The most recent issue of the Newsletter of the Borough of Nazareth was sent to residents this week. Some highlights include:
Chief Ruch addressed online safety and discussed MySpace.com as I did in what amounts to a companion series on this site (the first of three articles is here).
Mayor Keller noted that a new part-time police officer, William Cope, has been hired to be responsible for code enforcement. This will include zoning violations and general property maintenance. Officer Cope will work in closely with Keller Consulting Engineers, who have assumed the duties of issuing permits and ruling in zoning matters. Mayor Keller also noted that inquiries regarding enforcement questions can be made to Officer Cope at 610.759.9575 and permit requests/questions can be made to Dennis Huth at Keller Consulting, 610.759.9700.
The Vigilance Fire Company is seeking volunteers to help at their annual Carnival (May 31 through June 3) and would like to thank everyone who contributed to the building of the training facility located at the Municipal Authority plant.
If you live in Nazareth and don't receive the newsletter - call 610.759.0202.
Thursday, May 04, 2006
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Community Commentary
Now that I've actually determined to post regularly and let some people know about the NewsOverCoffee site and by extension this news blog, I thought it a good time to make some observations and put myself on record so you, the reader, can also keep me in line;-).
Yesterday around five thirty I was driving east on Belvidere toward Whitefield. On the corner was a woman with a stroller who was pregnant. She had the stroller angled to cross Belvidere and yet two cars in front of me each pulled up to the stop sign and proceeded through without waving her across. I waved for her to cross. She lowered the stroller to the street carefully, there were no curb cuts, and waved twice thanking me as she went and once she crossed.
This morning I was on route 78 around 5:15 a.m. on my way to a meeting in Philadelphia. Traffic came to a stop. A police car came into view, then flares, and twenty minutes later when we began to move again a minivan could be seen that was demolished and a tractor trailor on its side, wheels facing the road with the cab in the direction opposite traffic. Cargo was strewn down the road on the closed lane and into the grass. In the early morning hour it had a surreal look, with flashing emergency lights against dull crushed metal.
Why bring these two instances up? Because they are both poignant reminders to me of something we seem too often to miss today - civility and decency.
I walk alot in the borough often with my daughters. It's one of the reasons I love living here. Yet everytime we walk I'm struck by the fact that most drivers are so intent on getting to where they are going that they ignore common civility and often ignore the law as well. In the borough, where there are any number of potential unanticipated events that could occur, people roll through stop signs and speed with regularity. They also do not yield for pedestrians and most times seem unaware that a pedestrian is even standing on a corner waiting to use a crosswalk.
I don't know what occurred to cause the incident between the minivan and the tractor trailer on Route 78, but in driving to Philadelphia and back I saw at least five instances where I thought two cars would collide as a result of cars passing on the right and trying to cut inbetween vehicles in the left. These are not good drivers for not having caused an incident. They are instead fortunate that others yield to their lack of decency.
Which again brings me to civility and decency.
The driving force behind this site is to connect neighbors to share information. I'm a firm believer in collaboration and cooperation. Having been to the last two Council Meetings and Workshops I can say that both civility and decency were evident.
Tip O'Neal once said, "all politics is local." Well I can attest that local government is not about politics - at least not ours. While our council members may disagree, I have not seen them become locked on party lines - as is clearly the case at many other levels of government. The issues are indeed local, often to the point of most having a personal opinion. But the meetings have been civil and the members decent to one another. So too have the citizens who attend the meetings to listen, voice their concerns, and commend these individuals for their work.
Pulling these thoughts together, I want this sight to reflect civility and decency as well. I for one want to lead by example and I did add some statements to clarify comments I made in my posts on the Skate Park and House Bill after I had initially posted them. In hindsight I saw where elements I had taken for granted (for instance that the house bill had a good intention) were lost as I focused on the deductions and naming rights making the piece more negative than I had intended. In the future I'm going to be more careful about getting it right as opposed to getting it online fast. If I miss something or you think I've gone beyond civil or decent - call me on it, kindly. Email or post a comment.
