[0:00] So
I before we get started, I'm just going
[0:04] to quickly uh ask what topics are here
for um so I can be sure to prioritize
[0:10] them. Uh I have deer management. Have
that. Anything else?
[0:17] Open space.
[0:21] » Open space
location.
[0:24] » Okay.
[0:28] » Skate park. skate park. Anything else?
All right.
[0:34] All right. In that case, you're all
ready to go.
[0:39] Uh, welcome to the combined monthly
workshop and business meeting of the
[0:43] board of commissioners held for the
purpose of transacting the general
[0:46] business of the township. Today's date
is September 9th, 2026. The meeting is
[0:50] being held in the Springfield Township
building and is also being offered in a
[0:54] live streaming feature. The meeting will
be made available on the township's
[0:57] website beginning tomorrow morning.
Comments will not be accepted remotely
[1:01] during the meeting, but instructions for
submitting public comment in advance of
[1:04] tonight's meeting were provided as part
of the posted agenda. You'll find that
[1:09] this is a little unfamiliar format
because we're combining our Monday and
[1:12] Wednesday meeting because of course
Monday was a Labor Day holiday. Uh so
[1:17] bear with us as we try to move mostly
like a Wednesday meeting. That's why
[1:21] we're sitting here at the dis and not in
the more informal setting. they have
[1:25] experienced us before. Mr. Taylor, can
you please summarize any public comment
[1:29] received prior to the meeting?
>> Uh, yes, Madam President. We received
[1:32] nine public comments. All were related
to the skate park location at McKelby
[1:37] Park and all were opposed.
>> Thank you, Mr. Taylor. At this time,
[1:41] please stand and join the board of
commissioners in a moment of silent
[1:44] reflection to honor the servicemen and
women who place themselves in harm's way
[1:48] um at home and overseas.
[1:57] Please remain standing for the pledge of
>> allegiance.
[2:00] I pledge
>> allegiance to the flag of the United
[2:02] States of America and to the republic
for which it stands, one nation under
[2:07] God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all.
[2:13] » At this time, I'll entertain a motion
dispensing with the reading of the
[2:16] minutes of the previous meeting as
written and recorded in the official
[2:18] minute book of the township.
>> So moved.
[2:21] » We have a motion. Is there a second? Any
questions or comments? Hearing none. All
[2:26] in favor, please signify by saying I.
>> I.
[2:31] » All right. Uh we have a full quorum
today. Uh we typically on Mondays
[2:36] receive our engineer Tim Woodro. Uh due
to um a conflict, a schedule conflict
[2:44] and because it's a little light for our
engineer, uh we were able to excuse him
[2:48] tonight. But if you have any questions
for our engineer, please feel free to
[2:52] send them along to us as always.
Uh tonight's meeting is a combined
[2:59] workshop and business meeting due to the
Labor Day holiday. Uh and as a result,
[3:02] public comment will be accepted. Um as
each agenda item is discussed, I already
[3:08] took a quick poll, as you heard, of a
couple of topics. I'll try to bring that
[3:11] right to the front after announcements.
Um and as always, we when you do come
[3:15] and speak, please reminded to come
forward. uh say your uh name, uh what
[3:20] part of the township you live in, and of
course, try to keep your uh messages
[3:24] short and avoid repetitive comment. Uh
all right, at this time, I'm going to go
[3:30] ahead and do a couple of announcements.
First, regarding the Flowertown Country
[3:34] Club swimming pool pass, the daily
swimming pool passes at the Flowertown
[3:38] Country Club circulated 179 times over
an 80-day period during the first year
[3:43] of availability. The swimming pool
passes will be made available again next
[3:46] summer once the swimming pool resumes
seasonal operating hours. So that's
[3:50] really great. Love to hear that. That's
our first year doing that. Uh next,
[3:54] there is going to be a town hall event.
Uh state representative Napoleon Nelson
[3:59] will be hosting a town hall meeting on
Thursday, October 1st at 7 p.m. at the
[4:03] Free Library of Springfield Township.
The meeting will feature an update on
[4:06] the current projects and activities of
the Jentown Bureau, Cheltonham Township,
[4:10] and Springfield Township Environmental
Advisory Commissions. This is a
[4:14] reschedule from I believe two weeks ago.
Uh a reschedule because it was a stormy
[4:19] night and now you want to be sure that
folks can come out here. So uh those are
[4:23] my announcements. There are two more
announcements. First I'd like to hear
[4:26] from the chairwoman of the public safety
committee, Beth Mcamer.
[4:32] » Um thank you, Madam President. I have
one announcement. The Springfield
[4:35] Township Police Department and board of
commissioners have launched a
[4:38] collaborative public safety forum to
share information with the public and to
[4:42] provide the community a space for
discussion and feedback regarding
[4:45] policing and public safety in the
township. The forums will also allow for
[4:48] inerson engagement with police officers
to enhance knowledge and understanding
[4:52] of law enforcement roles and
responsibilities. Our next public safety
[4:56] forum will be held on Thursday,
September 17th at 7 p.m. at Springfield
[5:00] Township Building in this room and will
feature a presentation on crimes against
[5:04] the elderly and care dependent
individuals including common scams. The
[5:08] final public safety forum for this year
is scheduled to occur on Thursday,
[5:12] December 17th, and will include a look
back at the year in the police
[5:16] department, including major public
safety incidents, crimes, and
[5:18] activities. Each forum will conclude
with a question and answer session and
[5:22] an informal meet and greet with members
of the police department and other
[5:25] public officials. Please refer to the
township's website and social media
[5:28] platforms for additional information as
each forum date approaches.
[5:32] » Thank you, Commissioner um Mcamera. Uh
next, I'm going to move to uh chairman
[5:38] of our cultural resources committee,
Commissioner Morris.
[5:42] » Thank you, Madam President. Uh my
announcements about community day at
[5:46] Springfield Township Community Day
celebration will take place on Sunday,
[5:50] October 4th, uh 2026 from 10:00 a.m. to
1 p.m. at Cisco Park in Genai. Uh junior
[5:57] neighbors for a day filled with family
fun including
[6:01] face painting, balloon creations, and
other surprises.
[6:04] » Oo, surprises,
>> food, music, fishing, and fire and
[6:09] equipment display provided free of
charge. Community Day is made possible
[6:13] via generous support of our business
community and various community
[6:16] volunteers. For more information, please
contact www.urenhogivic.org/
[6:24] community-
>> All right, that concludes my
[6:28] » Thank you, Commissioner Morris. Um, I'm
going to go ahead and move a few items.
[6:33] Uh, one I think may be quick and is not
officially on our agenda, but on a on a
[6:38] Monday we would take. I'm going to first
do the deer conversation. Uh then I'm
[6:42] going to do open space natural lands and
then we'll do the skate accordingly.
[6:45] Then we'll move into our committee
reports. We'll hear from our manager um
[6:48] and then reopen at the end. So first I
know we have someone here to speak about
[6:53] deer. Uh you're more than welcome to
come to the microphone. This is public
[6:56] comment.
[7:01] » All right. Well, good evening uh
commissioners. Very excited. This is my
[7:05] first time here and u my name is Diane
Scooty.
[7:08] » I know no other format.
>> Huh. So, you know, no other
[7:11] » I work for a municipal government, so
I'm very familiar with um with meetings.
[7:15] Just a little bit more contentious than
up than uh Springfield Township.
[7:22] » Oh, no, no, no. I work at Upper Derby
Township.
[7:26] » Um, so I live on 20 20 I don't know if I
have to give my address, but I live at
[7:31] 26 Glen Circle in Ernheim. And I'm here
to of course discuss the deer population
[7:36] in the township. And I just um and I
just want to say this for the record. I
[7:41] appreciate Michael telling me, you know,
the plans for the um for the upcoming
[7:46] plans um regarding deer management, but
just um my husband and I have invested a
[7:52] great deal of money um to improve our
property. Um and it's frustrating and
[7:56] disappointing to constantly find deer in
our yard um eating the our many plants.
[8:02] And yes, we have planted deer resistant
plants. Um, but we also have many
[8:07] non-deerresistant plants that were
planted um on our property long before
[8:11] we purchased this property 15 years ago.
In addition, we work many um long hours
[8:17] in our yard and our concern for our
health because of the deer, the ticks
[8:21] the deer carry, as well as um their
feces. And this past uh Saturday evening
[8:26] while driving down Hall's Lane, um a
deer ran into my car um causing damage
[8:32] to the car at an estimated amount of
about 200. I haven't taken it to the um
[8:37] to the a vehicle collision place yet. Um
I'm thankful that I had no in injuries
[8:42] and I'm sorry for the injuries to the
deer but now I am very concerned about
[8:48] the great um because of the everex
expanding deer population um you know
[8:53] that there will be you know more when
will a much more serious car accident
[8:58] happen to a resident of the township or
other otherwise. Um I learned from a
[9:04] neighbor uh that a survey was done
earlier in the year regarding deer
[9:08] management. Um, and I guess I question
whether this was public publicized and
[9:14] if it's and if so, in what manner. Um, I
suspect more than 872 of the township's
[9:20] 21,000 residents would have responded.
I reviewed the deer management report um
[9:28] done for the township dated April 15,
2026. And I feel this study really
[9:33] summarized the issues and the solution.
Um, and basically that I I found it
[9:40] really fascinating that it said that the
deer obviously the deer population has
[9:44] grown beyond the carrying capacity of
our wooded lands causing ecological
[9:49] imbalance um such as preventing
establishment of new plants and um
[9:55] limiting biodiversity.
Obviously, the vehicle collisions
[9:59] causing injury, property damage, and
wildlife mortality are occurring in the
[10:04] township. Um, the tick born illnesses
including Lyme disease are also evident.
[10:11] And, um, what is really disturbing is
the mal malnutrition and disease
[10:16] transmission that can occur among the
overcrowding deer population.
[10:21] So the solution as recommended by the
study of the implementation of a
[10:25] structured deer management program um
which stated was the most practable,
[10:30] cost-effective and sustainable approach.
So I hope that's the approach the the
[10:34] township is taking and also just about
transparency and communication are just
[10:39] key with the deer management um
uh program. So, I'm very um happy to
[10:47] hear that this is going to be discussed
at an October meeting. I also have
[10:51] Wednesday night meetings um in my
township, but I work. So, um I might not
[10:55] be able to be here, but I can always
watch it online. And I don't know who
[10:59] which representative if I'm in
Erdenheim. Okay. Well, there you go.
[11:06] » Okay. Good. Okay. So, now I know. So, I
wasn't quite
[11:08] » We usually have workshop meetings on
Mondays, so we will probably talk about
[11:10] it more in detail at the Monday meeting.
