11, 2008
Page 12

Phil
Robinson     Comm. Steele: For Hidden Lakes. Are you also wishing to establish a
             time line?

             Phil Robinson: I‟m responding to a letter that you sent a couple of months
             ago that we either pull the plan or start the process for public hearings.
             The consensus of the property owners is to continue with the hearings. I
             think the board wanted a determination of what our exact status was. We
             are back here to find out what is our status and when do you want to start
             scheduling meetings.

             Comm. Steele: You are looking to establish a time line with a plan that
             we have in house. No changes?

             Phil Robinson: As of now, no changes.

             Comm. Steele: Can you hang with us until we get to the commissioner‟s
             agenda?

Jake
Romig
EAC          Last month the EAC met and we decided that one of the things we wanted
             to look at was how best to protect our water resources (wetlands and
             streams).

             We understand that Debra Hatley is working on a greenway ordinance
             which includes provisions for riparian buffer protection. We would like
             an opportunity to look into creating a Critical Environmental Area
             Ordinance. This will strive to protect our riparian areas, and also
             wetlands, ponds, lakes, forest, habitat and other value resources within the
             township. Currently Shrewsbury Township has a critical environmental
             area ordinance in place.

             Comm. Briddell: Is this sort of your first task to identify the areas, the
             second would be to develop an ordinance to preserve those areas? How
             does this work with the greenway ordinance, is it supplemented or in place
             of?

             Jake Romig: That‟s one of the things we are trying to figure out. I
             understand it may take 9-10 months to get an ordinance adopted. The
             greenway ordinance relies on the official map and Debra thinks it could be
             adopted within 4 months. We don‟t want to overlap the effort. We are
             trying to figure out the best way to move forward. The first thing we
March 11, 2008
Page 13
             would want to do is how best to reduce the overlap. It might be
             appropriate to take the riparian language out of the ordinance and move
             the greenway ordinance forward without that language.

              Comm. Briddell: I know we have struggled with what the EAC was doing
              and the rec commission was doing. I always felt that the EAC was more
              appropriately addressing things like this, critical and environmental areas,
              what we can do to protect preserve and enhance these areas. The rec
              commission was looking at how to tie the areas together, looking at a
              circulation plan for hiking. They were different enough that they co uld
              survive apart as long as it wasn‟t confusing as to who was doing what. I
              would certainly recommend to the other commissioners to look favorably
              on it.

Rosemarie
Wittig
Equine
Meadows       Board of Directors, Equine Meadows. Rt. 24 and Springwood Road. We
              are a 55 and older community. The average age of our residents is about
              70 and we have 260 units. This past summer, July 07 we were notified
              that our sewers were coming up for inspection. At that time when we
              contacted the W&S Authority (W&S) we were notified that we were a
              private sewer, which we were not aware of. Unfortunately, our condo
              documents did not address this, they addressed that we were responsible
              for the laterals to the mains. We went before the W&S to get our sewers
              dedicated.

              At the same time there is a lot adjacent to us. It was owned by Dennison,
              who paid the developers who built our condos $22,000 for the right of an
              easement to hook into our sewer system. Dennison sold the lot to HMDT
              who are going to build mini sheds. We both went to the W&S this
              summer. At the first meeting there wasn‟t a full board and no decision
              was made. The next month, there was a full board and a motion was made
              that they would not accept Equine Meadows sewer or any private sewer
              system. We were told that in 50 years the board wouldn‟t be there and it
              would be somebody else‟s responsibility.

              Then HMDT went behind us to the board and they were told that if they
              get approval, and there was no policy that said private couldn‟t hook into
              private, if the approval from DEP comes back to them they would take a
              further look at it.
March 11, 2008
Page 14

             Last month at the February meeting of W&S two resolutions were past,
             2008-1 and 2008-2. The first was that the township would not accept a
             private sewer system. The second was no private could hook into another
             private. We have reason to believe that HMDT, who wants to hook into
             us, will be granted a special exception. We are here tonight to ask for
             some kind of decision, if we have to provide for our own sewer system,
             which we would still like this board to overrule the W&S and say take our
             sewer system. If we have to be a private system, why should we take
             another private sewer system and be responsible for that coming into us.
             Right now they are mini sheds with one EDU, what happens if the mini
             sheds don‟t take and they sell and there‟s a McDonalds. Why should a
             development of senior citizens with EDU‟s from an adjacent lot when they
             are private and we are private. This company is in the Red Lion Water
             District. When they came to the W&S they come with a waiver. This
             saddles this development. We are here tonight for some kind of decision,
             can you accept our sewer system? If you can‟t, which meets all
             specifications, don‟t let another sewer system connect into our system.
             You might say you have 260 units, inspection comes up every 3 years, you
             can budget for that, but when the repairs come later, to repair any sewer
             problem you have elderly citizens who gets the burden. I am here tonight
             on behalf of the citizens to ask you take another look and maybe accept
             our dedication, grant us a special exception. I feel that we are a special
             exception.

             Is there any chance we could have a resolution?

             Comm. Knepper: I was aware of a request of a private sewer system
             hooking into yours, but I haven‟t heard……

             Rosemarie Wittig: It has not been settled yet.

             Comm. Briddell: Doesn‟t 2008-2 prohibit connection of private sewer to
             private sewer?

             Rosemarie Wittig: They just passed that at their last meeting, but they
             may have a special exception.

             Solicitor Hovis: The W&S adopted a policy stating that they would not
             permit private sewers to tap into another private system and then connect
             to York Township‟s system.

             Comm. Briddell: Isn‟t that an answer?
March 11, 2008
Page 15

             Rosemarie Wittig: No. They may allow them with a special exception.

             Solicitor Hovis: I think the board is still considering that.

             Ed Dick: HMDT made their request prior to us approving the resolution
             of private sewers connecting to private sewers. We still have to get the
             approval from DEP that they recommend they go that way.

             Rosemarie Wittig: They are still in the ball game. We made the request
             before HMDT. Would you please accept our sewer system? We are in that
             special exception too. If they are still in the ball park, why aren‟t we? We
             are a class of senior citizens that pays taxes, pays trash, pays everything
             we can for this township, more taxes than the rest of the people pay even
             with school children. Now a business that can tap into our sewer system,
             and we can‟t get a special exception.

             Comm. Ness: You are telling me that the legislation that you passed is not
             retroactive?

             Ed Dick: True.

             Comm. Ness: The ordinance that we used to send a letter to these people
             is that legislation retroactive as well? I‟m talking about the ordinance
             about private sewer where you have to have them cleaned.