Regarding the comments, I ask the same - be civil and decent, constructive and informative. Let's use this sight for productive purposes. I don't see a problem (though I've gotten more spam already than I'd like) and I do want comments to be as open as possible, but if they do become negative I'll move to a more restrictive setting.
I'm also going to let each council member know about this site and what I am doing so they can post comments to clarify and expand on the information presented.
In the end a good community is one with good people, who are polite and civil no matter whether you are a friend or stranger, or if your opinion is like or different. And I think we all feel our community is a good one that can be even better. It is my hope that the dialogue and information on this site will continue to move us in that direction.
Yesterday around five thirty I was driving east on Belvidere toward Whitefield. On the corner was a woman with a stroller who was pregnant. She had the stroller angled to cross Belvidere and yet two cars in front of me each pulled up to the stop sign and proceeded through without waving her across. I waved for her to cross. She lowered the stroller to the street carefully, there were no curb cuts, and waved twice thanking me as she went and once she crossed.
This morning I was on route 78 around 5:15 a.m. on my way to a meeting in Philadelphia. Traffic came to a stop. A police car came into view, then flares, and twenty minutes later when we began to move again a minivan could be seen that was demolished and a tractor trailor on its side, wheels facing the road with the cab in the direction opposite traffic. Cargo was strewn down the road on the closed lane and into the grass. In the early morning hour it had a surreal look, with flashing emergency lights against dull crushed metal.
Why bring these two instances up? Because they are both poignant reminders to me of something we seem too often to miss today - civility and decency.
I walk alot in the borough often with my daughters. It's one of the reasons I love living here. Yet everytime we walk I'm struck by the fact that most drivers are so intent on getting to where they are going that they ignore common civility and often ignore the law as well. In the borough, where there are any number of potential unanticipated events that could occur, people roll through stop signs and speed with regularity. They also do not yield for pedestrians and most times seem unaware that a pedestrian is even standing on a corner waiting to use a crosswalk.
I don't know what occurred to cause the incident between the minivan and the tractor trailer on Route 78, but in driving to Philadelphia and back I saw at least five instances where I thought two cars would collide as a result of cars passing on the right and trying to cut inbetween vehicles in the left. These are not good drivers for not having caused an incident. They are instead fortunate that others yield to their lack of decency.
Which again brings me to civility and decency.
The driving force behind this site is to connect neighbors to share information. I'm a firm believer in collaboration and cooperation. Having been to the last two Council Meetings and Workshops I can say that both civility and decency were evident.
Tip O'Neal once said, "all politics is local." Well I can attest that local government is not about politics - at least not ours. While our council members may disagree, I have not seen them become locked on party lines - as is clearly the case at many other levels of government. The issues are indeed local, often to the point of most having a personal opinion. But the meetings have been civil and the members decent to one another. So too have the citizens who attend the meetings to listen, voice their concerns, and commend these individuals for their work.
Pulling these thoughts together, I want this sight to reflect civility and decency as well. I for one want to lead by example and I did add some statements to clarify comments I made in my posts on the Skate Park and House Bill after I had initially posted them. In hindsight I saw where elements I had taken for granted (for instance that the house bill had a good intention) were lost as I focused on the deductions and naming rights making the piece more negative than I had intended. In the future I'm going to be more careful about getting it right as opposed to getting it online fast. If I miss something or you think I've gone beyond civil or decent - call me on it, kindly. Email or post a comment.
Regarding the comments, I ask the same - be civil and decent, constructive and informative. Let's use this sight for productive purposes. I don't see a problem (though I've gotten more spam already than I'd like) and I do want comments to be as open as possible, but if they do become negative I'll move to a more restrictive setting.
I'm also going to let each council member know about this site and what I am doing so they can post comments to clarify and expand on the information presented.
In the end a good community is one with good people, who are polite and civil no matter whether you are a friend or stranger, or if your opinion is like or different. And I think we all feel our community is a good one that can be even better. It is my hope that the dialogue and information on this site will continue to move us in that direction.
More from the 5-1-06 Council Meeting
As I mentioned in follow-ups to both the Skate Park and House Bill posts, I was rushing a bit and went back to clarify a few points I had meant to make and failed to. Well, in hindsight I realized I missed the notes I took on the public comment portion of the meeting.