>> Okay. Good. Or Wednesday meeting.
[11:13] » Good. Good. Good. So then I'll just you
know kind of follow up as to agendas and
[11:17] to see when that will be discussed.
>> Sure. And I mean and typically we do
[11:22] » you can sign up on the website upper
right hand corner
[11:27] » then you'll get meeting if you sign up
on the website you can get the meeting
[11:31] notices pushed out to you. Okay.
>> So you don't have to go back and check
[11:34] it all the time.
>> Okay. Okay.
[11:35] » That you should do that. Everyone should
do that in
[11:38] » All right. So that's all I have to say.
Thank you so much for your time. And for
[11:42] what it's worth, on Mondays we typically
have just more um uh more casual
[11:46] discussion. Uh but for this particular
topic, I mean, I don't have a problem
[11:50] saying that next month we anticipate a
report back from uh Chief PCKO who is
[11:54] tasked with following up on the deer
management survey because some of that
[11:57] requires uh basically impacted traffic
and other safety measures as as you
[12:02] referenced. Uh so we will probably be
talking about it at length next month.
[12:06] Okay.
>> Uh and we received that report about
[12:08] three months ago, I think. Uh but we
hear you. I think we're all sympathetic
[12:13] with the problem and also sympathetic
that it seems like uh the ultimate
[12:17] solution is either slow pace or
difficult to achieve in a densely uh
[12:22] populated area like ours
>> and you may know that in upper Derby as
[12:26] well.
>> No, I don't think we have a deer problem
[12:28] there.
Yeah. So,
[12:30] » but I am I used to work at Cababrini and
I am familiar with what they did there
[12:34] as well in RER Township um to to take
care of the deer problem. And they
[12:39] worked with the the federal government,
which I understand you have to be in a
[12:42] two-year program, but um and that was
primarily because of accidents that
[12:48] happened, you know, at bordering the
campus. So, I mean, there's just, you
[12:52] know, I think whatever there's just so
many reasons. So, I'm just looking
[12:55] forward to hearing, you know, what you
have to say. what's going to happen and
[12:59] transpire.
>> Thank you so much.
[13:01] » Thank you.
>> Thank you for your comment.
[13:02] » Uh, another set of topics we're going to
move.
[13:05] » Can I ask one question about that before
we move on?
[13:07] » Because this was actually something I
was going to ask about uh this month
[13:10] just to understand where we are with it,
but I'm glad to know that we'll be
[13:13] getting a report um next month from the
chief. Um, I don't know if anybody
[13:18] recalls from the presentation because I
I don't. I was just looking through the
[13:22] uh notes here from it and I couldn't
find it. Quick, does anybody know what
[13:28] the timing for actually doing the deer
management would be in terms of, you
[13:34] know, what time of year is sort of
>> Well, they'll be active in the fall.
[13:37] » Okay.
>> When they go into rut and they start to
[13:40] lose their mind and focus on certain
things,
[13:44] » like lose their mind and that's the
easiest time, but that's also the time
[13:48] where they walk out in front of cars and
you have the highest number of
[13:51] accidents. So, it's
>> important to get things going. Yeah,
[13:55] that's that's what I wanted to ask.
>> Yeah, I mean that's the time when you
[13:57] really need to be careful. The fall is
when you really need to be careful.
[14:00] That's where you get the car Yeah. car
deer collisions.
[14:05] » Yeah.
>> All right. Uh I'm going to go ahead and
[14:08] move over to the chairman of the
environmental resource committee,
[14:11] Brendan May. Uh regarding open space and
natural lands. Um how about we go ahead
[14:21] and read Well, actually, how about I
receive any public comment? us on this
[14:24] agenda item on open space and natural
lands at this time. And then what we'll
[14:28] do is read the motion. Uh and then we
will do our comments and questions on
[14:33] the motion as we typically do and then
we'll execute our vote. Uh if I know
[14:38] there's one in the back. Is there anyone
else who would like to speak on this
[14:41] topic? Come on. Uh come on up one at a
time. Whoever would like to
[14:54] Judith Panatuchi, 101 East Waken Avenue,
Lower Town. Um,
[15:00] I was here at the natural lands uh
discussions that you've had a couple
[15:06] months ago. Um, and I've also looked
through the zoning ordinances about the
[15:12] um overlays. I'm just uh wondering
since that's a pretty extensive uh
[15:19] process to go through all that um you
know digital paperwork um are the
[15:26] overlays going to be sort of part of the
natural lands too and we have township
[15:32] lands. Are they going to ever have any
common borders with the natural lands if
[15:38] we so do get those?
[15:43] Okay, I'm going to hold on to that
question and let us discuss it unless
[15:48] someone wants to make a comment. I think
what you're saying is what area of land
[15:53] will a natural lands um be going to
review? Just let's set the stage a
[15:59] little bit. Tonight we're considering an
agreement with natural lands to do an
[16:05] open space referendum. They recommend
about one year 12 months in advance of
[16:10] the election cycle where the referendum
would go. Uh and so this uh comment is
[16:17] about what area of land are we talking
about? And I think part of the
[16:21] conversation with a third party adviser
as such as natural lands is to identify
[16:26] some of those areas. Mike, am I you
correct? You're correct that part of the
[16:30] the scope of work would be to identify
potential lands for conservation going
[16:35] forward. Basically undeveloped but
unprotected open space as it exists
[16:40] today. I think you're referring to the
township zoning code map when you talk
[16:44] about overlays. This is independent
regardless of how something is zoned. um
[16:49] if it's undeveloped and current open
space but unprotected um that would be a
[16:55] consideration for possible conservation
in the future should a referendum pass.
[17:01] » Okay. And when I was here I remember I
got the paperwork from the desk here for
[17:06] what what I think I have it at home too
for the natural lands. Um, it just seems
[17:12] like when they had the map up there and
the woman was trying to explain certain
[17:16] things when the when the presenters came
to show that. Um, I I don't remember. Is
[17:21] it on that printout? Is that is the is
some of the stuff on there or it's not
[17:26] on there? I just wanted to know.
>> There has been no conservation map
[17:29] created as of yet. That is a work
product to be completed should the board
[17:35] agree to engage natural lands. Okay,
that's right.
[17:39] » I think this I think
>> that what the slide that you might be
[17:43] referring to that was an example that
the presenter gave from another
[17:47] municipality that she's previously and
she was giving an example of um after
[17:52] they had rendered services to that
municipality. They were able to identify
[17:56] what was protected, what was under what
was not yet developed, what what was
[17:59] left, right to kind of further the
discussion. So I think it was an I don't
[18:02] recall what township but it was another
municipality.
[18:06] » Okay. because I I think the same night
she did the overlay thing and that was
[18:10] totally different. It was not the same
topic. Um,
[18:14] is this going to be done like in six or
seven months? I'm just curious.
[18:18] Are they going to have any kind of a a
mapping of it or is it going to be
[18:22] further out? I'm just wondering because
I might not be here in six or seven
[18:25] months. I I'll live here but I I might
not be here. Is it going to be further
[18:29] out do you think when they're going to
start designing some of this stuff or or
[18:33] you don't know?
>> But to be determined. Okay,
[18:37] » we we haven't even engaged natural lands
at this point, but as Commissioner
[18:42] Ratzaban stated, they recommend a year
of planning before the ballot referendum
[18:48] actually appears on an election ballot.
>> Okay. Okay. Thank you.
[18:53] » There's work a lot of work to do before
then.
[18:55] » Okay. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[18:57] » Anyone else like to speak on this topic?
[19:05] » Uh, good evening. at John English 603
Bradford Road. Uh the natural lands
[19:10] proposal includes well it's a $15,000 uh
proposal is how is that funded? Is that
[19:16] taxpayer funded?
>> Yes.
[19:20] » Okay. So the natural land proposal
includes $9,000 for building public
[19:25] consensus. What safeguards will the
township put in place to make sure
[19:29] taxpayer funded outreach remains
neutral? public education does not
[19:35] become advocacy for a particular
referendum outcome.
[19:41] I
>> think by nature of it being third
[19:42] parties, right? And that's part of the
motivation I think to engage natural
[19:46] lands as I understand it is that it
engages a third party that is unbiased
[19:52] um and is again kind of worked with the
municipalities
[19:56] » understanding yes might they have a bias
towards uh protecting natural lands of
[20:00] course right but I think in terms of
them that was one of the things that
[20:03] that spoke to me in their presentation
that they are um really trying to gather
[20:08] information and present it and um go
from there right that
[20:13] That's my understanding of it anyway.
That's kind of our our goal is to use a
[20:17] third party um in this process so we can
have unbiased information.
[20:22] » Yeah. The only thing that I would add to
that is I believe that the way natural
[20:26] lands describes this um the
commissioners are allowed to be
[20:30] advocates one way or the other. The
township itself, township staff is to
[20:35] remain neutral on the question.
>> So that's how the ad advocacy component
[20:39] works as part of the the referendum.
Okay. And and the referendum is is
[20:44] basically it's a tax on you know would
the
[20:49] » it would be a question to the voters as
to whether
[20:51] » Sure. Yeah. Exactly. Okay.
>> Yeah. Support an increase in in attacks
[20:54] to fund open space acquisitions and
>> and have you uh explored any other
[20:59] options other than a tax like uh private
companies or any anything like that or
[21:05] you just gone right for the tax? Well,
we don't have a control over a private
[21:09] individual or company making the
decision to make.
[21:12] » Correct. I'm not saying you have control
over it. I'm saying have you explored
[21:15] any other options going right to the
tax?
[21:18] » I think for a couple years we've been
working on just understanding what type
[21:22] of open space is available to us, what
type of opportunities we have or don't
[21:26] have, what challenges we've had. And I
think this is one way for us to ask the
[21:31] question of our residents of what they
wish to see and what they wish to do. I
[21:36] think it a lot of people have different
interests in in open space preservation
[21:41] and uh you know rather than let's say us
to just come out outright with a tax for
[21:46] example I think it just makes sense to
bring it up to the taxpayers to decide
[21:50] if this is something we want to
prioritize and in what way. Having a
[21:53] third party I think will uh help shape
this. Not only do I think that I know
[21:58] that's what the job is and it's going to
be the most neutral way of handling it.
[22:01] I even read about um Hatfield recently I
think is doing one and the materials
[22:06] outright say as it's being published to
your concern um look we we cannot speak
[22:11] one way or the other but these are the
things that would be accomplished with
[22:14] that tax and this is what you're there
to consider and I think having um really
[22:19] tight language around that developed
takes is going to take some work it's
[22:22] going to take some time and that's why
they recommend 12 months okay advance so
[22:26] they
>> so we've considered over the years I
[22:28] mean to your to your point I think the
conversation about open face has
[22:30] happened a number of times over the
years uh as to what that could look like
[22:34] and one avenue to explore is taxation
and this is one way to explore that
[22:41] taxation if that's what the appetite of
the taxpayers is.