             Solicitor Hovis: That private sewer system ordinance was in specific
             recognition that we had these existing private sewer systems and were
             having problems with them. The resolutions adopted by the W&S were
             policy statements. The one problem that the W&S feared was….it actually
             started with Rosenmiller Woods and then Equine Meadows came up with
             a request and we feared that it would snowball into the fact that everyone
             that was sent a letter that they needed to clean, televise and provide a letter
             that it would snowball into the fact, okay take over my sewer because I
             don‟t want to do this anymore. They wanted to make it clear to all those
             developments that it was not the policy of the authority to take over those
             private systems.

             Comm. Ness: Mr. Hovis, I appreciate what you are saying there, but my
             reading of the ordinance does not specifically state that there is a
             retroactive provision in that for anything else.
March 11, 2008
Page 16

             I would also like to point out Sir, if you read the SALDO there is section
             610 which states about sanitary sewer disposal and water supply. I want
             to read a section: „If the applicant proposes connection to the public sewer
             system, the sewerage installation shall be in accordance with the
             specifications of the YTWSA. The YTWSA shall establish requirements
             for the ownership and maintenance of such system‟. My point being Sir,
             back in the 90‟s when the SALDO was passed, the W&S should have had
             policy, they should have passed the ordinance the established requirements
             and they never did. I also want to tie that together with….September 11,
             while Mr. Briddell was the chairman in the commissioner‟s agenda that
             day, I would like to read: „Comm. Ness I would like to call an executive
             session sometime on an issue. I don‟t know if we want to do it tonight or
             some other time.‟ That was me asking for an issue. This was the issue that
             I was referring about, I didn‟t want to talk about it at the time because I
             didn‟t want to have it come out to the public. But here we are out front
             and we have an issue that should have been talked about in executive
             session. We, if I can say so, dilly-dallied around. That was the famous
             September 11th day.

             Solicitor Hovis: I‟m not sure that was an executive session item…..

             Comm. Ness: My point being, my fellow board, what I would like to say
             is that the requirements were never done by the W&S, which was required
             by the SALDO. We made a mistake is what I am saying. We are here to
             try to rectify that mistake. We should have talked about this, but we
             haven‟t.

             Solicitor Hovis: There are two issues at hand. The one is the
             requirements for the maintenance of private sewer system versus the
             requirements of whether they are going to dedicate them to the authority
             and they become part of the York Township W&S Authority sewer
             system. You have noted from the SALDO that the authority should or
             should not have come up with regulations related to that. For whatever
             reason they did come up with specific private sewer system regulations
             with respect to televising and flushing and things like that recently which
             has trigged this most recent action. The unfortunate situation we have
             here is that we have a land development plan that was adopted with clear
             language on it that these were to be private sewer systems and they would
             not be dedicated to the authority, and it would be the responsibility of the
             homeowners to maintain that system. Ms. Wittig and fellow residents were
             not provided with the correct information at their sales. There was a
             disconnect between the plan and the information given at settlement.
March 11, 2008
Page 17

              Bottom line is when we adopted the plan it was clear it was a private
             system.

             Comm. Ness: I would like to say to that, I understand that the wording, I
             haven‟t seen it specifically, but I understand that the wording is vague and
             let‟s say, vague. If that would have been so, what should have been done
             the W&S or the township should have outlined the extent of the
             requirements and we never have. That‟s my point. We passed an
             ordinance after the day and we are making it retroactive, which I don‟t
             think will hold up in court.

             Solicitor Hovis: I would disagree.

             Ed Dick: We denied the adoption of Equine Meadows back in November
             prior to the resolution. The resolution was passed in February. Their
             adoption was denied.

             Comm. Ness: I‟m not talking about that resolution.

             Comm. Steele: The fact of the matter is that Equine Meadow sewer
             system is a private system, it is owned by the homeowners. It is their
             system, they connect to us and we accept the effluent from their private
             system. If someone wants to hook to their private system it is an action of
             the homeowners not the township. I believe the W&S has denied the
             accepting the ownership of a private system on private property. Is that
             not a correct statement?

             Ed Dick: Yes.

             Rosemarie Wittig: What is true is that we were not paid $22,000 for our
             neighbor to hook into us. That was paid to the developer unbeknown to
             us. We knew nothing about an easement going into our sewer. That
             easement was done before we gained control of the development.

             Comm. Silberstein: If I‟m correct the association has begun civil action
             against the developer down there. It seems to me that‟s the right course of
             action. I don‟t see where the township has a responsibility in this case.

             Rosemarie Wittig: If you are not going to accept our sewer system, we are
             asking to not allow HDMT to hook into us.

             Solicitor Hovis: That is a W&S issue.
March 11, 2008
Page 18

             Rosemarie Wittig: That is a W&S issue, but isn‟t this board over the
             W&S?

             Solicitor Hovis: No. The W&S is a completely independent body from
             the BOC.

             Rosemarie Wittig: What you are saying is the W&S can let another
             company next door to us make us dependent and make us responsible for
             our own sewer system yet allow this independent to hook into us and be
             responsible for that lot?

             Solicitor Hovis: Unfortunately, what created that is the easement that was
             recorded years ago that permitted them.

             Rosemarie Wittig: That was recorded in 2000. I have a letter that went to
             Mr. Resh, Jan. 31, 2000 and a copy to Ms. Heathcote asking that our
             sewer system be dedicated so that the property next door could be the
             easement granted into it. We just found this at the township. We weren‟t
             given any plats. Yes, we have a lawsuit, but it doesn‟t have anything to do
             with us getting our sewer system dedicated or having another sewer
             system connected to us.

             We don‟t feel the township should have the right, even though they got an
             easement, you have the right to stop that. If we were stopped from
             dedicating the system, you should be able to stop this. We shouldn‟t be
             responsible for the lot next door.

             The authority is saying no you can‟t Equine Meadows, but we will look at
             them when they come back after DEP looks at it.

             Comm. Steele: Did you enter into a contract with this third party? Did
             you accept any funds from the third party?

             Rosemarie Wittig: No, we have not received one cent. When we received
             the letter from the W&S is when we found out that we were responsible
             for other than the laterals to the mains. We did a title search and found
             that Dennison paid Mr. Watroba and Mr. Chronister $22,000 to hook into
             our system.

             Comm. Steele: I‟m not an attorney, but I think you have a civil action
             here. I don‟t think you have any action with the board.
March 11, 2008
Page 19

             Rosemarie Wittig: The W&S cannot go ahead and let this other company
             connect.

             Gary Milbrand: The W&S did not make a decision on this. What they did
             require was a planning module to go to DEP and once that comes back the
             W&S will make a decision. I would anticipate a couple of months.

             Comm. Knepper: Is that the only route? The only option they have to
             access sewer?

             Gary Milbrand: No, this is in an area that was identified to be served by
             Red Lion Municipal Authority. The narrative being submitted indicates
             an alternate connection, through the Red Lion system, off of Gotham
             Place. If they connect through Equine Meadows it‟s a gravity system, if
             they connect through Gotham Place to Red Lion‟s system it will require a
             grinder pump system, and an agreement with the other entities along
             Gotham Place.