The only public comment made at the start of the meeting was from Tom Iacone who made three points:
The only public comment made at the start of the meeting was from Tom Iacone who made three points:
- The first congratulating the borough on the work done, but questioned why work wasn't completed for the short distance in Phoenix. Some members of Council indicated it would happen, but when Tom asked if it would be within his lifetime, no one provided a timeframe.
- Encouraged beautification of west prospect with evergreens along the fence.
- Question regarding the previously announced vacancies on various commissions, if they've been filled, and what response the borough received. Paul Kololus replied that they had all been filled and they did receive an anticipated, but acceptable response rate.
Tuesday, May 02, 2006
House Bill 2550 - School District Imposed Impact Fees
On Monday, at the request of State Rep. Rich Grucela, the Borough Council approved a resolution to support his co-sponsored House Bill 2550 (read full text here).
In a letter to Council read during the workshop on Thursday and included in the resolution Monday, Rep. Grucela described the legislation as one that addressesthe effects of new residential developments on school districts and allows school districts to impost "impact fees" on developers to help defray the costs of the new students while not further burdening existing homeowners with increasing property taxes.
Having read the proposed bill, here are the key points:
The worst aspect of this bill is the exemptions. For each dwelling in a subdivision plan the following amounts can be exempted:
Now, I think I've heard it all. A piece of legislation with the right idea until they hit the deductions and naming rights.
What do you think? You can tell me, or you can contact your state representative and school board.
Addendum - I ended a bit harsh. I ought to clarify that what bothers me about this bill is not the impact fee, but the fact that there are deductions (and naming rights). This is a case of how a well-intended bill gets hurt through the political process. Helping offset building costs will be welcomed by all, which is why I'm sure Council supported the bill last night. Keep it simple and move it through the house to the senate and off to the governor.
In a letter to Council read during the workshop on Thursday and included in the resolution Monday, Rep. Grucela described the legislation as one that addressesthe effects of new residential developments on school districts and allows school districts to impost "impact fees" on developers to help defray the costs of the new students while not further burdening existing homeowners with increasing property taxes.
Having read the proposed bill, here are the key points:
- Amends the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, ARTICLE V-B 2 Educational Impact Fee and Assessment.
- The School Board will be able to create an Educational Impact Fee on each subdivision plan and building permit issued for the construction of new residential units located within its geographic boundaries, exempting affordable housing units for low-income and moderate-income individuals, permits issued for the replacement of existing dwelling units, and subdivision plans or building permits for residential dwellings built for older adult housing.
- The Impact Fee - shall be $2,500 imposed upon each bedroom in excess of one for each separate proposed residential dwelling unit in the subdivision plan, not to exceed $7,500 for any individual dwelling in the subdivision plan. For individual permits the $2,500 fee imposed for each bedroom in excess of one shall be applied - but only for bedrooms included in the permit (ie existing ones are exempt).
- Accounting - The school district shall deposit the educational impact fees collected into a separate school account. The moneys in that account may only be used for new construction for additional classrooms or renovation of existing buildings to expand classrooms or classroom space and any additional personnel costs to cover an increase in student enrollment.
The worst aspect of this bill is the exemptions. For each dwelling in a subdivision plan the following amounts can be exempted:
- Meets or exceeds the National Energy Star 4 rating - deduct $500.00 per dwelling.
- Stone or brick front on the facade of the house - deduct $500.00 per dwelling.
- Porous materials for the driveway and sidewalks - deduct $500.00 per dwelling.
- provides for a designated school bus loading area - deduct $1000 from total fee.
- each acre of land preserved within the proposed development for open space uses - deduct $1500 per acre.
Now, I think I've heard it all. A piece of legislation with the right idea until they hit the deductions and naming rights.
What do you think? You can tell me, or you can contact your state representative and school board.
Addendum - I ended a bit harsh. I ought to clarify that what bothers me about this bill is not the impact fee, but the fact that there are deductions (and naming rights). This is a case of how a well-intended bill gets hurt through the political process. Helping offset building costs will be welcomed by all, which is why I'm sure Council supported the bill last night. Keep it simple and move it through the house to the senate and off to the governor.
