Thursday, March 29, 2007

Go Emmaus!

Please check out this article! Some of us urged our Board of Supervisors to take similar action about 2 years ago. Perhaps our elected leaders will follow Emmaus's lead and offer us a similar program, which, as taken from the article would-
  • Open government to the public
  • Hold elected leaders accountable for their actions
  • Make council (Board of Supervisors) transparent
On top of this, Emmaus is working with RCN and Service Electric to actually broadcast these meetings! These fine public servants really do want to the get citizens involved!

WOW, how great would it be if Forks Township operated this way! They have 11,300 residents, we have over 13,000. If they can do it, so can we!

Supervisors Chairman David Hoff, we have taken you to task on many issues. This is a golden opportunity for you to end your tenure as a public servant on a positive note by enacting the same, or an even better system than Emmaus. What say you?

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Round 5 Update

As the Board of Supervisors heard during the Conditional Use Hearing, members of the Zoning Hearing Board heard from noted traffic expert Frank Tavani that if the Weis Markets were allowed to proceed, traffic conditions would remain an “F” (F=Failure) on Sullivan Trail. Succinctly, if this project does move forward, we will see 100x more traffic, or a 10,000% increase.

Courtney Lomax from the Express-Times offers a fairly vanilla and brief piece in today’s paper. Fortunately, Madeleine Mathias from the Morning Call provides a much more comprehensive and balanced report.

There were a few chuckles to be had last night. Specifically,
  • Every time a reference was made to the citizens having an opportunity to have input on this project, we were reminded that on all previous occasions the citizens made it abundantly clear that they were opposed to this proposal. Sadly, as usual, the majority of the Board ignored the wishes of the people on this project as well as most other concerns raised with the board.
  • We heard how we should count on the Board of Supervisors to protect us. Do not tell that to the people who were flooded out as recently as 3 weeks ago do to poor storm water management and planning in the township. Perhaps the Board should stick to doing what they seem to do best such as buying over-priced tables, hiring and firing town managers every couple of years and providing them with lucrative severance packages, giving themselves township jobs and accepting 60% pay increases.
  • That there appears to be no safety study done for this project, including FAA review due to the airport across the street.
Round six of this process is scheduled for Monday, April 16, 2007, 7:30 pm at the Municipal Building. Hope to see you there!

Friday, March 23, 2007

Yet even more table talk

The "Letter to the Editor" that appears below was in today's Express-Times. Bad enough we residents know how incompetent our Board of Supervisors (sans Ms. Nicholas) are, now we have other towns laughing at us :-(

--------------------------------------------------------

New tables should be at bottom of wish list

After reading the article about Forks Township's newest table quest ("Forks meetings "tabled," Easton edition, Wednesday), I would like to offer some advice to the Forks supervisors.

Just because the township has become "rich" with development money, how in the world can they justify spending more than $6,000 on two tables, after their taxpayers already expressed outrage about the first $3,000 one?

May I be so bold as to offer a few suggestions as to a better way to spend this money. They could...

Raise supervisors' pay to motivate more intelligent and insightful candidates to be in charge of the money.

Protect more open space. This would stop the exponential residential growth. Less space would be needed to work at zoning meetings. An added bonus: Saving the cost of a sound system.

Hire two people to fold and put away the two tables already in use; seeing as this is beneath the status of the esteemed supervisors in such a large community.

Supervisor Bonnie Nicholas is the only person with her priorities straight and feet on the ground.

An after thought: I wish I would have gone to the Stockertown meeting, I'm sure we could have gotten the fire coverage contract with Forks at half price ... if only we had a few more tables.

Bruce Perowski
Stockertown

Thursday, March 22, 2007

Legal Defense Fund?