             Solicitor Hovis: One of the agreements would be with the Federal
             Government with the post office.

             Comm. Silberstein: I would like to offer a thought, perhaps this board
             could provide some direction to the W&S that they hold off on making
             any decision regarding this until the civil complaint is settled. That might
             give the residents some comfort to know they will have their day in court.

             Comm. Steele: I understand your comment. The W&S is the owner of the
             system, York Township leases the system from the authority and we end
             up paying all of the expenses for the authority. The authority owns the
             system, we do not own it. I‟m not sure what we are going to do.

             Rosemarie Wittig: What is your answer to Equine Meadows?

             Comm. Steele: You have a civil action.

             Rosemarie Wittig: What can you tell us, what decision…When we leave
             here tonight we either feel good, bad or indifferent.

             Comm. Ness: I don‟t think we want to make a decision.

             Comm. Steele: I think the W&S has to really think this out. I‟m not sure I
             know all the details, but they have to think about what they are going to
March 11, 2008
Page 20

              do. I don‟t understand how you can have one private connected to another
              private.

COMMISSIONER‟S AGENDA

Comm.
Ness          I‟d like to make a comment, on the first Saturday of the month we have a
              few gentlemen from the DPW crew that grind branches. I stopped by
              Saturday and the gentlemen were there in some real harsh weather and
              they did a real good job. There was one gentlemen there greasing the
              equipment, which I found was very nice and I want to tell Scott that I
              appreciate what they do on the first Saturday of the month. That‟s an atta
              boy!

Comm.
Silberstein   I was invited by Comm. Ness and accepted and took the opportunity to
              attend the fire chief‟s meeting and their various assistants. It was an
              extremely productive meeting. I did receive the minutes afterwards. I
              found them informative, they have lots of challenges and opportunities in
              front of them. I believe with the amount of money provided to the fire
              service, the reliance we place upon them that it is very important
              organization and I am going to do my best to attend some additional
              meetings with Comm. Ness.

              Barry‟s here somewhere. You do a great job. I appreciate the welcome I
              was given there.

              There was one item on their agenda and it‟s continued to bother me. I
              think the township may need to assist them. Evidently when they ordered,
              they are in the process of changing the radio system for the fire and
              emergency services, the radios for their vehicles/stations, it wasn‟t made
              very clear to them what exactly the options were, or what the equipment
              layout might be. The gentlemen from the county discussing the radio
              system said they were sorry, but what they ordered is what they are stuck
              with.

              Gary Milbrand: The county took the list and summed them up and put
              that out as a contract. They are under a contract to provide some type of
              radio. The county was somewhat limited as to what they could order. The
              township put out some money in 07 to help offset the costs to the fire
              companies. A handheld radio, that radio is $10,000, that would be our
              cost, if York Township wanted to switch over to that system. We could
              talk to someone in Dover if they were on the system. The down side is
March 11, 2008
Page 21

             that‟s an extremely expensive piece of equipment. They are somewhat
             locked in to certain equipment, any thing beyond you are paying full price
             on.

             Comm. Silberstein: Could the township provide any assistance? One of
             the radios that I saw that they got vehicle mount radio; and they didn‟t
             know if they bought this other type of vehicle mount it would also serve as
             a vehicle mount and handheld. I got the impression that a lot of the fire
             companies that service the township wished it had been explained better.
             Is there any way that we can help out to see if they can‟t…..it‟s a ton of
             money we are spending, is there anyway to get equipment more along the
             line of what they wanted.

             Solicitor Hovis: You have the ability to make a donation to the fire
             companies. The question is in the past the board has attempted to make
             sure that the money donated to all of their fire companies is used in a very
             efficient manner. You need to analyze if it‟s an efficiency issue. It‟s up to
             the board if they want to expend funds.

             Comm. Silberstein: Is there any influence that the board can exert upon
             the county or upon the contractor to try and remedy the situation as it
             stands now?

             Solicitor Hovis: The information that I have is the county executed a
             contract, obtained funding for the purchase of these units and has
             purchased them. It is a done deal. It‟s always worth an inquiry to the
             county to get additional information as to whether the units can be
             returned to the contractor.

             Comm. Silberstein: I‟d like to make a motion that the township manager
             be directed to send a letter to the coordinator for radio systems for the
             York County EMA indicating that York Township would like some
             consideration given to its fire companies being able to modify the original
             purchase request, not as a reduction in dollars spending, but swapping
             equipment for equipment.

             Comm. Steele: Just so I‟m clear, you‟re wanting the township manager to
             send a letter to who?

             Solicitor Hovis: I think it would be the county agency responsible for the
             overall purchase and distribution of these units.

             Gary Milbrand: Bob Fesig.
March 11, 2008
Page 22
             Comm. Steele: Isn‟t this a situation where party A enters into a contract
             with somebody and we‟re sort of tagging along? Someone else issued a
             contract, not us.

              Gary Milbrand: County Control issued the contract. They are putting up
              the new system. They put out the work sheets to the various fire chiefs
              and said based on your need put down some numbers on this spread sheet.
              I worked on this with EMA, since we had a grant to cover some of these
              costs. It was a very confusing process, and you had to ask a lot of
              questions.

              Solicitor Hovis: The county got all of these orders, millions of dollars at
              the end of the day and they wrapped it into their bond issue with the
              construction of their facility. It‟s a matter of going back to see what the
              contract says.

              Comm. Ness: Second.

              Comm. Knepper: Has this equipment been received?

              Gary Milbrand: Various equipment has been received. All of the
              equipment is in house with the county now.

              Comm. Knepper: Was there a committee that researched this prior to
              making the order? Barry were your guys involved with this at all?
              Somebody committed this to you?

              Gary Milbrand: The county had the job of picking the radio system they
              wanted to go with. They have 9 towers across the county. Supposedly
              you can go anywhere in York County and talk on the system, as long as
              you know what talk group they are on.

              Barry Myers: They did have a committee throughout the county and they
              met for about 2 years. They talked about equipment and had an idea of
              what they thought they were going to get.

              Comm. Briddell: I trust your judgment, you‟ve earned your stripes for
              years. I am a little hesitant about York Township leading the charge on
              this thing, like it‟s just brought to us tonight and it‟s been worked on for
              three years, plus the five companies servicing York Township they serve
              other municipalities. If some sort of action is taken, our township
              manager making a request, I don‟t think it‟s appropriate for one township
              to just do that. We‟ve got too many partners in this. It‟s a complex
              process what they went through to do this. From the standpoint of a 20
March 11, 2008
Page 23

              minute conversation here we‟re going to lead the charge on that. I object
              to that.

              Comm Silberstein: Maybe we can look at whether or not it would make
              sense for our township to try and provide any assistance, and I would offer
              to meet with the fire and Gary and those people, and I‟ll withdraw my
              motion for the time being and look for direction of the board to try and
              take a look at this and report back next meeting.