Skate Park in Nazareth - How to Asses What Citizen's Want
During the 5/1/06 Nazareth Borough Council Meeting a rather lenghty (roughly 40 minute) discussion took place regarding a proposal from Jack Herbst, Law Committee, to create a Skate Park at the Nazareth Borough Park.
The Skate Park would cost between 30 and 40,000.00 based on initial estimates and it would be a "pay-to-play" format. The area would be enclosed and locked when not in use. The Borough would need to purchase additional insurance (roughly 3-4,000 per year), and a pass would be purchased on a seasonal basis by riders. The pass would be a sticker visible on safety equipment. Day passes could be purchased in the form of a wristband. Facility monitoring would be the responsibility of the park manager and police.
The discussion had several fronts:
From my personal perspective if the borough has a significant amount of money that must be spent on recreation, spread it around and use it in a way that benefits the most residents, not a specific and small demographic.
Nazareth has many nice, small parks throughout the borough, but the equipment at these parks is not equal and some is in need of update/repair. Taking $5-10,000 and using it per park with another $10-20,000 ear-marked for the Borough Park would allow a significant upgrade that many residents and visitors utilize daily. There are also minimal ongoing costs associated with this as opposed to annual insurance fee in the case of the skate park.
As an addendum, I ought to have clarified and didn't in my haste to get the material posted this morning, that this comes down to a classic question for Council, what is in the best interest of the community? If Jack's research favors the skate park, then the Council will need have the information they need to make this decision, but as of the meeting it didn't appear they had the needed support to do so. My suggestion is just that, a suggestion and it is not intended to be considered better (or worse) than any other out there.
The Skate Park would cost between 30 and 40,000.00 based on initial estimates and it would be a "pay-to-play" format. The area would be enclosed and locked when not in use. The Borough would need to purchase additional insurance (roughly 3-4,000 per year), and a pass would be purchased on a seasonal basis by riders. The pass would be a sticker visible on safety equipment. Day passes could be purchased in the form of a wristband. Facility monitoring would be the responsibility of the park manager and police.
The discussion had several fronts:
- Borough has $60,000 received in impact fees that must be used for recreation and spent within three years, they are currently in year two and haven't spent any.
- By offering a Skate Park, would then ban skateboards in the community since they are being given a place to ride. Concerns arose regarding drawing in those from other areas, creating a potential problem area by increasing the number of teens gathering, and question whether or not any of these individuals would pay to skate.
- Also was noted that parental support is critical to any youth activity and if there were parents in the borough who support this, they should attend a meeting making the request or supporting resolution.
- Members wanted to know if the money could be used to pay for the bandshell, which was budgeted for $40,000 this year, or for the pool which is in constant need of repair/update.
From my personal perspective if the borough has a significant amount of money that must be spent on recreation, spread it around and use it in a way that benefits the most residents, not a specific and small demographic.
Nazareth has many nice, small parks throughout the borough, but the equipment at these parks is not equal and some is in need of update/repair. Taking $5-10,000 and using it per park with another $10-20,000 ear-marked for the Borough Park would allow a significant upgrade that many residents and visitors utilize daily. There are also minimal ongoing costs associated with this as opposed to annual insurance fee in the case of the skate park.
As an addendum, I ought to have clarified and didn't in my haste to get the material posted this morning, that this comes down to a classic question for Council, what is in the best interest of the community? If Jack's research favors the skate park, then the Council will need have the information they need to make this decision, but as of the meeting it didn't appear they had the needed support to do so. My suggestion is just that, a suggestion and it is not intended to be considered better (or worse) than any other out there.
050106: Borough Council Meeting
On Monday, May 1, 2006 the Nazareth Borough Council held its monthly meeting.
The discussion of the night focused on a proposal from the Law Committee's Jack Herbst to further investigage/allocate funds for a skate park within the Nazareth Borough Park (Read related article here). The motion was tabled until more information could be discussed.