[22:44] » Okay. Yeah. I mean, I don't have an
opinion on uh open space either way, but
[22:48] uh my concern is that uh using taxpayer
money for, you know, to kind of gain and
[22:54] I I read it in the I I read through the
whole natural lands and I think it was
[22:59] to build public uh consensus
and to me that says, you know, they're
[23:04] they're leaning towards this outcome and
to use taxpayer dollars for that. Not
[23:09] everybody may agree. And that's why I
that's kind of where my question is.
[23:13] Yes, that's why we have a vote, you
know, then then the the majority is
[23:17] going to determine what happens. And we
all hear from our constituents that's
[23:23] extremely important to them. So, we're
trying to respond to community needs
[23:28] with this project. And I mean consensus
also there is going to be a a
[23:33] conversation about what town the
township would concede and and and have
[23:37] consensus around which parcels what type
of land or you know that needs to be
[23:43] identified and so that we can know how
much money would be needed. Would it
[23:46] even be enough money to take care of any
amount of properties or maybe we'd have
[23:52] to do more. whatever the outcome is,
that's going to be the year's worth of
[23:55] work that this third party is going to
engage in in doing the work of
[23:59] discovering. So, I think it's, you know,
>> I would add too, it's not, it's not an
[24:04] either or. Very rarely is a situation
come about for preservation where it's
[24:10] taxpayer money or not. There's usually
somewhere in the middle. If if an
[24:15] opportunity comes and let's say a large
parcel quickly becomes available and
[24:20] under threat of development without any
kind of funding mechanism to just say,
[24:24] "Wow, we hope some rich donor, you know,
in the next month buys it." You know,
[24:29] that's not really a plan that that we
can just bank on. So, um, but it does go
[24:34] in the books, right? At the end of the
day, this is here are the pros and the
[24:36] cons.
>> The reprimand buzz. I understand that.
[24:39] But the $9,000 to kind of steer it in
one direction is what I have a problem
[24:44] with.
>> Well, the referendum is asking you to
[24:46] enact something that doesn't exist. So,
I don't know how you would
[24:50] » not skew it because you're not taking a
vote to take something away. You're
[24:54] taking a vote whether to create
something that doesn't exist yet.
[24:59] So, if you were straight down the
middle, then you wouldn't even do it
[25:01] because it doesn't exist right now.
>> Okay. Thank you very much for your time.
[25:05] » Thank you.
>> Thank you. Would anyone else like to
[25:07] speak to this topic before we make the
motion?
[25:11] » All right. At this time, I'm going to
ask uh Commissioner May to go ahead and
[25:15] submit that motion.
>> Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
[25:20] So my motion I move that the board of
commissioners authorize the execution of
[25:24] an agreement with natural lands to
assist the board of commissioners with
[25:29] the preparation of an ordinance and
ballot referendum to assist municipality
[25:33] with the preservation of open space. The
scope of work shall include public
[25:38] education, facilitation of public
meetings, and the preparation of a
[25:43] conservation opportunities map. The
Total cost of the agreement is $15,500
[25:50] in accordance with the natural lands
proposal dated May 18th, 2026. That is
[25:56] my motion.
>> We have a motion. Is there a second?
[25:59] » Second.
>> Uh are there any questions or comments
[26:03] on the motion?
>> I just wanted to add, you know,
[26:06] regarding natural lands, I think one of
the things that stuck out with their
[26:09] presentation is that they don't measure
success by whether a referendum passes
[26:14] or not. they just help with construction
of the referendum. that's that's the
[26:17] role that they felt they played which
you know with my interest in natural
[26:21] ants you know and open space
preservation I think I was like ah you
[26:27] know I kind I think I kind of hoped or
thought that they might be you know
[26:31] working towards it but really it's just
the construction the referendum that
[26:35] they have this expertise
>> that I'll add a comment there too
[26:39] Brandon that natural lands also performs
the services of helping to raise money
[26:43] not just not just what in the matter of
the referendum that we're talking about
[26:47] here. In fact, when um the property
implies lane was an issue, you know,
[26:52] starting in 2019,
this board did have a proposal from
[26:56] natural lands to reform services to go
try to raise that money through grants
[27:00] and other private donations outside of
any kind of of of taxpayer funding. So,
[27:06] they they are minded uh in that way as
well in terms of raising.
[27:13] » Uh
>> now, that's not what we're hiring to do
[27:15] here. This is very specific, but that is
one of their services.
[27:19] » Andy, are there other uh third party
vendors that talk about open space
[27:24] preservation referendum formation like
natural lands does in your in your uh
[27:28] experience?
>> I think natural lands are the are the uh
[27:32] the leaders in this area, I would say,
in in Montgomery County for sure. Um on
[27:36] the the Hatfield one, I believe they're
involved. They were involved in Lower
[27:39] Southford, which um is a community that
I represent as well. Um, so you know,
[27:44] I've seen them in many places um,
assisting municipalities in various ways
[27:49] with with the referendum questions. Um,
I really haven't seen too many um,
[27:54] » alternatives and I think they're
probably the, you know, the leader as
[27:57] far as I can tell in this area at the
moment.
[28:00] » Thank you. I'm just following up because
I was looking for the same just to be
[28:04] thorough and be sure that if there's
some other competitor that we, you know,
[28:07] obviously get the appropriate request
out there. Um but I think this again as
[28:12] you heard me say I think is a it's the
appropriate direction for being
[28:16] responsive to our taxpayers who
frequently come here and um discuss uh
[28:21] how do we preserve land and uh how do we
do it with taxpayer dollars or without
[28:27] taxpayer dollars. I mean uh the only
other way without is by the generosity
[28:31] of benefactors uh with you know about
whom we can't really control. So, I
[28:35] think this is a great avenue to learn
more about what our taxpayers want and
[28:39] um I really appreciate the opportunity
to be neutral by the township and the
[28:43] township uh staff itself. Uh obviously,
you can hear that we have interest uh
[28:48] individually and so I'm looking forward
to hearing more and seeing what comes
[28:52] out of it. One of the things that we've
been working on uh without spending
[28:56] taxpayer dollars is can we develop uh
spaces and parcels that we wish to
[29:01] prioritize and it really started to get
a little complicated as far as being
[29:05] sure that it was fair, equitable, that
we're being thorough, that we have the
[29:08] due diligence as frankly volunteers
trying to figure that out. And so being
[29:12] able to use professional expertise in
this area um and learning about this
[29:16] process I think is is the way to go. So
that's my comment. Any other comments?
[29:23] All right, we have a motion. There is a
second. Uh, all in favor, please signify
[29:27] by saying I.
>> I. I.
[29:29] » Any oppose? Hearing none, please record
a unanimous vote.
[29:34] » All right. Uh, thank you for those
submitting public comment and thank you
[29:38] commissioners for that vote. Next, we
have a uh individuals here to discuss
[29:43] Sleep Park and that's the last of my
public comments. So, uh, I will ask one
[29:47] more time if there's any on any other
topic, but our last one in the public
[29:51] comment section will be skate park. So,
if anyone would like to comment on skate
[29:56] park, uh, please come to the four. Uh, I
will just cue that up while people get
[30:02] their feet together and come to the mic.
Uh, that tonight we intend to, uh, hear
[30:08] a motion regarding the designation of
the opportunity to provide a skate park
[30:12] at McKelby. Uh, and that's what we're
here to discuss. But before that motion,
[30:16] is there public comment on this topic?
If so, please come to the front. Please
[30:20] try to keep your comments uh short and
try not to repeat previous comments if
[30:25] they've already been suggested.
Our usual setup often.
[30:42] » Hello. Good evening. Uh my name is Mark
Burr. uh resident of Orland uh 228
[30:48] Plymouth Avenue. Uh I have two young
children. We use McKelby Park uh in its
[30:53] current uh form. Uh we really enjoy it.
Uh the current lot uh next to the 5 to
[31:00] 12 playground and the basketball courts
serves as a really nice open and
[31:05] transitional space. Um it really lends
itself well to the kids that play there.
[31:11] Um if older kids don't want to go into
the smaller kid playground area, that
[31:16] field can be used for ball sports, uh
hanging out. Um the basketball court
[31:22] when it's used is very popular. Uh when
it's not being used, it's also serving a
[31:27] second purpose. You can ride bikes on
it. Kids can play chalk. um to think
[31:32] about losing one of the few remaining
open spaces in that part of Orland I
[31:36] don't think would serve uh my family
especially but the community uh very
[31:41] well. So please take that into
consideration uh when you make your
[31:46] decision. Uh I think uh a skate park
not being used uh isn't necessarily
[31:53] something that can serve a a second
purpose and I think um would be a loss
[31:57] for that part of our community. Thank
you for your time.
[32:01] » Yeah. Thank you.
[32:20] » Hi everyone. My name is Karen Ersum. I'm
an resident of Orland. And I know that
[32:25] you've heard a lot from me about this
topic and about advocating to preserve
[32:30] the green. So I'm not going to go into
all of that again. Um but I am here
[32:36] tonight to ask you some questions that I
think need to be answered before making
[32:40] this decision.
Um,
[32:43] I am going to ask that you give serious
consideration to community voices and
[32:47] priorities as you weigh this decision
and to ask if you've answered all the
[32:52] questions that you've answered all the
questions that you've needed to before
[32:55] you can vote on this.
I'm asking whether you've established
[33:00] that McKelie is the right location and
whether the evidence really supports
[33:04] giving up this particular piece of green
space.
[33:08] The township has established that there
were no park specific impacts measured
[33:12] in the areas of concern that were
brought up both by residents and through
[33:16] the township survey. So I want to ask
you, has the township completed a
[33:21] professional feasibility study for this
specific site, including the physical
[33:25] constraints of McKelie, storm water,
drainage, trees, grading, residential
[33:30] proximity, noise, parking, access,
construction costs, and long-term
[33:35] maintenance.
[33:42] All right. Uh,
>> that's a question.
[33:46] » All right. Do you have any other further
public comment?
[33:48] » Yes, I have other comment. I believe if
what the township manager said earlier
[33:55] this week is that if that hasn't been
completed, is the board prepared to
[34:01] approve this location before knowing
whether the site is actually suitable?
[34:07] Also, I feel like it's very unclear what
we're voting on.
[34:11] I would like clarification on exactly
what the board is voting to approve
[34:16] tonight. Is it a general location? Is it
a footprint? Are there parameters in
[34:20] place?