              Comm. Briddell: Thank you. I take a little bit of comfort in that. There are
              some good people to work with, I think you have to think through the
              approach. You are talking about millions of dollars.

              Barry Myers: I‟m on the fire school board and we are trying to work on
              this. The pagers are suppose to come in a month or two, and the radios
              installed in our stations around the third quarter of the year.

              Comm. Knepper: Didn‟t anybody look at one of these models prior to
              purchase?

              Barry Myers: On the internet. They brought some in, but not everybody
              was able to see them.

              Comm. Ness: Withdraw the second.

Comm.
Silberstein   I sent an email to the township manager and to the other members of this
              board regarding liability both to the township and to myself based upon
              things that occur at this meeting. I would like to know what the liability is
              for a commissioner both for my own actions and for the actions of another
              commissioner.

              Solicitor Hovis: I don‟t know that I saw an email.

              Comm. Steele: I have no idea what you are talking about.

              Comm. Silberstein: I‟ll resend it tomorrow, and we can talk about it next
              month.
March 11, 2008
Page 24

Comm.
Knepper      I did notice the sign out front with regards to the brush collection as the
             result of the storm we had. I thought that was a great response from public
             works.

             I‟ve been appointed to the police commission and one of the things at the
             last meeting was an awards program for officers that displayed
             outstanding performance in their work above and beyond what is their call
             of duty. It came to mind that we often do that here, give policemen
             awards, we give Boy Scout and Girl Scout awards. We never give our
             own people any recognition. What also helped bring it to mind, last
             month there wre comments from some of our staff of the potential savings
             of some $230,000 to the township, and we barely got off a thank you. I
             thought that was not appropriate. I think we can do better. I know we can
             do better. I would like to know if it‟s alright to develop an awards
             program. I talked with Chief Gross and asked for his policy, obviously we
             can‟t follow their criteria, but may use it to develop our own criteria. I
             would like to sit down with some of the staff and develop some criteria to
             develop an award for outstanding service when it happens. You would
             have to decide on who would make the decision, who would qualify, etc.
             The police department gives out pins (chief pins), which the chief
             recognizes as outstanding job. They give out plaques as well, which I
             thought was appropriate. Those were officers that did some incredible
             things in the line of duty.

             I think we have people here in the township that do way above and beyond
             their call of duty also and ought to be recognized for it. We ought to be
             able to recognize them right here in this room. I‟m asking for your
             support to pursue this. I brought this up a couple of years ago and I let it
             die on the vine. I make a motion that we develop an awards program of
             some kind, give me a little time to develop it.

             Comm. Steele: I‟ll second that.

             Comm. Briddell: If you need a little help, I‟m available.

             Vote 5 yes.
March 11, 2008
Page 25

Comm.
Steele
Res. 2008-7
Appts.        One of the things we must address is the vacancies on the ZHB, and Water
              & Sewer Authority, 2 on EAC and one on recreation. On March 5 th I sent
              an email to say that we needed to do this tonight. We needed to make
              appointments to the ZHB, W&S, EAC. My question to Comm. Briddell is
              that the open seat on the ZHB is the 4th Ward, did he want to appoint
              someone from the list from the 4th Ward, and I believe that he answered in
              the affirmative.

              We had eleven people step forward and came over to talk to us about their
              interest in supporting the township. I want to tell you that I was impressed
              by the people that came out, what they had to offer, their interest in the
              township and their background. Not every citizen that stepped up and
              volunteered was interested in ZHB, some of them offered other
              alternatives.

              Comm. Briddell: I think that the perception that I‟ve had while I‟ve been
              on the board, if we had qualified applications from that ward applying for
              a position that we did not have a representative from that we would try to
              fill that spot. If there were no qualified applicants from the ward but from
              somewhere else then we would look to them.

              I would concur that we had an awful lot of good interviews here. I
              appreciate the fact that so many stepped forward for the various positions
              and expressed the interest in serving on other boards. That‟s extremely
              helpful to us in trying to fill some of these positions. Based on the
              interviews that came before us I would like to make a motion to appoint
              Al Granholm to the ZHB. Seconded by Comm. Silberstein. Vote 5 yes.

              Comm. Briddell made a motion to appoint Jim Sechrist as an alternate to
              the ZHB.

              Motion died for lack of a second.

              On motion of Comm. Silberstein, seconded by Comm. Ness, Carl
              Dallmeyer was appointed as an alternate to the ZHB. Vote 5 yes.

              On motion of Comm. Steele, seconded by Comm. Knepper, Shirley
              Sterner was appointed as an alternate to the ZHB. Vote 5 yes.
March 11, 2008
Page 26

             On motion of Comm. Knepper, seconded by Comm. Steele, Zane
             Williams was appointed to the Water & Sewer Authority. Vote 5 yes.

             On motion of Comm. Ness, seconded by Comm. Briddell, Ben Ryer was
             appointed to the EAC. Vote 5 yes.

             On motion of Comm. Briddell, seconded by Comm. Silberstein, Thomas
             Carbaugh was appointed to the EAC. Vote 5 yes.

             Comm. Briddell: I would rather hear from the rec commission on the
             appointed to the rec board.

Hearing
Officer      Comm. Steele: Each of you should have received a resume or an interest
             letter from the attorneys who expressed an interest in serving the
             township. The next question, are we prepared to hire an attorney to be a
             hearing officer for specifically Heritage Hills?

             Solicitor Hovis: Can I raise a concern with that? Given the
             representations that were given by the applicant this evening that they
             anticipated incorporating their previous hearing testimony as part of the
             record. It was my impression that they were coming back with a new plan
             and basically starting fresh as a result of substantial changes to the plan.
             They specifically desired to incorporate the previous testimony. I do have
             some reservations about that. It is the hearing officer‟s responsibility to
             hear the testimony, issue findings of facts, conclusions of law and a
             decision. If the hearing officer was not present for that first hearing a nd
             that was the layout of what we are doing, I do have some concerns if in
             fact the hearing officer can render a full and fair decision on that
             application.

             Comm. Briddell: At a minimum that would be an appealable condition?
             Somebody could appeal?

             Solicitor Hovis: I think someone could. MPC: The hearing officer shall
             make findings, conclusions of the law and a decision. If I recall that initial
             hearing in September that it was a complete layout of their entire plan and
             how it interrelated to the property and the surrounding neighborhoods and
             the main corridor that was going to access that property.
March 11, 2008
Page 27

             Comm. Steele: I was under the impression that there was a new plan, a
             different plan. It was my understanding that the new plan was going to be
             our starting point, but you are telling me we are going back and using the
             same plan used in September.

             Solicitor Hovis: That‟s why I asked the specific question that I asked
             today based on the September 17th hearing. We still have Hidden Lakes.