The meeting opened with the approval of the April Meeting minutes, the Treasurer's, Emergency Management, Zoning, and Code Enforcement reports, as well as the paying of the bills.
Economic Development:
Police:
Public Property:
Mayor also noted there have been 130 crimes to date, with past month having 31 traffic, 18 accidents, 11 mischief, 2 DUI, 4 harassment, 2 underage drinking, 1 public drunkenness, and 1 drug arrest.
No reports from the Solicitor or Engineer.
It was noted that the wrestling team would be present at the June meeting to receive their resolution acknowledging their successful past season.
The discussion of the night focused on a proposal from the Law Committee's Jack Herbst to further investigage/allocate funds for a skate park within the Nazareth Borough Park (Read related article here). The motion was tabled until more information could be discussed.
The meeting opened with the approval of the April Meeting minutes, the Treasurer's, Emergency Management, Zoning, and Code Enforcement reports, as well as the paying of the bills.
Economic Development:
- Approved resolution 5-06-A endorsing the Main Street Program and marking the submission of the grant application to the Pennsylvania DCED. The grant would provide the organizing committee with $5,000 seed money and it would give them one year to meet the initial goals established by the DCED.
- Approved a motion to provide a 3% pay increase to the pool/park manager, Heather Coyle, for the 2006 season. There was a discussion to ensure that next year this position's salary was discussed in November during budget talks and not after the fact. While a voice vote was held, I believe one member did vote no on the increase.
- Approved a motion to establish a Borough of Nazareth Culture and Arts Commission, becoming ordinance #719. The roll call vote was unanimous following a discussion regarding composition of the Commission and the reporting mechanism. It was noted that once the Commission was established the By-laws would be amended to add the Commission under Economic Development Committee.
- Approved a motion to place ads for members of the Borough's new Culture and Arts Commission.
- Approved a motion for use of the circle on Thursday, May 4, 2006 from 7:00 pm on for the National Day of Prayer Ceremony.
- Approved a motion to appoint Elton Werkheiser to the Nazareth Recreation Commission (term ending 12/31/08)
- Approved Resolution 5-06-B, which endorses proposed House Bill 2550 introduced by State Representative Rich Grucela. The Bill imposes an impact fee on developers to off set anticipated school tax increase due to new students. (Read commentary on the Bill here)
- Approved resolution 5-06 commending Thomas DeMarc Jr., a Nazareth High School swimmer, who placed 2nd in the PIAA Swimming Championships.
- Approved a motion to authorize a $5.00 assessment fee for duplicate tax bills provided by the tax collector.
- Approved report of the Ecology Committee.
- Approved a motion to reapply for the 2006 Growing Greener Grant offered by PA DEP.
- Approved a pair of motions for "planning module" for additional gallon usage per day at Keller Consulting, 49 E. Center, and Negrao Group Care property on South New Street.
Police:
- Approved a 90 day resolution for placing a "stop" sign at the intersection of older South Green and newly configured South Green in southerly direction.
- Approved several street closures including May 29, for the Memorial Day Parade sponsored by American Legion Post 415 (in a seperate motion $50.00 was donated to the Legion to offset costs), July 14 on Belvidere between Main and Broad for the Block Party, July 15 on West Center from the Circle to Green for Nazareth Day.
Public Property:
- Approved a motion to refurbish the fireplace in the Log Cabin at Nazareth Park at a cost of $200.00, and to readvertise bids for the re-pointing of bricks on the bridges at the Park.
- Approved two motions, one to hold and one to advertise a public meeting on May 25, 2006 for the purpose of explaining plans for Phase II of the Capital Projects Initiative specifically dealing with the changes/rebuilding of a Borough Administrative Building and the Borough's Police Headquarters.
- Approved payment to Kraemer Electric for $23,994.55 for street light project on the circle.
Mayor also noted there have been 130 crimes to date, with past month having 31 traffic, 18 accidents, 11 mischief, 2 DUI, 4 harassment, 2 underage drinking, 1 public drunkenness, and 1 drug arrest.
No reports from the Solicitor or Engineer.
It was noted that the wrestling team would be present at the June meeting to receive their resolution acknowledging their successful past season.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)