There's a whole slew of things that I
[34:24] feel like have not been very well
established for not only the immediate
[34:30] neighborhood but for the community in
general because this will be a community
[34:35] resource no matter where it ends up
going.
[34:38] Um I have questions about the prox the
residential proximity factor. Have those
[34:45] been updated? Last month, we brought up
that there were apartment complexes that
[34:50] did not appear to be included in those
measurements, and I've asked if those
[34:56] could please be verified. So, I would
like to
[35:00] ask that again. Um, if I would like to
hear about what specific mitigation
[35:07] measures are being considered for noise
and other neighborhood impacts.
[35:13] Um, and how are you weighing the
community community feedback portion?
[35:19] You've heard that people in our
community would like a skate park
[35:23] somewhere here in Springfield Township.
You've also heard that there are people
[35:28] who very strongly
prefer to preserve the green for its
[35:33] current use. Um, so I am wondering how
are you weighing those two things?
[35:42] Um, and what evidence would tell you
that preserving the green is the better
[35:47] decision for the broader community or
is there another place the skate park
[35:52] can go? Because these are not mutually
exclusive goals to have is to preserve
[35:57] the green and to have a skate park. Last
month, Cisco was on the board right up
[36:02] until the last minute where it was
removed. And so, are we really
[36:07] determining the best place for this
skate park if we haven't actually
[36:11] considered all the possible spaces where
it could go? Can we go back to the
[36:16] drawing board and say, let's really look
at these. Let's update this scorecard.
[36:21] Let's consider do some of the best
practices scores on there actually even
[36:27] need to be there because they're scored
differently for McKelby versus Cisco for
[36:34] active or I don't know if that was
actually it actually I do have it in
[36:39] front of me um
safety security and sports lighting.
[36:45] While this park isn't intended to be
used after dusk why does Mckelby get a
[36:50] score? or is it just simply because the
amenity exists even if you're not
[36:54] intending to use it? So, is this making
your scorecard a little out of balance?
[37:00] Um, and the same thing goes, it is
active. You've given me a five, but
[37:05] you've given your other sites fours and
threes, but then in your explanation,
[37:09] you say all parks are active. So, there
are some things that I'm going to ask
[37:16] that you explain
if you're able how they were scored and
[37:21] what gave them that weight and are they
actually even necessary on this to add
[37:27] just additional information.
Um,
[37:33] before I finish my
comment, I would just ask that
[37:39] you consider
truly what our community values in this
[37:45] park, what we value as a community of
Springfield, it's green open space,
[37:50] listening to residents, really just
feeling like this is a place that we
[37:55] want to call home. Um, and knowing that
and really giving consideration
[38:01] obviously you have to the skateboard
association
[38:05] is that we're we're really looking at
the big picture to make sure that when a
[38:10] spot is found, it is the best spot that
we can give them, not just something
[38:14] that simply worked for that location. If
there are other locations, have you
[38:20] weighed that? Um, I hope that we'll be
able to get some of these answers
[38:26] tonight and hear exactly what you're
voting on and how the parameters will
[38:31] work around any agreements that are made
and commitments, the time frames us, you
[38:37] know, a lot of people are wondering what
are the taxpayer implications? Who's
[38:41] paying for this? I in some of the older
um parks and wreck meeting there was a
[38:48] comment about if they raise half the
township would match it. Does that still
[38:55] stand? Is that something that's under
consideration? I think those are
[39:00] questions that both taxpayers in the
whole community deserve to have
[39:05] answered, but also
um
[39:09] people who live directly in that
community are will be affected by this.
[39:14] So, thank you so much.
>> Thank you. Any other comments on skate
[39:17] park at this time?
[39:26] » Hello everybody. Uh good evening. Uh,
Pete Ruben, Kim, gota take my readers
[39:30] off because that's all I have to read.
Um, but anyway, thanks again for your
[39:34] time for another time. Um, and I just,
you know, reading the, you know, the
[39:41] most recent agenda, um, the survey that
went out, the scores that came back, um,
[39:47] you know, the thing that we have to
realize, or at least I've been a
[39:51] Springfield resident forever, and we
want the same thing. We want green space
[39:55] as well. Uh, and it's a balance. And you
know what I've seen since I've been here
[40:01] in this township is an increase in green
space, whether it's Harstston Woods, um,
[40:07] you know, um, I forget the the name of
it, but the Flood Plane Park. Um, you
[40:11] know, so we've actually increased the
green space. Um, most of the comments
[40:16] that came back and I thought it was a
great juxaposition was to see like the
[40:21] the neighboring municipalities that you
guys reached out to um to just most of
[40:27] the concerns were based on fear and
based on unknowing because we've never
[40:31] had one. But now we're not trying to
recreate the wheel and we're talking to
[40:35] municipalities who have done it and some
of the same fears and their objections
[40:40] going to bring drugs and graffiti. Uh
you know the municipalities said no it's
[40:45] actually not the case. So um I guess I
just want everybody to realize that we
[40:51] truly want the same thing. I mean and
the skate park does not mean like you
[40:54] said mutually exclusive. It doesn't mean
there's going to be a void of green
[40:58] space. There will be trees. there will
be places for people to sit uh and and
[41:02] just relax. Um, you know, I think it's a
a preconceived notion that it's anarchy
[41:08] and it's going to be crazy, which is
just not the case. So, I've said it time
[41:13] and time again. I mean, we we've created
countless opportunities for the kids in
[41:17] this township to play organized team
sports, but nowhere for a kid who needs
[41:23] to get off their phone and just do it on
their own clock, their own agenda to do
[41:27] it whenever they please. And that
doesn't mean whenever they please. We
[41:31] all want the same thing. We want to have
hours that restrict. We don't want it to
[41:34] be, you know, it's open till 10 o'clock
at night. Um, you know, it it's it's
[41:40] something we just have to provide, you
know, for the alternative. I mean, one
[41:43] of the responses was um, which was just
kind of funny is that we have to um, you
[41:48] know, have free space for diversity
and that's what we're trying to do here.
[41:53] So anyway, that's all I have to say.
Thanks.
[41:55] » Thank you.
>> Thank you. Any other comments on this
[41:58] topic before we put forward a motion?
[42:08] » No, you got a comment.
[42:13] » I'll be back.
>> Is this new information that you're
[42:18] » I just want to have the public comment
to be that McKelby Park is 0.8 8 acres
[42:24] and this is the only small patch of
green in this part of Orland. So, we're
[42:28] not saying that um green space isn't a
priority for the township and that there
[42:33] haven't been new places that have
existed, but it's rare that you're
[42:37] taking away a spot that serves a whole
community. And it is the only spot there
[42:43] that's green there. It's fully developed
and paved all around. And so this is
[42:50] really taking this little gem of a field
and turning it into concrete which is
[42:56] really what is fully surrounding which
makes it so valuable to us. So I
[43:01] appreciate that there is there are other
parks and there are other places for
[43:07] other neighborhoods to relax in a green
park but that won't be the case in
[43:12] downtown Orland.
Any other comments on this topic?
[43:18] » I think I'd like to offer
>> sure
[43:20] » comment from our end of things
>> just about and and we probably should
[43:25] announce some of the the measurements
and you know clarify some of that before
[43:29] we vote.
>> Um are we going to have the discussion
[43:32] before the vote or after the vote
>> so that we can do the uh discussion
[43:36] after the motion? Uh
>> I don't know. That's what Susie told me.
[43:39] That's the only as long as there's no
>> I just wanted to comment. Yeah. I just
[43:43] wanted to be sure there was an
opportunity for public comment before we
[43:45] go right into the motion. Again, this is
a little of an unusual format. We're
[43:48] missing our Mondays and Wednesdays. Um,
any other public comment on this topic?
[44:01] » Hi, I'm Adrian. Um, I started like
advocating for the skate park with my
[44:06] mom and um, sixth grade, I think. Uh,
I've kind of played team sports a lot in
[44:14] my life, but I really like
skateboarding. I've been skating since I
[44:18] was I think I was like 6 or 7 years old.
Um, I know people who like never played
[44:25] team sports, but love skateboarding and
love those individual sports. And um,
[44:30] there's nowhere in this township for
people like that. Like I know a lot of
[44:34] people who haven't really played team
sports and grow up never being able to
[44:39] skateboard or ride BMX in this township.
Never felt like
[44:44] uh involved in the township. Never felt
accepted. So I feel like um having more
[44:50] diverse areas for like kids my age to go
to would be great.
[44:56] » Thank you, Adrian.
>> Thank you. Thank you.
[44:58] » All right.
and then I'll do one last call for
[45:03] » I just have one question because I'm
familiar with um building a skateboard
[45:06] park. So, how is it going to be funded?
Is there a skateboard coalition that's
[45:11] funding this or is it the township
that's funding it?
[45:13] » So, again, a level set and again trying
to wage what to say in in our comment
[45:18] period versus what to engage in um
without drawing out public comment. Um
[45:22] but essentially there has been a
proposal by an a third party
[45:27] organization nonprofit organization
Adrian and their mother is is a part of
[45:32] it uh to offer to fund it. I don't think
it's accurate that the township was
[45:37] willing to uh split 50% of the cost in
the past. In the past, what was
[45:41] proposed, and this and this was even
before I I was sitting here, uh, was
[45:45] that, hey, once you have, you know,
basically half of $500,000, $250,000,
[45:51] come back and see if maybe we'll give
you a spot. And how we landed here was,
[45:56] wow, that's after a few years of trying
it that way, correct me if I'm wrong,
[46:00] um, you know, actually, how could I ask
a donor to donate to my organization to
[46:05] work with a township that may not be
ready to give me space to do that? So
[46:09] they came here and said, you know, can
we restart that and refresh how that is
[46:13] worked out? Our position at this time is
to offer an opportunity for the skate
[46:18] park to build skate facility somewhere
in our township. We've been doing due
[46:23] diligence on this and have come to the
conclusion that McKelby is an ideal
[46:27] potentially ideal location. That is one
of the questions before us today uh
[46:32] after that due diligence period. And uh
that's really the question before us
[46:37] today is whether they'll have the
opportunity to then go forth do the
[46:40] design knowing that there's going to be
um tacit conceptual approval of the idea
[46:45] of a skate park facility at this
location provide that they uh go out and
[46:49] do the fundraising. We'll offer services
that um are not necessarily capital
[46:54] expenditures. They're going to be things
like additional engineering services. um
[46:58] park and recck staff is going to of
course consider it as something that
[47:02] we're working on. But beyond that, at
this time, our capital expenditures are
[47:06] caught up in actually bringing about 10
acres of park online this this year and
[47:12] uh a rec center. So that's not uh out of
our tax.