             Comm. Steele: This started and Comm. Briddell you were the hearing
             officer. That adds a new issue on whether we are going to hire an attorney
             for Heritage Hills.

             Solicitor Hovis: It doesn‟t prohibit you to hire one for other TND‟s. It
             does impact your ability to do one for Heritage Hills.

             Comm. Steele: Do we want to approach attorneys and determine our
             interest and their interest as serving as a hearing officer? The five member
             board here doesn‟t want to do it then we have to figure out what we want
             to do.

             Comm. Ness: Before you move on, I‟ll volunteer to do the next TND.

             Comm. Steele: Does this mean that Comm. Ness would be the hearing
             officer for Hidden Lakes? Comm. Briddell you would remain the hearing
             officer for Heritage Hills. I will remain the hearing officer for
             StoneBridge. Is that what we are saying?

             Comm. Ness: I think so. My opinion if I can say so, I think all of us
             commissioners should have a bite of the apple. We should all try this. We
             should all take one.

             Comm. Steele: I want to propose something else. I thought this was a
             great idea. The day we are going to hear Heritage Hills that we come here
             at 7:00 in the morning, we stay here until noon, take an hour for lunch,
             come back at 1 and stay until 5. We announce to the public we are going
             to do it and we stay at it for a day. If we don‟t finish we come back the
             next day and we get it done. This two hours a night is just not working.

             Comm. Silberstein: I like the idea of plugging along. I do not think that I
             can give up two consecutive days of work as a self employed individual
             that doesn‟t get paid vacation.
March 11, 2008
Page 28

             Comm. Steele: Let‟s do it Saturday and Sunday.

             Solicitor Hovis: Can you separate it one day this week one da y next week.
             I would agree with the chairman that many of the issues that arise from
             citizens about notice about procedural issues because every time we are
             rehashing what we have done before to get up to speed it creates
             monumental issues to deal with.

             Comm. Briddell: That sounds incredibly appealing to get it done.
             Looking back on Bridgewater there were a lot of opinions and questions
             that got dealt with during the process. There was time in between to
             address those things. That would forego that. Basically what you are
             saying, the plan is presented, there‟s no opportunity to do anything to it,
             then approve it. Or do you work with the plan, which is the intention of
             the review process and work it so it meets everybody‟s needs.

             Comm. Steele: I will commit that if you want to take a day to do it, I will
             do it.

             Comm. Ness: I‟m looking at the MPC and I would like to point out they
             are specific in what they do for you. They tell you that you have to hold
             hearings within 45 days, and I think there is a reason for that. You can
             think about the information that you were given and do some work on that.
             The disadvantage to what you are talking about, if you go in and work if
             you are talking about just making a decision I would probably go along
             with that. If you are talking about a TND hearing you might come along
             and need some information you would have to suspend the proceedings
             until you got the information. I think you should do it on a monthly basis
             or on a period of time basis so you can get the information for the next
             meeting. I think whenever they framed the MPC that‟s why they did it
             that way. The reason it takes a long time is because the applicant has
             agreed in writing to an extension. All of the applications have agreed to
             those extensions. So we can take it from the opinion that they more than
             willing to go forever to finish their case in chief. Let‟s give them the
             opportunity. Let‟s do it on a monthly basis, which we have been doing. I
             know it takes time but I think that‟s the best way to do it. That‟s the way I
             see it. That‟s what the framers did and it has worked in the past and works
             in other municipalities.

             Comm. Silberstein: I think one of the things we have to keep in mind we
             are here representing the citizens of York Township and for us to
             determine that we are scheduling a hearing that‟s going to start on a week
             day or weekend at 7 in the morning and continue until 5 in the afternoon
March 11, 2008
Page 29

                has the potential to preclude many of our residents from atte nding. It‟s not
                an easy thing to chop a day out of your schedule to go to a municipal
                hearing. I think we need to be careful about it.

                Comm. Briddell: I think both Comm. Ness and Comm. Silberstein make
                good points. I think trying to concise that down to one day would not be a
                good decision.

                Comm. Knepper: With regards to Bridgewater, I like the way it matured
                over time, that we have a better product now than when we started with.
                That took a little while to produce. That appeals to me. For me
                personally, it doesn‟t matter if it‟s 7 in the morning or evening, if it‟s light
                out it‟s work hours. I am self-employed, it doesn‟t matter morning or
                evening.

                Solicitor Hovis: Can we do it in more than 2 hour segments?

                Comm. Steele: We have to do it in more than 2 hours. It‟s tough on us,
                tough on presenters. Can we agree we are going to do it at night and at
                least 4 hour runs?

Modifications
                Comm. Steele: I sent an email asking if we have to accept all of the
                modifications before we have a revised plan. You should have gotten a
                note from me.

Heritage Hills
Hearing
Date           Monday, April 28, 2008 at 6:00 p.m. hearing date for Heritage Hills.

                Sally Holbert: What should we be expected to present at this meeting?

                Comm. Steele: You should start with your basic plan. You don‟t have to
                do it in as thorough detail.

                Comm. Silberstein: I think we need a read from our solicitor, if it‟s a new
                plan or an old plan?

                Comm. Steele: They are saying it‟s the same plan.

                Comm. Briddell: We have something from the planning commission and
                what did they pass on.
March 11, 2007
Page 30

             Dennis Henry: Could the board define original plan for me? When we
             revuew TND‟s we are working with the developer through the township‟s
             provisions in the TND ordinance, so you end up with a modified plan.
             Where does the new plan start? Unless you scrap the whole idea.

             Comm. Briddell: What brought that up was Sally‟s reference to going
             back to the original plan.

             Sally Holbert: When we said we were here, it is the same application. We
             have received comments from staff, from the submission that was done in
             March 2007. I would have liked to go through the time line so you could
             see the effort we have put into it. It‟s always been an open collaborate
             proce, us seeking your input. We‟ve had site walks. When we got those
             comments we did consider them, we valued those as making a better plan.
             Did we massage it a little bit, addressing some of the concerns we heard ?
             Yes we did do that. I guess what the question is, what deems a brand new
             plan? They are very minor modifications. One of the things you‟ll love to
             hear is that we lowered the density. We did waive our right to the 120
             period, we agreed with that we knew it would take more collaboration. If
             we knew that it was going to take that when we came back here tonight
             that you would deem the small modifications would be a new plan
             submittal and start from scratch, then we will go back to what was in the
             application in February 7, 2007 if you would like us to do it that way.

