Borough Council Public Comment 7/10/06

The only thing missing from the Nazareth Borough Council Meeting on July 10th, 2006, was Quint, the screeching of his nails on a chalkboard, and a great big shark.

No, the Mayor wasn't closing the beaches, he would only say that he didn't want people getting hurt, but you can read about that later. Instead it was the Council who had proposed a plan to build a 10,000 square foot expansion onto the existing Council Chambers, in a residential neighborhood, and nearly triple the cost of the project from what they had anticipated (read more here). Needless to say, the community, and not only those who lived nearby, came out to be heard. It was soon a feeding frenzy.

When friends and neighbors gather not because they want to, but because they have to, and a hundred plus pack a room that typically draws a dozen or so, you can expect emotions to flare and you hope small town values will provide enough good sense to yield positive results.

At 7:00 p.m. you could not literally take one more person into the Council Chambers, they were on the floor up to the desks, standing around the edges, and lined out the doors looking in the windows.

Council President Dan Chiavaroli opened the meeting as he has for the past several explaining to people how the meeting will be run. He stated that one hour has been standard for public comment and that they would try to allow everyone to be heard. To his credit he allowed the comment to go on for one hour and fifty minutes and everyone had their chance to speak.

The presiding argument for the new building was that the 30 Belvidere site was no longer fit, however, there was no definitive argument as to why the location had been chosen insead of any other. Conversely, there seemed to be an over-focus on the Park tonight that did not exist in previous meetings.

Summary of the comments:

• Not a Green Street problem - put it up to a vote of the entire community.
• Question of Council as to who they were representing in their decision. Where they representing themselves or their constituents? How many Council Members went around their ward and spoke with their constituents? What did they say? Who will answer?
• In response Councilman Stoudt said that 30 Belvidere was not a fit place to work and Councilman Herbst acknowledged that it was personal on his part, but he's also acting with the community.
• Space can always be converted. This building (30 Belvidere) has been neglected. Not good what you are doing. Renovation is always better than building. Many of us here have old homes, we didn't level them and start over, we renovated them - you can too.
• I'm not saying the building at 30 Belvidere has mold, but if it does, look at what happened to the school when they had mold. It cost lots of money to fix.
• Taxes always go up. If you get rid of 30 Belvidere to build a new one because its not safe, how can you expect someone else to move in?
• Maybe there's a problem. We want a good facility, but to take away land is a sin. It's a beautiful historic area - keep it that way.
• These plans contain a retaining pond next to my property - who is going to clean up my basement and property when the water run-off hits?
• Did someone sit down and do a comparative analysis? (reply from Paul Kokolus was that they did one in 2004).
• I talk to everyone who lives in your wards and people do want a safe place for the workers, but if you don't maintain the property your problems aren't going to go away.
• My twelve and six year old kids play at this park every day. The Borough Park has too many big kids. They have fun here. Consider the feelings and concerns of the people.
• The park will still be here if they put the addition on. They are not getting rid of the park.
• Why are you going from the center of town to a neighborhood to be secure? What do you need a big area for when the borough isn't growing only the building is?
• Why has the existing building been left go? We all keep our homes up to date.
  
• In response Samus said that maintenance is done, carpets are cleaned, but the building was a firecompany and is so cut-up renovations aren't possible.
• In response Werner said that some people can't look at old buildings and see potential and it makes it easy for them to want something new, when they already have something great - they just can't see it.
• No question that 30 Belivere is a historic building should be preserved.
• Has there been any alternate plan? Why 10,000 feet?
• In response Chiavaroli - In past discussions small addition had been considered.
• This has not been thought through thoroughly. Alot has been unnecessary. There is a planning and zoning room and we don't do it - its at Keller Consulting. 30 Belvidere has its problems, there is an issue I've heard about the bathroom for workers and prisoners, but I don't see seperate one in the new plans. This project is not addressing needs.
• If 30 Belvidere is good enough for others it ought to be good enough for us. If kids are playing baseball on this field, other kids are playing where the building is going to be.
• How did this plan come about?
• In response Chiavaroli said that a five year plan included highway projects then building. And the public property committee addressed building project.
• In response Werner said that she was a member of the public property committee and they never addressed the building.
• In response Davis stated that the 2nd phase of the five year plan called for one committee of two people to address the police and one committee of two people to address the administration. The two committee's came together and had one four member committee.
• In response Herbst asked - where did the plans come from? They look like the ones we saw before.
• Question (by myself) was raised regarding the committee's Davis noted, specifically that these committee meetings were not publicly announced.
• In response Chiavaroli stated the May 25 meeting was in the paper.
• In response I stated that at the workshop following May 25 and the last one, Davis noted that his committee met and after hearing public comment first decided to continue with the proposal as is and then decided to go back to the architect to scale back the project. This committee should be no different than any other committee and that the Sunshine Law was applicable to it and the meetings should have been announced.
• In response Borough Solicitor Al Pierce stated that the media often misunderstands the Sunshine Law and that there are administrative and legislative committees and the borough, excepting maybe the law committee has all administrative committees and is therefore exempt, but announces meetings in good will.
• Voted to go back to the architect at the last meeting, where does it stand?
• In response it was noted that the engineer is out of town, but the plan is to reduce the size and cost. As far as is known it will be discussed at the next workshop meeting.
• Sunshine Law applies to government and by definition a committee of a government body is a government body. In this case there were two committees that were seperate and then joined to form a plan. It is a violation of the Sunshine Law and you should err on the side of caution, and in this case it means to be open.
• You are making it out to seem like if you downsize it will be okay. People still won't like it. The perception is that Council will win because they will outlast the people.
• Thank goodness there are people in this town willing to come out here. Can you see we don't want it. We just don't want it. Making it smaller won't help. We want it over today.
• Can't tell me it's cheaper to build. We have a foundation, we have walls, a roof, Mr. Orwig, myself, others, we have properties. We take substandard buildings and fix them up - you can too.
• I knocked on 150, 200 doors and its 97% against. Don't tear at the fabric of this community. You don't just legislate you lead. If you push something through the people don't want its going to be ugly and its going to linger. Don't tear at the fabric of the community. The best thing Council can do is terminate this tonight.
• Don't think people trust Council at this point. Resolve to end it now and forever.
• Who will make a motion to terminate this plan? (Werner, Herbst, and Kopach raised their hands)
• I would say, don't build on public green or open space, contractors have said they can renovate and we believe them.
• We are losing green space at an alarming rate. In the Borough Green Space is even more limited than the townships. If you make this decision it is final. Please don't give it away.
• Thanks to Council for the 4th of July Program. Everything was beautiful. It was beautiful because everything was maintained.
  
• Nazareth wanted to be the first to sign on to the Council of Governments (COG), the second point of having COG is to preserve space.
• This property should be maintained as green space. If we didn't let things go we wouldn't have this problem.
• What recourse do we have if the Council doesn't listen to the people?
• In response Pierce said they represent you.
• There are places in town you could put this building that will improve the area. You put it here and it will depreciate the neighborhood.
• My kids go to the store and they want everything. You gotta put limits on to stop it. We got an architect with an open check.
• Listened to everyone and no one knows the cost of anything, not new, not to renovate.

The period of public comment ended at 8:50 p.m. and began at 7:00 p.m.