We caught this news on the township's official website under the "news section."
---------------------------------
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ESTABLISH LEGAL DEFENSE FUND

By Board Resolution, Forks Township will now accept voluntary contributions to a Legal Defense Fund, which will be used for our legal costs of defending the Townships' ordinances and policies against legal challenges. The Board shall have sole authority and discretion in using these funds and will have sole control and authority over the conduct of all such litigation. All contributions must be made payable to the Township of Forks with an appropriate notation that the funds be placed in a separate fund entitled "Legal Defense Fund".
---------------------------------
On the surface this seems like a pretty good idea. We have some questions though.
  1. Will the money be used evenly for challenges to ALL ordinances and policies or just select ones? The obvious concern here is that if used selectively, the intensity of say a citizen's challenge may be compromised depending on the amount of resources devoted to the challenge between the township's budget for legal fees and the money available in this new legal defense fund.
  2. How, and who will protect the integrity of these donations? In other words, using the example of our challenge to zoning ordinance #298, *IF* a party who would financially benefit from the challenge to #298 being struck down donated significant money to this legal defense fund, would that be an ethical donation?
  3. What if one developer wanted to block another developer and "donated" a lot of money to the legal defense fund and there were no other current challenges in process. If the town used this money to fight the proposal, would this be proper?
  4. Will the challengers to ordinances and policies be notified that in addition to the township's budget for legal fees being used to fight them that this legal defense fund money will also be used?
There are probably other questions and concerns, but for now, this is good food for thought. This scenario also reminds us of the argument about "soft money" being used in political campaigns.

Perhaps a good solution is for the Board of Supervisors to appoint a three member independent commission to monitor the donations and activity of this fund. This commission should have NO ties to ANY Board member or current group within the township and should report their findings to the public on a quarterly basis.

Based on our population and demographics, we are confident that there are enough privately employed accountants, auditors and attorneys who would be willing to perform this simple yet very important task.

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

Candidates Forum

We were thrilled to learn that the League of Women Voters has announced a "candidates forum" to be held on Sunday, April 22, 2007, 7:30pm at Faith Lutheran Church. The Church is located at 2012 Sullivan Trail and is next to the Forks EMS building and across the street from Easton Animal Hospital.

It appears as though Supervisor John Ackerman is NOT participating in this event even though he is running for re-election. This is a disservice to the voters.

While the League of Women voters is moderating this event, this will be your opportunity during the primary process to submit your questions to the candidates.

If elected, what-
  1. Goals will they set for themselves and for the township?
  2. Changes will they make to improve the tenor of the Board of Supervisors?
  3. Processes will they put in place to insure accountability on all levels?
  4. Systems will they put in place to better monitor department head and outside consultants/independent contractor performance?
  5. Plans do they have to fill the empty storefronts in the township, including the former Laneco/Giant building?
  6. Steps will they take to combat traffic, congestion and overcrowding in the township?
  7. Programs will they install to better serve our growing senior population?
  8. Financial plans do they have to replace the current revenues derived from new home construction so that taxpayers are not hit with massive increases?
  9. Plans do they have to re-establish integrity on the Board of Supervisors?
  10. Steps will they take to better work with the EASD to address overcrowding and lack of resources which, we, Forks Township have contributed significantly to?
We are sure that you will have your own questions, but this list represents a good and meaningful start.

Attached is a flier that the League of Women Voters created. Please print and circulate to any township residents that you may know.

Please do your best to attend. If you don't ask, they can't tell!


Me too!

After reading this article, we can not help but wonder if the chickens are coming home to roost. After all, Supervisor Don Miller, a.k.a. Supervisor 60%, received a whopping 60% pay increase for his "work" at the Community Center in January. Can anyone really be surprised that our hard-working and dedicated township workers want their piece of the pie?

Debt be damned, at least these people can point to their accomplishments!

Table Talk

Though the Board of Supervisors meeting concluded about 6 days ago, it was nice to see the Express-Times finally write about the now infamous table purchase that the Board approved (excluding Supervisor Nicholas) last week.

Here are our favorite quotes from the article-

1. These tables are different from the $3,000 table purchased for the lobby of the municipal building in July because supervisors voted on this purchase, Supervisors Chairman David Hoff explained Monday. "The original table that caused the controversy was part of the overall project," Hoff said. "These tables are coming separately as a result of the lack of tables."