             In a conditional use process, as you have chosen to use to create a
             collaborative process with the TND design and planning, we are seeking
             approval of the use of the property for a TND. We fully expect there will
             be changes to that plan should we get your approval to proceed with that
             pattern of development. We fully expect there will be changes during the
             preliminary plan and that we will need to do that because you might have
             comments on our plan when we come back to you again. We will need to
             take them into consideration. Not all of the requests for modifications will
             be agreed upon by the board, which will require us to look at that again so
             we can redefine what needs to happen. All of that can take place in the
             preliminary plan design process. That goes before all the boards, so it
             stays relatively true to the design and concept with small changes to the
             block, the lot, and the fabric of the design of the development.

             Comm. Ness: I know I‟m not a professional in this, but I‟d like to explain
             this ordinance to you Ms. Holbert. The ordinance is very very clear. It
             says the applicant shall comply with the requirements set forth in part 3 of
             the SALDO during the pre-application review and that there‟s a list in the
             ordinance of 9-10 items and it does not talk about density. It does not talk
March 11, 2008
Page 31

             about the issues you are pointing out. It does not talk about modifications.
             In the SALDO it also has a list from a-j of items which does not talk about
             density and does not talk about modifications. What I would like to point
             out to you is you are putting the horse in front the cart. In the sketch plan
             as you present it you are only required to go in front of the planning
             commission and you are only to talk about those issues that the ordinance
             talks about. What has happened is, persons like yourself, have extended
             that issue and have thrown in modifications. You are, quite simply from
             my view, not allowed to do that. The modifications are to be seen during
             the conditional use hearing.

             I have read some of the minutes of the Planning Commission and the
             Planning Commission‟s making decisions on the modifications, and they
             are not allowed to do that. If you go to the MPC it says they are allowed
             for discussion only and the ordinance is very clear. I would like to point
             out to you that you stick to what the ordinance says and you will be okay.

             Sally Holbert: We don‟t set your procedures, we just follow the process
             that we were told to follow.

             Comm. Steele: On Monday, April 28 at 6:00 you come with your story.
             Do you have a list of modifications that you are going to be requesting?

             Sally Holbert: That is in your booklet, and you have a copy of them.

Hidden
Lakes        Comm. Steele: Will April 30th work for you?

             Phil Robinson: I know that the Planning Commission can‟t approve
             modifications, but they can make recommendations for this board. I would
             assume that you would want the comments from the PC if they
             recommend them. I want clarity. We have gotten recommendations from
             your PC that we would be bringing forward also. I want to understand
             how we are to proceed with them. Don‟t we get recommendations from
             the PC and bring them forward.

             Solicitor Hovis: I think we have seen recommendations from the PC.

             Comm. Steele: Do you have your plans, and are they exactly the way you
             submitted them?

             Phil Robinson: Yes, that‟s what we are moving forward with.
March 11, 2008
Page 32

             Comm. Steele: Is the board okay with Hidden Lakes scheduled for
             Wednesday, April 30th at 6:00 p.m.? Be prepared, have all your
             documents ready.

Hearing
Officer      Comm. Steele: We did skip over the hiring of a hearing officer. I guess
             we failed to come to an agreement on that. Comm. Ness volunteered. Is
             there any interest in interviewing any of the five attorneys for the
             possibility of using them as a hearing officer?

             Comm. Briddell: The whole idea of going out was to see whether having
             a hearing officer brought anything to the table, and it‟s certainly one way
             of addressing it. The whole attempt was to try it. If it seems to be the way
             to go, then it‟s the way to go.

             The whole reason for doing it could be negated if we change the TND
             ordinance. In order to give the way it is now to give it a full faith effort,
             our board being the hearing officer, or a professional being a hearing
             officer. I still think it‟s worth while. Can we identify an item in the
             budget to cover that? My thought is that it‟s an investment we are making
             in the development process for the township. We just have to find a way
             to do it at the end of the day. A budget is a budget, but it‟s a guideline. At
             the end of the year we will have a plus or minus and if it‟s a minus the
             capital reserve will pick it up. My opinion is that it‟s a worthwhile
             investment.

             Comm. Ness: The reason I volunteered, I think this next year is going to
             be very expensive for the township, and I feel I can do my part.

             Comm. Steele: So you would not be interested in hiring an attorney?

             Comm. Ness: Not at this time.

             Comm. Silberstein: I think the only way that I am interested in
             interviewing attorneys for a position of hearing officer is if this board as a
             whole can come to an agreement as to what the role of the hearing officer
             and what the role of the board is to be during the hearings.

             Comm. Knepper: I believe we ought to interview. As much as I disagree
             with spending money we have not appropriated I think we should
             interview.
March 11, 2008
Page 33

             Comm. Steele: Three of us believe we ought to interview, not hire. And
             with that said, did you look at the resumes and decide which one you
             would like to interview. I‟ll be glad to tell you my choice…Charlie
             Rausch. I think he would do a fine job.

             Comm. Briddell: I‟ll go along with that.

             Fred Krause: My only concern is that it‟s not in the appropriated budget
             in any one area. I don‟t exactly know the total expense we are talking
             about. My concern is that we are in compliance with the First Class
             Township Code which states if it is not in the appropriation that we
             approved back in November that any appointments or contracts we made
             would be invalid, unless we approve an ordinance to be put aside. I know
             that you are interviewing, I don‟t know if it means there will be a contract
             which could be deemed invalid.

             Comm. Steele: I think we are saying, we are not ready to enter into a
             contract with anybody, but we would like to talk with somebody. After
             looking at the resumes, I picked that one that I would like to talk to. I
             think two of us should talk, even if we just go to his office and chat. I
             think we need to look at our options. Do I have permission to invite Mr.
             Charlie Rausch to just come and talk to us?

             Comm. Silberstein: To the whole board.

             Comm. Steele: I was thinking it could just be two of us so we don‟t have
             to put it in the paper.

             Comm. Silberstein: I think he should come before the public and explain
             what he has to offer to us. I really believe that we need more than one
             person, and I would like to suggest that we choose one other person.

             Comm. Steele: The second attorney to be interviewed will be Matthew J
             Crème, Jr. from Nicolaus & Hohenadel.

             The township manager was directed to set up interviews with the two
             attorneys for Monday, March 31, 2007 at 6 and 7 p.m.

EAC          On motion of Comm. Ness, seconded by Comm. Briddell the EAC will be
             allowed to develop a program for sensitive environmental areas. Vote 5
             yes.
March 11, 2008
Page 34

TOWNSHIP MANAGER AGENDA – Elizabeth Heathcote

Bridgewater
Traffic
Agreement     Staff would like to set up a meeting(s) with Bridgewater associates to iron
              out the traffic agreement. Comms. Steel and Knepper were initially part
              of the group that worked on the traffic issues. We request that they both
              continue working with the staff and Bridgewater to come up with a traffic
              agreement.

              Comm. Silberstein: I would like to question whether or not it‟s
              appropriate for township to enter into discussions with somebody that‟s in
              the process of suing us?

              Solicitor Hovis: What is the purpose of proceeding with those
              discussions? It‟s up to the board if they want to proceed in that direction.
              It depends on the purposes of the discussions and what the resolution is
              going to result in.