[47:15] » Okay. I just want to be Yeah.
>> Yeah. I hope that helps. Thank you.
[47:18] » Uh for those who might be newer to the
conversation, um if there are no other
[47:21] public comments, what we'll clarify is
this motion reading and then we'll go
[47:24] ahead and have this conversation. Uh, I
don't see any other further public
[47:29] comment. So, Commissioner Goldberg,
please, as chairman of the Parks and
[47:34] Recreational Resources Committee, please
read your motion.
[47:36] » Thank you, Madam President. Okay. I move
that the board of commissioners
[47:40] designate an area at McKelie Park to
allow the Springfield Township
[47:45] Skateboard Association
the opportunity to design a community
[47:49] skate park. The designation of the area
shall be conditioned upon the
[47:54] association preserving the existing
trees and limiting the impervious
[47:59] surface to no more than that of the
previous basketball court that occupied
[48:03] that location. In addition, the so the
association shall be required to present
[48:08] plans for the skate park review and
recommendation by the parks and
[48:12] recreation advisory committee. The
director of parks and recreation shall
[48:16] arrange for public notice to be provided
by mailing notice of the meeting to all
[48:20] property owners located within 500 ft of
the park perimeter and by posting notice
[48:24] of the meeting at the park property,
which I should note we did again for
[48:28] this meeting. Construction of the skate
park shall not occur until permission
[48:33] has been granted by the board of
commissioners at at a regularly
[48:36] scheduled meeting. That concludes my
motion.
[48:39] » We have a motion. Is there a second?
Second. Any questions or comments on the
[48:43] motion? And Brendon, maybe you start
since you started.
[48:46] » Um, yeah, I could lead off with some,
you know, I'm just trying to address
[48:50] some of the questions that were out
there. Um, you know, some of the
[48:54] questions really were about um how this
would be handled down the line. This is
[49:00] just really the beginning of the
process. So, you know, the the engineers
[49:04] will have to look at everything as far
as storm water runoff, the grading. Um,
[49:10] you know, they're going to be examining
the trees that are there to make sure
[49:13] that they're safe, that they're not
getting compacted by any construction
[49:16] that we're doing. So there are a ton of
things that still need to be fleshed out
[49:22] down the line there, you know, as was
indicated in the motion um that you know
[49:28] there's going to be additional meetings,
reports and opportunities for input even
[49:33] if at this point in time we were to uh
give the task approval to to build a
[49:39] skate park at that location. Um, you
know, as far as the green space, uh, one
[49:45] gentleman I think kind of pointed out,
you know, we're not taking away all
[49:49] those trees. We're not taking away all
the green space. You know, if you look
[49:53] at the aerial photographs of the area,
you know, you can see where the um,
[49:59] basketball court was very clearly um, if
you take a look on there. And so it does
[50:04] leave still a great strip of grass where
people can, you know, sit at picnic
[50:10] benches, you know, and it would be as
wide as you see wrapping around the
[50:14] basketball courts. Um, you'd see it on
that end of the park. And then there
[50:18] would still be a nice patch of grass
between uh any potential skate park and
[50:24] the playground that exists there as
well. Um, you know, there's talk about
[50:30] losing green space. you know, this is
just it's a manicured piece of lawn. Um,
[50:36] you know, which is a little bit
different when we're talking about open
[50:39] space, you know, which is typically
where we're we're talking about trying
[50:42] to have uh, you know, meadow areas that
are, you know, used for um, wildlife and
[50:49] for also helping with drainage and other
storm water runoff. You know, this
[50:53] really isn't serving that purpose there.
A lot of what's under there is is still
[50:57] some remnants of a dismantled basketball
court. um you know and and the
[51:01] basketball court really was not there
much long very long ago. Um so it's you
[51:07] know it's not a a major change there. In
addition, you know, we're talking about
[51:12] a space that's about 60 ft by 90 ft and
at the same time we are working on
[51:19] opening a park in Orland that's less
than a half mile away that would be 600
[51:24] feet by 400 ft. Uh so greatly dwarfing
this patch grass and it's not to say
[51:30] that any space is not valuable but you
know we are also really looking out for
[51:37] Warland in this section of our township
and you know going to have a a worldass
[51:43] park there in the not too distant future
which I think uh will greatly benefit
[51:48] Orland as well as the whole of the
township.
[51:51] Um
>> just for everyone's benefit that's the t
[51:54] former tank car property that Brendan's
>> and walnut
[51:58] » you know is where it is there. Um
and then I think you know personally I
[52:03] would echo echo some of the comments and
particularly of the young man who came
[52:07] up here just talking about how um you
know we've done a lot for children with
[52:13] team sports uh but you know we we don't
offer anything for individuals and I
[52:20] think this would be a great use of of
space. It's in a a commercial district.
[52:25] It's at an already established park. Um
I guess one other question is about the
[52:30] lighting and that's more to um from a
security standpoint not to allow for
[52:35] activity to run through the night. It's
just that you know people can't go there
[52:40] under the cover of darkness and and get
away with anything you know which was
[52:44] another important factor in in our
evaluation.
[52:48] And you know that I think those were the
things that I want to touch on but I
[52:52] know there were some other questions as
well that others might want to address.
[52:55] If I could just set the stage for fellow
commissioners here, I think uh to the
[53:00] point of some individuals saying, you
know, what exactly are we voting on?
[53:04] What are the questions here? And I think
it narrows down to two. One, uh do we
[53:09] think skate as an activity has value to
our township? And do we want I guess
[53:13] that's one question. Do we want skate
park somewhere in our township? And time
[53:18] and time again, that question has come
before us, has come before park and
[53:20] wreck. uh and the answer has been yes
without any strong qualifying nos. I'm
[53:26] not saying that there aren't any merits
to saying no. I think it's fine to to
[53:29] land a different way but uh overall that
has been the first hurdle and then here
[53:34] we're at a point where do we like it at
Mckelby and that's what we're talking
[53:39] about here. We're talking about
evaluating our parks. Do we like it at
[53:42] McKelby Park? uh and by function of
liking it here not to necessarily
[53:47] discount the other parks but say that
we've gone through a due diligence
[53:49] period have considered the other parks
and do we find this to be the best
[53:53] avenue and that's what that motion is
addressing that we're providing this
[53:57] opportunity at McKelby Park and I think
those are the two questions that we
[54:01] basically have to answer. I think yes,
skate for the reasons that Brendan and
[54:04] others alluded to, providing a space for
individual sports uh is is a strong um
[54:10] argument uh among others and just just
to enhance our parks with this amenity.
[54:15] Uh one of the things about skate also is
putting skate closer to neighborhoods as
[54:20] opposed to far away. I know somewhere
along the way I've read why don't we
[54:23] make it more of a larger destination
center at at Walnut Lane at Walnut AB
[54:28] and hey as a non-expert just reading
through this at first that really
[54:33] appealed to me. I said wow that sounds
really great. We're building this new
[54:35] park and as we peeled back the layers of
diligence actually that wouldn't be the
[54:40] most advisable thing per skate park uh
guidelines because of safety reasons or
[54:45] and other reasons. Not saying it's
impossible, but if you had to make a
[54:48] decision, um I said, "Well, fine. We're
talking about putting it in a safer
[54:53] place, putting it closer to
neighborhoods. We land ourselves here."
[54:56] Uh and so, do I like it, Mckelby? I
think the answer for me is yes. Um
[54:59] Commissioner, if you make any further
comment, uh some things I've heard, and
[55:03] I just don't want to lose sight of them
because one of the things we've heard
[55:06] time and time again is are we
considering community voices? I hope I
[55:10] mean I I think I do. I think I'm
diligently trying to do that right now.
[55:14] Uh but also this is about those who feel
that they're not being heard because
[55:19] they're saying no and we um may say yes
and I just want you know to be mindful
[55:24] of that and I understand that. I think
we can uh come to the same facts and
[55:28] have different agree a different outcome
on that and it's okay for us to disagree
[55:32] uh as we may have last month. Last month
we said hey what about Cisco? Have we
[55:37] fully vetted Cisco? I feel like sure I
could throw that out to escape park
[55:42] association and let you explore that a
little bit more. Um and others said you
[55:46] know what uh given the parameters the
rubric that we went through the
[55:49] diligence we've gone through um that's
really would be out of line with going
[55:53] through that process we've landed on
McKelby we should stick with that if we
[55:56] believe in Mckelby and fair enough a
fair enough argument to me uh and again
[56:01] you may have seen that outcome that we
may not necessarily directly agreed but
[56:07] uh we agree that Mckelby is a fine spot
for it. Can I just make one more sure
[56:11] comment, Susie? Also, this would be kind
of what would be considered a pocket
[56:14] skate park. It would be smaller than
many many skate parks and
[56:19] » and it would um it wouldn't attract like
really like hot skateboarders coming
[56:25] from other places. It would be for, you
know, kids basically, you know, and
[56:30] adults who are still in the game, but it
wouldn't be one of these big challenging
[56:34] ones like the one in FDR Park. It's it's
not that scope at all. It's a it's a
[56:39] small part
>> and I can go on but I I know other
[56:43] commissioners want to speak. So a other
points that I heard by most you know
[56:47] dissenting uh voices would be do we have
enough evidence has our essentially the
[56:52] question is do we do enough due
diligence uh will we have professional
[56:56] feasibility studies. I think that is
supposed to be born in the design
[56:59] process and with a, you know, working
with our township engineer, working with
[57:02] a director of parks and recreation and
what parameters we want to set. And what
[57:06] I hear is parameters include the trees
being carved out and and um and being
[57:12] considered uh sounds like a land area uh
parameter um and consideration that we
[57:18] will see its proof in design which we
have not come to yet. Um and to
[57:23] Brendan's point, this is the beginning
of the process, not the end. Um, so
[57:27] those are the main and and the with the
parameters I think that also solves the
[57:31] mitigation question as well. So those
are some points that I think the
[57:35] community should know that I at least
personally have used to contextualize my
[57:39] decision uh and I hope others here will
or is doing so. Any other questions or
[57:45] comments by the fellow commissioners?
I guess to um to Rob's last point about
[57:51] this being a smallcale
park, um I will say I had some concerns
[57:57] at the beginning of this as to whether
um whether McKelby made sense in terms
[58:02] of the size.
>> Um and I had some questions about um you
[58:07] know, is this really a big enough space
um where it would be a meaningful um
[58:13] park for the people that that might want
to use it. And um you know just
[58:17] understanding I'm I've never skated my
life and uh you know I wasn't as
[58:22] involved as some of the others in this
process. Um I will say one thing. Last
[58:27] week I was on vacation up in
Massachusetts. Um and totally
[58:32] fortuitously
um my daughter asked me to go to a
[58:35] playground. We went um there happened to
be a skate park right behind it. Um and
[58:40] it was next to a playground. It was next
to a basketball court. Um, and so I took
[58:46] the opportunity to take a look at it.