Wow, you gotta give Hoff credit. This was an awesome bit of double-talk on his part and it makes absolutely NO sense at all! After re-reading this, three times, we are reminded of the old Abbott and Costello comedy routine about "who's on first".

2. "In the future we'll be better prepared," Hoff said.

Better prepared for what and by whom? Better prepared to try and sweep this kind of waste under the rug or meld it into another purchase? Who is this "we'll" he is referring to? He is not running for a third term (HOORAY!) and he's outta here (truthfully, who among you isn't counting the days?) in December. Again, another great attempt to try and calm the firestorm, but, everyone is smarter than that!

Hey, here is a crazzzzy idea Supervisor Chairman Hoff. Why don't you and your posse (Howell, Miller and Ackerman) man-up and admit you made a mistake and save the taxpayers $4,516.00 and go with Supervisor Nicholas's proposal?

If you do this, everyone will have to acknowledge your courage to admit a mistake and that you ultimately did the right thing.

Sunday, March 18, 2007

Government Waste, Forks Style

Many of us emphatically embrace the concepts of an organization called Beyond Budgeting Round Table. Two important principles of this group include eliminating the “use it or lose it” mentality of traditional budgets as well as the awareness that budgets fail to focus on shareholder value. In our case, we, the citizens are the “shareholders”.

Reading Madeleine B. Mathias’s article in the Morning Call today, with the exception of Supervisor Bonnie Nicholas, we were reminded just how shortsighted and careless Supervisors Hoff, Ackerman, Howell and Miller are with YOUR money.

In justifying the expenditure of $6,216.00 for two tables, Mr. Hoff cited the fact that the money would be taken from a “discretionary fund” set up for such additions at the building. Supervisor Nicholas offered a viable $1,700.00 option and even offered to put the wheels on herself! Why would we possibly spend an extra $4,516.00 for two meeting room tables? Is it because Zoning Officer Tim Weis when asked about the tables said that they “are formal tables to go with the formal room”? Mr. Weis, with all due respect, this isn’t your living room, this is a government building, whom exactly are we trying to impress? Besides, didn’t you say under oath recently that you were “just a paper pusher?” If so, why are you adding design and style opinions?

By chance, if you think that it could not get worse, you are wrong! In this same article, Mr. Hoff let his intentions be known by indicating that he will be looking at a projection system so that development plans could be beamed onto a projection screen. So if we understand correctly, the Board is going to make it even EASIER for Developers? Wow, how about raising the application fees charged to Developers to cover the costs of a projection system rather than burdening the taxpayers? As for the idea of buying a “free-standing public address system", this must be a misprint. After all, the majority of this board has NEVER shown a serious interest in public comment much less taken it into consideration before they cast their votes!

We hope that all of the candidates seeking to fill the two open seats on the Board of Supervisors will address this type of government waste in their campaigns. Until then, get ready; your pocket has been picked, AGAIN!

Friday, March 16, 2007

Its only money, albeit yours!

While both the Morning Call and Express-Times focused much of their coverage regarding last night's Board of Supervisors meeting on Forks EMS, other significant business occurred as well.
  1. The Stockertown Fire Department deal was approved. So much for the concept of having our Finance Manager do a comprehensive study of the ramifications of this "deal", or having the Township Solicitor study all of the potential legal pitfalls of this arrnagement.
  2. Forks EMS secured approval from the Board to resume operations. While we wish them success, to say that their financial plan is optimistic would be an understatement.
  3. Remember when the Board of Supervisors along with former township manager Kichline bought a $3,000 table for the foyer of Municipal Building? Boy, that sure was an outrage, or, so we thought. Sans Ms. Kichline, they are at it again! The Board of Supervisors authorized purchase of two custom tables for the meeting room costing $6,000+. Supervisor Bonnie Nicholas was the sole dissenting vote and offered a $1,700 alternative, which the boys rejected. Supervisor Ackerman, do you really think that a vote like this will do anything to help your re-election bid?
On a totally different subject, our heartfelt thanks goes out to all those who contacted us regarding our "Two Posts Pulled" post. While we continue to get many requests for more details, we will continue to withhold specific details for now. We can tell you that the matter is in the hands of the legal system and upon resolution we will provide an update in this forum. In the meantime, THANK YOU to all those who have offered their concern and well-wishes, we appreciate it more than words can properly convey.