              Comm. Silberstein: This commissioner would see no purpose in
              discussing anything with somebody who is costing us to spend money and
              justifying our decision up to this point.

              Solicitor Hovis: Their response is one of our objections. It is the one that
              we want to talk to you about, therefore it may save you money if we are
              able to resolve it.

              Comm. Steele: Is the issue with Bridgewater strictly over the traffic?

              Solicitor Hovis: The other is golf, but the traffic is the bigger of the
              issues.

              Comm. Ness: It‟s my opinion, they cannot continue on until they meet all
              the conditions made by the commissioners, and one of those is the traffic
              agreement.

              Solicitor Hovis: If you look at the agreement it says the agreement shall
              be in place prior to the final land development plan. Although it‟s a part
              of the conditional use decision it doesn‟t need to be completed and agreed
              upon until the final land development stage.
March 11, 2008
Page 35

             Comm. Ness: I would like to see a traffic agreement in place so that we
             can discuss because that will make a difference on the decisions we make
             on the preliminary plan.

             Solicitor Hovis: I agree. If we can sit down and nail down what that‟s
             going to be it‟s going to give you a lot more understanding as to what that
             preliminary plan and final plan need to look like. You will know what
             they are going to construct, how access is going to look. Probably better to
             get that done sooner than later.

             Dennis Henry: Your Planning Commission is the empowered body to
             review the preliminary plan. This board does not get to see the
             preliminary plan.

             Comm. Ness: I disagree with that. You‟re talking about a TND
             ordinance?

             Dennis Henry: No, it‟s in our underlying ordinance.

             Comm. Ness: Are you talking about the specific TND situation?

             Dennis Henry: It becomes a preliminary plan submission under the
             SALDO. It‟s a subdivision plan and the PC has been, since 1996 at least,
             empowered as the governing body of this township to approve preliminary
             plans.

             Comm. Ness: I don‟t have the time to dig it out right now. I disagree with
             that. In the MPC it‟s specific, 706.A where it specifically states that a
             preliminary and final plan which are the domain of the body, that is us.
             The preliminary plan is mentioned in the section c of formal application
             which tells you to develop under the TND shall meet the sections of the
             preliminary plan and we as the legislative body are the ones that hear that.
             That first after the conditional use and the preliminary plan comes in that
             is ours to see. There are exceptions in the MPC and this is one of those
             that allows us to do the preliminary plan as well as the final plan.

             Dennis Henry: We need that in writing from somebody because this board
             has never reviewed a preliminary plan.
March 11, 2008
Page 36

             Comm. Briddell: I‟ve got to make a comment here. I‟ve had about all I
             can possibly handle with a pseudo attorney making all these judgments
             about what the ordinances of this township are. I, as one of five, look to
             that solicitor to give me direction as to what‟s legal and what‟s not. You
             can express your opinions, but that‟s what they are. Until all five of us
             have given direction, I don‟t want to hear anymore….

             Comm. Ness: I‟m sorry Phil, but I‟m going to express my opinion
             because that‟s why I‟m here.

             Comm. Briddell: That you are allowed to do Denny. But don‟t make any
             representations that this is the law. That guy is going to tell me what the
             law is, okay, not you.

             Comm. Ness: I‟m reading it out of the book.

             Comm. Briddell: That‟s great Denny. I can read it out of a book too.

             Comm. Ness: I have been characterized as a code reader from you and
             that‟s exactly what I‟m going to do, Phil.

             Comm. Briddell: Alright. Being an attorney is a little more than just
             reading something out of a book.

             Comm. Ness: I do not say that I am an attorney.

             Comm. Briddell: Well you are making it to be that way. You are telling
             everybody that this is the law, this is the way it is. I guarantee you that it‟s
             been said a hundred times.

             Comm. Steele: The original question was in the township manager‟s
             report do two commissioners want to sit down and iron out the issues with
             the Bridgewater traffic agreement? I look at our solicitor and ask if we
             should be doing this? Is it proper to do that?

             Solicitor Hovis: I believe so. In doing so it could lead to an ultimate
             settlement agreement associated with the land use appeal that is pending in
             the court of common pleas.

             Comm. Steele: You are saying it is proper to do that. I believe I was
             involved, and Comm. Knepper you were involved. Are you willing to
             participate in a discussion? Does the board feel that we should do that?
March 11, 2008
Page 37

               Comm. Briddell: Yes.

               Comm. Steele: Let the record show that four commissioners agreed that it
               would be proper for two of us to sit down with representatives of
               Bridgewater to iron out the traffic agreement.

PUBLIC WORKS – Scott DePoe

Recycling
Grant          On motion of Comm. Silberstein, seconded by Comm. Ness the board
               authorized the payment of the 2009 cab and chassis truck out of the cap ital
               equipment reserve fund realizing that the 90% reimbursement from DEP
               would probably not be received until 2009. Vote 5 yes.

Pedestrian
Crossing       On motion of Comm. Briddell, seconded by Comm. Silberstein, Scott
               DePoe was directed to proceed with contacting PennDOT to see if the
               permit can be updated at the intersection of S. George and Leader Heights
               Road to include pedestrian crossings. Vote 5 yes.

Recognitions
               Paul Miller received his License to Operate a Collection System, issued by
               DEP.

               Mike Attig, foreman for the parks area, passed his Playground
               Certification. He has undertaken the responsibility to inspect the
               playgrounds. Next month I want to bring a resolution outlining our policy,
               which has been approved by the rec board.

Josie
Dick           Spoke regarding the installation of sidewalks at the S George Street and
               Leader Heights intersection. She felt it was extremely dangerous for
               pedestrians in that area. I would not cross at that intersection, I would
               cross in the middle of Leader Hts. Road. You can‟t go straight up to
               George Street.
March 11, 2008
Page 38

ENGINEER‟S AGENDA – Dennis Henry

Stein
Hill
Estates      Plan presented by Steve Schiding, Attorney Kurt Blake and Clark
             Craumer. After a lengthy discussion with the board, Barry Myers,
             representing the fire companies and Gary Milbrand the following waivers
             were considered:

             On motion of Comm. Knepper, seconded by Briddell, waiver #1
             §603.B(1) and §603.C (1) for installation of sidewalks and curbs was
             granted with the 6 months statement noted on the plan. Vote 3 yes, 2 no
             (Ness, Silberstein)

             On motion of Comm. Briddell, seconded by Comm. Silberstein, waiver #2
             on §402.E.3.a requiring a hydrologic report was denied. Vote 5 yes.