Um, so I looked at it and it's it was
[58:51] slightly larger than what we're
contemplating at Mckelby, but not a
[58:54] whole lot. Um, and I could conceptualize
in my mind what you know what somebody
[58:59] could do in that space um, in terms of
the people like like you, Adrian, that
[59:04] that might use it. And I was like, okay,
this makes more sense now. Um, I can see
[59:09] this working in a way that it would be
um attractive for the people that that
[59:14] want to use it while at the same time
it's part of a greater um a greater area
[59:20] um that has other things like
playgrounds, courts, things like that.
[59:24] So, so um that circumstance kind of made
me understand a little bit better um you
[59:30] know how this how this would be
beneficial. So, so I think that's kind
[59:34] of brought me off the fence um as to
this particular location. Another thing
[59:38] I would just say is there were some
comments uh I think that were submitted
[59:43] in writing um about
um this becoming an eyesore down the
[59:49] road. Um and and again just in uh doing
a little research on the skate park that
[59:55] I happened to see last week up in
Massachusetts was um that one's actually
[1:00:01] been there since 1998.
Um it was they did some additional work
[1:00:05] on it in 2007 and I'll tell you it
doesn't look run down at all. Um so I
[1:00:10] think if you have the right maintenance,
which I'm sure we will in this township,
[1:00:14] um we we we put a lot into that. Um I I
don't see that becoming an issue either.
[1:00:21] So um I'm inclined to to be in favor of
this.
[1:00:26] » Any other comments?
>> Um I would say, you know, going back to
[1:00:31] why how this has come to this, right?
The goal is to really have an amenity
[1:00:36] for a constituency that's that's really
been underserved. And as Adrian, you
[1:00:40] know, was eloquating if that's a word.
Um but so look, you know, none of these
[1:00:47] decisions are easy. Um when when you're
creating something and something's being
[1:00:51] taken away, you know, um that's not an
easy decision and no matter what we do,
[1:00:56] someone's not going to be happy or in
most cases, no one's happy because you
[1:01:00] know, you didn't get a full-size park
and um you know, grass is taken away.
[1:01:04] But our go, you know, I think this board
listened that this is something that we
[1:01:09] wanted to find a home for. Um, it really
spoke to us about the number of kids
[1:01:14] that that aren't served in in team
sports and we have team sports
[1:01:18] facilities out the wazoo. I mean, we're
not the biggest and the brightest in,
[1:01:22] you know, in that category, but we still
got fields, you know, fields galore.
[1:01:26] And, you know, even that's not enough
sometimes, you know, for the teams that
[1:01:29] that won it. And a lot of kids do skate.
Now, my kids didn't skate. I don't
[1:01:34] skate. I'll probably never use this
thing, nor will my kids, but I know a
[1:01:37] lot of people do. I see people zipping
around New Orleans all the time. um just
[1:01:41] on Labor Day, three or four kids and
good to see them wearing helmets. We're
[1:01:45] skateboarding down Lyster Road towards
downtown Orland. I've seen kids
[1:01:49] skateboarding at the little um Marlo
Field parking lot there. Um you know,
[1:01:54] there's no there's no jumps or anything.
It's just like a little little paved
[1:01:58] there. So, the goal was to to listen to
that to find a home for it. And it was
[1:02:04] easier said than done. Um, obviously the
the um the community group that wanted
[1:02:09] this, you know, first pitched Laurel
Beach, which we really considered and
[1:02:13] ultimately is just not suitable. There
really isn't an ideal spot. I know you
[1:02:17] used the word ideal earlier. I didn't
mean ideal, but we're trying to find the
[1:02:20] best because there is no ideal spot.
We're not flush with these large parks
[1:02:25] that we can can fit stuff in. And over
the last, you know, since the beginning
[1:02:29] of this year, I think we've been talking
internally about what about McKelby?
[1:02:33] Let's look at that. And um it is a good
option. Um the bad part is and there's
[1:02:40] no I I used the term no sugar coating in
previous meetings. Yeah, there's a nice
[1:02:44] green spot there that wouldn't be there
anymore or at least not in its current
[1:02:48] form. And Mark, I appreciate you coming
and making a comment. I am not excited
[1:02:53] to be a part of taking that away from
you and your kids. So that is just a big
[1:02:58] con of the argument for McKelie Park is
that there's a little nice green space
[1:03:03] that wouldn't be so green anymore. So I
can't really argue with that point. It's
[1:03:08] a totally valid point. Now some of the
other stuff about process and um the
[1:03:12] nitty-gritty I don't necessarily agree
with. The rubric is not a science it's
[1:03:16] not scientific. It's one tool um to sort
of do like a sanity check. You know
[1:03:22] anyone can say well this category should
be more important than this category.
[1:03:25] let's wait it and you know you can make
it any way you want. So we tried to be
[1:03:29] as neutral on that as possible but it's
not the only thing. Community feedback
[1:03:33] you asked about we listen like yeah
absolutely um it pains me to think that
[1:03:38] my own constituents won't be happy with
with a vote um and I hear that but again
[1:03:44] that's one part two like we we have to
make tough decisions uh that might be
[1:03:49] unpopular with some people because we
think it's ultimately better than not.
[1:03:53] The one question was, you know, what's
the better outcome? And I can't tell you
[1:03:58] for sure what the better outcome, but I
am thinking that for our community, for
[1:04:02] the people that are underserved, for all
the kids that want to skateboard, I
[1:04:05] think it is a better outcome. Um,
McKelie is a it's a vibrant spot. Uh,
[1:04:10] there's an ice cream shop, there's a
pizza shop, there's a market for snacks.
[1:04:16] Um, it's a place that, you know, kids
can really be that. And Cisco has some
[1:04:19] good points, too, but it doesn't have
that. It's sort of like remote. It's on
[1:04:22] the edge of the township. Um Orland is
very dense. There are tons of kids up
[1:04:27] and bikes, skateboards,
motorcycles.
[1:04:32] Um just coming and going. Like it would
be a vibrant little spot. There's
[1:04:36] already basketballs bouncing. Um and it
just adds a little little to that
[1:04:41] downtown. Uh again, not crazy about
losing grass because that serves a
[1:04:45] purpose, too. I'm not arguing that. But,
you know, all that being said, I think
[1:04:49] McKelby is not ideal. I think it's the
best from all we looked at. And we did
[1:04:54] look at every single park inside and out
and some most of them really except
[1:05:01] down to two. I mean, we didn't need a
prof, you know, professional study to
[1:05:06] know that we had to eliminate those for
for obvious reasons. Um, so so that's
[1:05:11] where I am. I I think it's a good thing.
Um, I think ultimately it will be a good
[1:05:16] thing. Um, but I hear the people that
don't want it and and would rather have
[1:05:21] grants there. I really do.
>> All right. Any other comments?
[1:05:26] » Um, yeah, most of them have already been
covered. So, um, to avoid redundancy, I
[1:05:30] won't go down that path, but um,
obviously I agree that it's not ideal.
[1:05:34] Um,
but I think that it's a viable option.
[1:05:39] Um I think too when we think about a
responsible approach to open space um
[1:05:45] that doesn't always mean that every
green space will be preserved but rather
[1:05:50] when there are shifts and changes to how
space is used that there's really
[1:05:53] thoughtful consideration of the design
and the intersection of the design and
[1:05:58] nature um and tree protection and shade.
So, um I trust and assume that those uh
[1:06:04] and there will be safeguards in place to
make sure that those things are um are
[1:06:08] considered and part of the uh design
process. Um I also appreciate the
[1:06:13] clarification of what we're actually
voting on, right? Um
[1:06:18] right, we're not voting on the is this
the ideal place, right? But we're voting
[1:06:22] on is is this um is this worth an
opportunity to get some of these
[1:06:28] questions answered? Right? the the
public comment and and the um both
[1:06:32] written and offered brought up really
valid questions many of which that I
[1:06:36] shared and I think a lot of us on the
board shared right that that we don't
[1:06:40] know the answer to yet and we won't know
some of those answers until we
[1:06:44] greenlight an opportunity and if the
answers aren't the answers that um we
[1:06:49] expected we wanted or we like there are
opportunities for nos along the way
[1:06:53] right that this is not a green light to
go build the skatepark right that
[1:06:56] there's going to be checks and balances
there's going to be opportun unities for
[1:06:59] future votes. Um it's the it's the green
light for an opportunity to start to do
[1:07:04] the information gathering, the design
work, right? All the questions that we
[1:07:08] have will be they will need to be
answered, right? And it might be that
[1:07:14] the fundraising is not there and that
some of the questions aren't answered
[1:07:18] the way that they the skate park people
wanted them and so it's not a go, right?
[1:07:22] I don't want that to happen for you, but
I mean this is just like this is the
[1:07:25] green light for an opportunity, right?
And to start their due diligence. Um, so
[1:07:29] that felt important to me to understand
about what we're voting for.
[1:07:36] » All right,
great. Uh, just because we talked a lot,
[1:07:39] I'm going to ask Rob go ahead and read
that motion one more time just for the
[1:07:42] sake of of those in the room.
>> Okay. So, I move that the board of
[1:07:47] commissioners designate an area at
McKelby Park to allow the Springfield
[1:07:52] Township Skateboard Association the
opportunity to design a community skate
[1:07:56] park. The designation of the area shall
be conditioned upon the association
[1:08:01] limiting the impervious surface to no
more than that of the previous
[1:08:05] basketball court. In addition, the
association shall be required to present
[1:08:09] plans for the skate park review and
recommendation by the parks and
[1:08:13] recreation advisory committee. The
director of parks and recreation shall
[1:08:17] arrange for public notice to be provided
by mailing notice uh of the meeting to
[1:08:22] all property owners within 500 ft of the
park perimeter and by posting notice of
[1:08:26] the meeting at the park property.
Construction of the skate park shall not
[1:08:30] occur until permission has been granted
by the board of commissioners at a
[1:08:34] regularly scheduled meeting.
>> All right, we had a motion, we had a
[1:08:39] second, we've had questions and comments
uh by the board. No further comment. Uh,
[1:08:46] all in favor, please signify by saying
I.
[1:08:49] » I.
>> Any oppose? Say nay. All right. Please
[1:08:52] record a unanimous vote.
[1:08:58] » All right. That concludes our public
comment period on uh for this meeting.
[1:09:04] We're now going to move into committee
reports after which we'll do our
[1:09:08] managers report which we typically do on
Mondays as a part of the agenda book.