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Is this a good deal for Forks?

We read in the paper about the proposal for Forks Township to supply fire protection to Stockertown.

As we understand the numbers, Stockertown will pay Forks Township $1,250.00 a month, or, $15,000 annually for this service. The article also indicates that Stockertown averages about 60 fire department calls per year. Using these figures, this works out to $250.00 per call. We also learned that the Forks Fire Department may also receive $6,800 from the state.

Whether it is $250 per call or $363 per call, is it really possible to cover the added costs such as fuel, vehicle wear and tear, maintenance, equipment replacement costs, etc. for $250 or $363 per call?

While we want to be good neighbors, we must also think of our own financial needs, plus, consider the extra strain and stress that this will put on our very dedicated and hard-working volunteer firefighters.

We hope that the Board of Supervisors has Finance Manager Jim Farley take a long and hard look at the finances as well as having Township Solicitor Karl Kline carefully examine all of the potential legal ramifications of this arrangement.

Friday, March 09, 2007

Two Posts Pulled

Due to personal threats made against one of our members this morning, two recent posts on this blog have been pulled. A report has been filed with the Forks Township Police Department.

We have no further comment on this matter at this time.

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

Tainted!

About a month ago or so we publicly announced that we would be holding "Meet the Candidate" events during the Primary and General Election process regarding the Board of Supervisors race.

We approached the Board with a request to use the Municipal Building for these public service events. They hemmed, hawed and stuttered and we complied with all of their requests including submitting a formal letter outlining that while we would be hosting the event, either the League of Women Voters or a media outlet would moderate the events.

Imagine our surprise when we learned today that a certain Supervisor circumvented us and went to the League of Women Voters directly to conduct these forums.

Once again certain members of the Board of Supervisors acted in bad faith. Is there any wonder why the public does not trust these elected officials?

Sadly, if these candidate events do still occur, they, and all who participate will be tainted as this is a terrible abuse of political power.

Hopefully there will be more details to follow.

Friday, March 02, 2007

Updated flood info

This link contains street closures as well as a link to our photos that the Express-Times was kind enough to post. It was good to work with E-T to provide you with this flood news and information.

As info, to see larger views of any of the photos, simply click on them. Also, for the latest water levels on the Delaware River by the Easton-Phillipsburg Bridge, just look for the link to "Delaware Flood Levels" found in the right margin of our website under "links".

More storm water run off pictures-Part 4







More storm water run off pictures-Part 3




More storm water run off pictures-Part 2





Storm Water Run Off

It seems like RWC has been talking about the storm water run-off problem in Forks Township forever. Yet, sadly, most members of the Board of Supervisors as well as developers, builders and even residents are NOT listening, or, don't care. We have also talked about "open space" serving as catch basins for water run-off yet here too, virtually no one seems to consider it a matter of importance.


These pictures taken earlier today illustrate what happens in Forks Township even after a moderate rainstorm. Sadly, we fear that tonight and tomorrow will be even worse based on the weather forecast.


New Township Manager-Part 2

With regard to the Morning Call article about last night's Board of Supervisors meeting, how come there was no mention of our written request (as previously directed by the Board) to utilize the Municipal Building for "meet the candidate" events?

Despite what some of these Board members say, we are NOT a PAC (political action committee) or a partisan group.

How come back in the days when we were the Forks Concerned Citizens it was okay to use the Municipal Building for these events? How come Hanover Township allows a citizens' group to use their municipal building for such events?

Is the real reason for this roadblock due to at least one member of the Board of Supervisors being intimately involved with the Forks Action Committee (FAC)?

New Township Manager

With respect to the comment from new Township Manager Rick Schnaedter in the Express-Times, referring to our Board of Supervisors as "stable" and "professional", this is hopeful at best, or naive at worst.

But then again, maybe he just met with Supervisor Bonnie Nicholas, which, would then justify his comment and observation.