             On motion of Comm. Silberstein, seconded by Comm. Ness, waiver #3
             §602.A(7) requiring streets to be reconstructed according to the most
             stringent township or PennDOT specifications was denied. Vote 2 yes, 3
             no (Briddell, Knepper, Steele)

             On motion of Comm. Briddell, seconded by Comm. Knepper, waiver #3
             §602.A(7) requiring streets to be reconstructed according to the most
             stringent township or PennDOT specifications was approved. Vote 3 yes,
             2 no (Ness, Silberstein)

             Comm. Silberstein was very concerned that we are not considering the fire
             service and the people who will be purchasing the property in the area.

             On motion of Comm. Silberstein, seconded by Comm. Knepper, waiver #4
             §702.A.1.a requiring plans to be drawn at a scale of 10‟, 20‟, 30‟, 40‟ or
             50‟ to the inch was approved. Vote 5 yes.

TTMT
LD07-9-1     Plan presented by Todd Wilson, Alpha Engineering. On motion of Comm.
             Silberstein, seconded by Comm. Briddell the plan was approved with the
             following conditions or modifications:

             1. All comments on the letter from Dennis Henry dated March 7, 2008
             must be met.
March 11, 2008
Page 39

              2. The York Township Engineering Department shall receive an
              electronic file prior to recording.

              3. A check in the amount to be determined by the Assessment Office and
              Recorder of Deeds Office must be received by the York Township
              Engineering Department prior to recording.

              4. Waiver granted for §603.B requiring the installation of sidewalks along
              both sides of all streets. Sidewalks along the south side of Rosslaire Road
              east of Drive A and along Cape Horn Road north of Drive B will be
              installed when development occurs in that area.

              5. All invoices to be paid prior to recording.

              Vote 5 yes.

Orthopaedic &
Spine
Specialist
Ld08-1-1      Proposed secondary access drive plan presented by Kathy Conley, LSC.
              On motion of Comm. Steele, seconded by Comm. Briddell the plan was
              approved with the following conditions or modifications:

              1. All comments on the letter from Dennis Henry dated March 7, 2008
              must be met.

              2. The York Township Engineering Department shall receive an
              electronic file prior to recording.

              3. A check in the amount to be determined by the Assessment Office and
              Recorder of Deeds Office must be received by the York Township
              Engineering Department prior to recording.

              4. Waivers granted for the following:

                     a. §402 submission of a preliminary plan.

                     b. §603.B sidewalks to be installed along both side of all existing
                     roadways, with continuation of the 5 month statement on the plan

              5. All invoices to be paid prior to recording.

              Vote 5 yes.
March 11, 2008
Page 40

Baumholtz
P06-9-5      Plan presented by Drew Young. On motion of Comm. Briddell, seconded
             by Comm. Ness the plan was approved with the following conditions or
             modifications:

             1. All comments on the letter from Denis Henry dated march 7, 2008
             must be met.

             2. The York Township Engineering Department shall receive an
             electronic file prior to recording.

             3. A check in the amount to be determined by the Assessment Office and
             Recorder of Deeds Office must be received by the York Township
             Engineering Department prior to recording.

             4. All invoices to be paid prior to recording.

             Vote 5 yes.

Plan
Extensions   On motion of Comm. Briddell, seconded by Comm. Silberstein the
             following plans were given a 90 day extension of time:

                    LD06-1-1        Todd Kniseley
                    LD06-3-2        Cherrywood
                    P06-4-2         Heather Glen Phase II
                    P06-5-2         TTMT
                    LD06-7-2        Rutters
                    P06-7-1         Ravenswood
                    LD06-12-4       Southwood
                    P07-4-1         Cherry Lane
                    LD07-4-2        Olney Road
                    P07-2-4         Nextel
                    LD07-2-1        Nextel
                    P07-4-3         Michael Martin
                    LD07-8-2        Markey Park

             Vote 5 yes.

TPD          Dennis Henry: Traffic Impact Ordinance and the fact that we are into this
             update to the point where we are more than half way through the time line
             that the traffic impact study is set up to address. We initiated it in 2002,
             the time line comes due in 2012. Now we are closer to 2012, what that
March 11, 2008
Page 41

              means we are in the process in updating the land use assumption map and
              is taking a long time. That letter talks to the point where it gives you
              advantages and disadvantages where we redo the study so it extends out to
              2018. The advantage is that it will update the information needed to go
              forward with what‟s happening currently in our township and what we
              expect to see in the future, which we couldn‟t guesstimate in 2002. That‟s
              the good part. The downside is the cost. We are in an agreement with
              TPD currently that still has about $21,000 to update this study. What they
              are saying we still have to spend that money, which we have earmarked,
              but in addition to that they are estimating another $13,000 - $14,000 on
              top of that to restudy all of the traffic counts in the township. I don‟t have
              a proposal for that yet. Think about that and let me know how you want to
              move forward on this.

SOLICITOR‟S AGENDA – Steve Hovis

Ord. 2008-3
Septic
Tank          On motion of Comm. Briddell, seconded by Comm. Silberstein,
              Ordinance 2008-3 requiring the removal or filling of any privy, cesspool,
              sinkhole, septic tank, dry well or other receptacle after sewer system
              connection was approved with the following voice vote:

                     Comm. Knepper                   Yes
                     Comm. Silberstein               Yes
                     Comm. Steele                    Yes
                     Comm. Ness                      Yes
                     Comm. Briddell                  Yes

Ord. 2008-4
Board of
Appeals       On motion of Comm. Knepper, seconded by Comm. Ness, Ordinance
              2008-4 providing for an intergovernmental cooperation agreement for the
              purpose of joining with the County of York to create and operate a County
              Board of Appeals pursuant to the Pennsylvania Construction Code Act and
              regulations promulgated there under was approved with the following
              voice vote:

                     Comm. Silberstein               Yes
                     Comm. Steele                    Yes
                     Comm. Ness                      Yes
                     Comm. Briddell                  Yes
                     Comm. Knepper                   Yes
March 11, 2008
Page 42

Res. 2008-4
Deed of
Dedication
Crossway      On motion of Comm. Silberstein, seconded by Comm. Knepper,
              Resolution 2008-4 accepting the deed of dedication for Crossway Drive
              was approved. Vote 5 yes.

Res. 2008-5
Pension
Plan          On motion of Comm. Silberstein, seconded by Comm. Briddell,
              Resolution 2008-5 appointing Elizabeth Heathcote as the Chief
              Administrative Officer of the Non-Union Employee Pension plan was
              approved. Vote 5 yes.

Curfew        Comm. Silberstein was more concerned that the 8 municipalities that are
              covered by YARP should be talking to make sure they all agree on the
              same curfew times than what the county is. The board directed Solicitor
              Hovis to contact Chief Gross and offer any help on coordinating the
              curfew ordinance.

Recess        The board recessed to Monday, March 24, 2008 at 6:00 p.m. to conduct a
              Conditional Use Hearing for StoneBridge and any other business deemed
              necessary.



              Secretary

				
DOCUMENT INFO