[1:09:12] Uh, and then here we go. Uh, as
chairwoman of the community development
[1:09:16] committee, I don't have a report. So,
we're going to move right into the
[1:09:20] report of the chairman of the
administrative fiscal affairs and zoning
[1:09:23] committee, Commissioner Lee.
>> Thank you. U, Madame President, I have
[1:09:29] several items. First, uh, regarding the
bill listing, I move the board
[1:09:33] commissioner approve the August check
reconciliation in the amount of
[1:09:36] 1,271,544,80
[1:09:41] and the September bill listing in the
amount of 931,2867.
[1:09:47] Motion.
>> Uh, we have a motion. Is there a second?
[1:09:50] » Second.
>> Any questions or comments on the motion?
[1:09:54] » All in favor, please signify by saying
I.
[1:09:57] » I.
>> Any oppose say nay. Hearing none, please
[1:09:59] record a unanimous vote.
>> Uh, next I'd like to make an
[1:10:03] announcement about our budget schedule
for 20 the 2027 budget. Um first meeting
[1:10:11] is meeting with our supporting agencies
including the fire ambulance and
[1:10:16] planning commission on uh September 16th
in this room at 700 p.m. Uh we will also
[1:10:23] be scheduled to meet with candidates for
the environmental advisory commission
[1:10:26] beginning at 6:20 on that same date of
September 16th. Uh the next meeting is
[1:10:32] our budget workshop on October 21st,
2026 at 7 o'clock. All of these meetings
[1:10:39] are scheduled to be in this room. Next
is our budget presentation, and I
[1:10:45] believe that is our regularly scheduled
business meeting in November, which is
[1:10:49] November the 11th at 7:30 p.m. Our
budget hearing and our budget adoption
[1:10:55] will both take place at our business
meeting December the 9th at 7:30 p.m.
[1:11:03] Uh, next, resolution 1698.
Uh, the board of commissioners has a
[1:11:10] statutory obligation to adopt a
resolution setting forth the minimum
[1:11:14] municipal obligations to properly fund
the township's employee pension plans
[1:11:18] and to incorporate the minimum municipal
obligations into the succeeding year
[1:11:22] township budget. Therefore, I move that
the board of commissioners adopt
[1:11:26] resolution 1698, the resolution
establishing the 2027 punchin fund
[1:11:32] minimum municipal obligations for the
three defined benefit and one defined
[1:11:36] contribution pension plans. That is my
motion.
[1:11:39] » We have a motion. Is there a second?
>> Second.
[1:11:42] » Uh any questions or comments on the
motion? And this is pretty similar to
[1:11:47] last year's uh contribution.
>> Correct. There is a there's about a 4%
[1:11:51] increase. Um it's generally reflects the
increase in salaries across
[1:11:56] all the um operating departments
specifically the biggest increase here
[1:12:01] as a police department
>> right and generally reflects inflation
[1:12:04] increases and so on.
>> Yeah.
[1:12:07] » Any further questions or comments? All
in favor please signify by saying I.
[1:12:12] » I.
>> Any oppose say nay. Hearing none please
[1:12:15] record unanimous vote.
Next, regarding engineering services, I
[1:12:20] move board of commissioners authorize
the 2027 hourly rate schedule for Woodro
[1:12:24] and Associates municipal civil
engineers. Fee schedule includes a
[1:12:29] combined hour average hourly increase of
4.78%.
[1:12:34] The hourly dollar increase varies
between $3 and $6 per hour depending
[1:12:38] upon position. That is my motion.
>> We have a motion. Is there a second?
[1:12:42] » Second.
>> Any questions or comments on the motion?
[1:12:45] I would just add that um you know
typically whenever we consider uh a
[1:12:50] request for increase in rates um you
know township staff does a good job of
[1:12:55] pulling the market getting feedback on
what um the area municipalities pay.
[1:13:00] We're typically and in this case really
under average uh and obviously Tim and
[1:13:04] his firm has been great.
>> Uh yeah, I would agree. We have those
[1:13:09] materials. Typically, we review these on
Monday night meetings and um you know
[1:13:13] have a pause, but we already saw these
materials. Even though Tim's not here, I
[1:13:17] would wish you were here. So, I think
give them a chance to say good job and
[1:13:21] good work. Um I agree with that. Any
other further questions or comments?
[1:13:25] Hearing none. Um all those in favor,
please signify by saying I.
[1:13:30] » I. Any oppose?
>> Please record a unanimous vote.
[1:13:35] Next, regarding the township auditors, I
move that the board of commissioners
[1:13:39] reappoint Bergville and company
certified public accountants to serve as
[1:13:43] the Springfield Township Auditors to
audit the township's financial
[1:13:47] statements for the year ending December
31st, 2026, consistent with the audit
[1:13:52] engagement letter dated August 12th,
2026. Cost of the engagement is $24,200
[1:13:58] plus an alternate in the amount of
$4,800 to compile the pension activity
[1:14:04] for the four pension funds. That is my
motion.
[1:14:07] » We have a motion. Is there a second?
>> Second.
[1:14:10] » Any questions or comments on the motion?
Hearing none. All those in favor, please
[1:14:15] signify by saying I.
>> I. I.
[1:14:17] » I. All those opposed say nay. Hearing
none, please record unanimous vote.
[1:14:23] And finally, an announcement regarding
the zoning hearing board. Township
[1:14:30] Spring Township zoning hearing board
will meet on Monday, September 28, 2026,
[1:14:34] 7 p.m. here in this building to receive
testimony on three applications. The
[1:14:40] first is case 28,
excuse me, 26-18,
[1:14:45] application of Miss Laura Downey, owner
of the property located at 1005
[1:14:49] Harstston Lane, Burtonheim. The owner
seeks approval to construct a
[1:14:53] singlestory garage addition to the home
that will reduce the required 12- foot
[1:14:58] wide side yard setback to 7' 8 in and
reduce the aggregate sideyard setback
[1:15:04] from 34t 8 in to 20t 8 in in width
property zone in a residential district
[1:15:12] of 4.
Second is case 26-9,
[1:15:17] the application of Megan, Paul Cook, and
Michael Davyy, owners of the property
[1:15:20] located at 716 East Willow Grove Avenue
in Winmore. The owners seek approval to
[1:15:25] construct a detached garage within the
rear yard that is proposed to be 13' 6
[1:15:30] ines in height. Accessory structures are
limited to maximum 12 feet in height.
[1:15:35] Property is zoned in the B residential
district of W.
[1:15:40] And lastly, case 26-20, the application
of Eric Irvine, owner of the property
[1:15:45] located at 44 West Mill Road in
Flowertown. The owner seeks approval to
[1:15:49] construct an addition to the home that
will encroach into the side and rear
[1:15:53] yard setback areas. The proposed
addition will reduce the sideyard to 5T
[1:15:58] instead of the required 8 foot in width.
The rear yard is proposed to be 21t 6 in
[1:16:03] in depth instead of the required 25 ft.
property is zoned in the C residential
[1:16:09] district ward one. Copies of the
application packets are available for
[1:16:13] review in the community development
office in this building during normal
[1:16:17] business hours or on our website at
springfieldmonco.org.
[1:16:21] Check it out. You can also contact the
zoning department 2158367600
[1:16:27] extension 1114. Ask for mark. That
concludes my report.
[1:16:33] » Thank you, commissioners. Appreciate
Um,
[1:16:37] » you like his home phone number?
>> I really felt that was in like a jingle
[1:16:41] for I was waiting for the song at the
end. All right. Now, we're going to move
[1:16:45] to uh chairman of the Environmental
Resources Committee, Commissioner May.
[1:16:49] » Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I just have
the recycling report left to report
[1:16:54] here. And during the month of August
2026, Springfield Township residents
[1:17:00] recycled 107.18
tons of material with a householder
[1:17:05] participation rate of 51.5%.
The net cost for the month was 19,22867.
[1:17:14] That concludes my report.
>> Thank you, Commissioner May. We will now
[1:17:18] move to Chairwoman of the Public Safety
Committee, Commissioner McNamera.
[1:17:23] » Thank you. Um, thanks.
>> Um, I have one motion this evening. I
[1:17:27] move that the board of commissioners
authorize the execution of an agreement
[1:17:30] between Springfield Township and Lasowl
College High School for daily traffic
[1:17:34] control services provided by the
Springfield Township Police Department.
[1:17:38] The term of the agreement shall be for
the 2026 2027 school year and provides
[1:17:42] one hour of traffic safety control
services between the hours of 7:15 and
[1:17:46] 8:15 a.m. on each day that the school is
open. The total cost of the services is
[1:17:51] $13,080. That is my motion.
>> We have a motion. Is there a second?
[1:17:55] » Second.
>> Any questions or comments on the motion?
[1:18:00] » Uh just a reminder for the public, we've
been doing this since 2017. Correct.
[1:18:04] » Correct.
>> Okay. And what happened prior to 2017?
[1:18:07] » Uh the township provided the service at
their fee. Uh but uh when Chief PCO came
[1:18:12] into office as a former traffic safety
officer, he said, you know, this is uh
[1:18:17] ridiculous. Uh we should be getting paid
for this service. Uh so he very nicely
[1:18:22] brought the subject up with Lel and they
were very cooperative and understood uh
[1:18:26] the need to pay for the service and have
been doing so every year.
[1:18:31] » All right. Thank you. All in favor
please signify by saying I.
[1:18:34] » I.
>> Any oppose say nay. Hearing none please
[1:18:37] record unanimous vote.
>> And I believe that concludes I'm sorry
[1:18:43] that concludes my report. Thank you.
Great. Uh, next we move to Commissioner
[1:18:47] uh Morris, chairman of the cultural
resources committee.
[1:18:51] » I believe you made your announcement for
the day.
[1:18:54] » So, no further report. Thank you,
Commissioner Morris. Uh, and then we
[1:18:58] move to Commissioner Goldberg, chairman
of the parks and recreation res and
[1:19:02] recreation resources committee.
Commissioner Goldberg.
[1:19:07] » All right. No further report from
Commissioner Goldberg. Thank you. Now,
[1:19:11] we move to Commissioner Kirk, chairman
of the Hold. Oh, I'm so sorry. You want
[1:19:14] to do reports like report report like
workshop meeting reports?
[1:19:19] » Uh why don't we just do that down the
line at the end consistent stuff like
[1:19:22] that?
>> Why don't we do that at the end just to
[1:19:25] be consistent?
>> Um commission
[1:19:29] » Commissioner Kirk, chairman of the
public works and facilities committee.
[1:19:32] You're up next.
>> Thank you Madame President. Uh, I have a
[1:19:36] motion regarding a an agreement for
pedestrian access easement for the uh
[1:19:42] with the Springfield Township School
District. I move that the board of
[1:19:45] commissioners authorize the execution of
a pedestrian trail access agreement
[1:19:50] between the school district of
Springfield Township and Springfield
[1:19:53] Township granting a temporary
construction easement and permanent
[1:19:57] pedestrian trail easement for the
Springfield Township High School
[1:20:01] property. The agreement permits the
installation and construction of a
[1:20:04] pedestrian trail to connect the
township's Harson Woods property on Haw
[1:20:08] Lane with the high school property on
Paper Mill Road. That is my motion.
[1:20:12] » We have a motion. Is there a second?
>> Second.
[1:20:16] » Any questions or comments on the motion?
Um, I just I would comment that I I took
[1:20:23] a look at the the the trail and it's
it's pretty cool. And um it seems like
[1:20:28] it would benefit from a bench kind of at
the midpoint of the the path and we
[1:20:33] should talk about that when we have a
chance because otherwise you're just
[1:20:36] kind of scooting through there and
there's no opportunity to just kind of
[1:20:39] soak in the beauty of the woods. So,
>> we have a a bench donation program and
[1:20:45] perhaps the next person that wants to
donate a bench, we ask Jim to maybe
[1:20:49] steer them towards that.
>> That would be that'd be cool. Yeah.
[1:20:52] » I think Commissioner Goldberg just
signed up.
[1:20:58] » Thank you.
>> What's it cost? I want to know.
[1:21:00] Typically, they're not cheap.
>> $3,500. Uh,
[1:21:04] » yeah. So, that would be a no.
I
[1:21:09] wanted to comment that I believe the
school district has already approved
[1:21:12] this. The path is already there. This is
uh just sort of stamping the access the
[1:21:17] the public access right away and I
believe there will be signage on the
[1:21:22] school side regarding the notification
of hours and so on.
[1:21:28] » Right. So that's the only thing I wanted
to make known to the public. Uh there's
[1:21:33] been a motion. There's been a second.
All in favor please signify by saying I.
[1:21:36] I.
>> Any oppose? Say nay. Hearing none,
[1:21:39] please record a unanimous vote.
>> And I believe that
[1:21:43] » that concludes my report.
>> Beautiful.
[1:21:45] » All right. Now that we've reached the
end of our committee reports, I'm going
[1:21:49] to now move to the manager report,
uh, which is what we typically do on a
[1:21:55] Monday, not on a Wednesday. And that is
tab B of our agenda books.
[1:22:01] » Sure. Try and run through this pretty
quickly. Um so the first item is the
[1:22:05] 2027 budget. Um Jim, Commissioner Lee,
he uh reviewed the budget schedule.
[1:22:11] That's really all that um that paragraph
talks about. Um we do have the upcoming
[1:22:18] meeting with the three fire companies
and the ambulance association. Uh that
[1:22:22] was referenced in Jim's report. Uh
that'll be on the 16th. So we'll look
[1:22:26] forward to meeting with those folks. Are
we going to reschedule with um I think
[1:22:30] one of the fire companies was challenged
for a scheduling issue because they
[1:22:33] received fire
>> flower fire company is going to be out
[1:22:37] of town. Uh their their key staff and
and officers are going to be inspecting
[1:22:42] the new fire engine that being built out
of Wisconsin. Um and they did not want
[1:22:48] to delay the delivery of that equipment
any further. Uh it's been on order for
[1:22:53] over four years and uh I wanted to make
sure that they got that. So, uh, yes,
[1:22:58] we'll we'll reschedu with them. Uh, you
had even mentioned that maybe when they
[1:23:02] accept delivery of the fire truck, it's
an opportunity for them to show it off
[1:23:06] to the commissioners.
>> Yeah, I think that'd be a nice time.
[1:23:09] » We can follow up with them on that. Um,
the next item is the Environmental
[1:23:13] Advisory Commission on that same evening
that we're scheduled to meet with the
[1:23:16] fire companies and the ambulance
association. You're going to meet
[1:23:20] beforehand at 6:20 p.m. to meet with
four candidates for the environmental
[1:23:25] advisory commission. Uh, one is a
student representative and there are
[1:23:29] three applicants for one vacancy as an
associate member. So, just to mention
[1:23:34] that and that meeting has been
advertised. Um, September meetings,
[1:23:39] we're in the middle of it right now. the
um just a brief note that during the
[1:23:45] month uh Tim and I along with
representative from representative
[1:23:49] Nelson's office, state rep. Nelson's
office met with uh family on Paul's Lane
[1:23:54] to talk about their stream bank erosion
concerns and we also met with a uh
[1:23:59] resident of Overbrook Lane for a similar
matter.
[1:24:05] Not uncommon. We get those periodically.
Uh the next item is a little bit more
[1:24:09] interesting. Uh we met Tim and I met uh
on the 31st of August with an individual
[1:24:15] um in Windorf who lives at pretty much
the middle of a pretty large watershed
[1:24:20] uh but has a property that provides and
has we've had our eyes on for many years
[1:24:26] an opportunity to maybe construct some
storm water management facilities that
[1:24:29] would help with downstream flooding in
the Carile Road and Patton Road
[1:24:33] neighborhoods. Um they're amanable to um
a discussion anyway. uh they have a pond
[1:24:40] on the property as it stands and they
want to rehabilitate it and they just
[1:24:44] wanted to know what what what are they
in for when they try and rehabilitate
[1:24:47] this thing. Um what are they what are
the um the hand grenades they have to
[1:24:51] look out for and u the regulations and
and Tim was real helpful in helping them
[1:24:56] out with that. We used that opportunity
to kind of introduce the concept of a
[1:24:59] stormwater detention basin and as I said
they're open to it like to learn a
[1:25:04] little bit more about it. So Tim's going
to arrange for a wetlands mitigation
[1:25:08] specialist to meet him out there and see
what we might be dealing with in terms
[1:25:12] of permitting uh for that if anything um
because you know there's some cat eye
[1:25:17] tales there and sometimes if they're
man-made um you can get rid of them. Uh
[1:25:21] other times you have to allow them to
stay in place and there's some
[1:25:25] permitting obligations that we might
have there. So
[1:25:28] » that would be a great opportunity. I
know it to to Mike's point it really
[1:25:31] impacts the rivers downstream. It's at
the, you know, an apex of a hill, if you
[1:25:35] will, and uh the neighbors downstream,
particularly at Parallel, we have a
[1:25:40] drain there, and uh we're regularly
responding to that area to help those
[1:25:45] neighbors out. So, that would be
wonderful.
[1:25:47] » Yeah. For those of you who aren't
familiar with the exact location, it's
[1:25:51] at the intersection of Evergreen and
Arbor.
[1:25:55] Love it. Yeah. It's beautiful. It's a
really beautiful neighborhood. Beautiful
[1:25:58] property
>> and rare a lot,
[1:26:00] » right? and rare that we'd have the
opportunity to do so modern mitigation
[1:26:03] in that area.
>> It's all privately owned. So,
[1:26:07] » you need a cooperative land owner. Next
item is um the College Avenue
[1:26:11] neighborhood. Um we've got um a rodent
issue that was brought to our attention.
[1:26:16] There's an individual in the
neighborhood that maintains uh pigeons
[1:26:19] in an outdoor coupe. And for a period of
time, the pigeons, which are kind of
[1:26:23] messy birds, uh were spreading the feed
all over the place. and that was of
[1:26:27] course attracting robots to the
neighborhood. Um so um we've been
[1:26:33] working with the McGomery County Health
Department to try and mitigate that.
[1:26:36] That homeowner has been very responsive
and cooperative. Um unfortunately when
[1:26:42] the H County Health Department responds
and they see evidence of rodent trails
[1:26:47] on other properties, um they require
those individuals to get professional
[1:26:51] extermination services as well to try
and eradicate the problem. Um,
[1:26:55] fortunately, everybody in the
neighborhood has been cooperative in
[1:26:58] that regard. There's one individual
who's been a bit of a challenge. Uh, but
[1:27:03] Pat has been working with that
individual as well as the the county
[1:27:06] health department. So, we are um hopeful
that we're going to get a handle on that
[1:27:11] pretty soon. Beth has been in contact
with the neighbors. She's walking
[1:27:17] » spent some time out there. So, she
>> of the rat trails.
[1:27:21] » He saw the trails with her own eyes. Did
you get Did you get catch one?
[1:27:25] » I did not.
>> Are they carrier pigeons or just
[1:27:28] pigeons?
>> Uh I think they're racing pigeons.
[1:27:32] » Interesting.
>> Where they take them out and then they
[1:27:34] bring them back. That's what I was
>> Oh, cool.
[1:27:36] » led to believe anyway. I haven't spoken
with the individual.
[1:27:40] Um last item to bring just just an FYI.
Um you may or may not be aware of it
[1:27:47] that since co um the dental industry
have been hit with um red increased
[1:27:54] costs to provide services and reduced
reimbursements or no increases to the
[1:27:59] reimbursements from the dental insurance
companies uh which has led to some
[1:28:04] dental providers dropping some of their
dental insurance plans that they worked
[1:28:08] with in the past. Um we haven't had any
complaints um within the the township
[1:28:15] from employees who have had that happen
to them. Um we provide two dental plans
[1:28:20] at present. One is an ethnic plan that's
included with the health insurance plan
[1:28:24] um that that is provided. Um very few
people take advantage of that. In fact,
[1:28:28] everybody upgrades to the Delta Dentl
that we offer. Uh but Delta Dentl has
[1:28:33] been one of those providers that have
been losing participating dentists. Um
[1:28:37] and our health trust of which we are one
of the founding members um has heard
[1:28:41] that from other members and as a result
has arranged for United Concordia to be
[1:28:46] another um plan that our employees could
purchase up into um if their dentist is
[1:28:51] a participating provider. So we're
surveying our employees to see how much
[1:28:54] interest there is in that tooth.
>> Wow. He wrote that down waiting for that
[1:29:02] all night. Okay,
>> I think the remainder of your items are
[1:29:07] executive. Uh at this time, I'll re
we'll have gone through every item in
[1:29:12] the our agenda book. I'll reopen the
floor to public comment. Uh for those on
[1:29:17] Zoom, there is no one else remaining in
the room. So at this time, uh the board
[1:29:22] will be adjourning to meet in an
executive session to discuss one
[1:29:25] personnel matter and four litigation
matters. Uh so I will now accept a
[1:29:30] motion to adjourn the public portion of
the meeting. So moved.
[1:29:33] » We have a motion. Is there a second?
>> All in favor, please signify by saying
[1:29:37] I.
>> I.
[1:29:39] » The meeting is so adjourned.