The proposed Home Rule Charter is headed to the ballot in May, which means Towamencin Township is only a few months away from finding out if the second-class township code will be voted out.
Using only three months out of the state-recommended 18 months to investigate the township code and develop a home charter draft, and insisting the efforts are done primarily to stop the multi-million dollar sanitary sewer sale, Towamencin’s Government Study Commission unanimously voted last Wednesday after a public hearing to approve the charter draft, approve the report of the GSC, and approve the home rule charter ballot question that will appear on the May 16 ballot.
Should the home rule charter be approved at the Primary, it will go into effect July 1. If it is defeated, then everything remains status quo.
Over the past three months, the Commission has met bimonthly to discuss the home rule charter draft, of which there have been four. A town hall session is set for April to continue the discussion of the charter.
Aside from public comment at public meetings, the Commission has not “workshopped” with the taxpayers to cooperatively investigate the township form of government and develop a major change to the municipality’s Constitution.
“Should the motions be adopted this evening,” said commission solicitor Lauren Gallagher, “the Commission will submit the documents to the township secretary for transmission to the Board of Elections.”
Gallagher said the finalized version of the Home Rule Charter report will be mailed to residents after the commission approves the spending at its March 15 meeting.
Osei repeated that the purpose of the government study is to explore ways home rule could change the outcome of the pending sewer sale, explore the ways it could add citizens participation through referenda, and explore ways home rule could add transparency to Towamencin operations.
“To be clear, the sewer system has not been sold,” Osei said. “My household received the sewer bill and it still has the Towamencin seal on it, so Towamencin still does own the sewer system.”
NextEra and the PUC are dragging their feet in officially acquiring the sewer system, according to Osei.
“NextEra does not have a certificate of public convenience from the PUC, which means they are not a wastewater utility in Pennsylvania,” Osei said. “NextEra has been approved by the Department of Environmental Protection to implement our Act 537 Plan. NextEra has not even filed a PUC application to be approved to acquire our sewer system. The entire contract is contingent on all governmental approvals.”
Osei said the sewer sale was “an uneasy decision made without popular support.”
“It would cost ratepayers $9 million a year in excess sewer rates if we sell, which is greater than the stated $3.5 million a year in benefits,” he said. “An individual household could see triple rates with that $9 million. It’s a permanent decision without recourse if it goes wrong.”
Osei said there are solutions to fund municipal projects without a sale. One solution is increasing property taxes, “which is the standard assumption that is usually the approach the supervisors take to increase funding.” A second option is to implement a stormwater fee, or a tax on impervious surfaces.
“We could sell the sewer to a governmental entity. The sewer face value of about $35.5 million is enough to reset our township debt,” Osei said. “We could have a referendum to increase the earned income tax.”
“If you are asking me personally what I would do, I think selling to another government entity, implementing a stormwater fee and slowly, over the course of a few decades, increasing property taxes makes the most sense,” Osei said.
The addition of initiative and referendum provisions in the charter solves the concern of not enough direct democracy in Towamencin, he said.
As it stands, Osei said the proposed charter defaults township provisions to the Second-Class Township Code. It also proposes, among other things, no changes to elected offices, no changes to the code for financial procedures, explicitly retains limitations on the rates of taxation, gives residents power to initiate proposed ordinances, gives the right to public ownership of water, and prohibits the sale or long-term lease of water or wastewater or stormwater systems.
A new section was added to the charter to address North Penn Water Authority. Per the charter, the provisions shall not apply to NPWA.
“The township shall be prohibited from approving or supporting the sale, transfer or lease of assets of NPWA to a non-governmental entity as set herein,” Osei said.
Supervisor Kristin Warner began the lengthy public comment period by criticizing the commission’s lack of experience in township functions.
“We have a budget period in October, during which time we meet once a week every week, and meetings run from six to 10 at night because we hear presentations from all committees in the township. They haven’t experienced that process,” Warner said. “This is our financial statements and supplemental information that is audited by an outside audit agency. They haven’t experienced that process.”
“I don’t know how they can sit up there and say that they understand how our township runs and that they know what’s best for our township,” Warner said. “They are basing all of this on one very small part of our overall budget. I think it’s a foolish exercise to go forward with this at this point.”
Warner said the ballot question was “Do you want a Home Rule study?” and she said a majority asked for a Home Rule study. More than 60% of voters in Towamencin voted in favor of the Government Study Commission during the November 2022 General Election.
Warner referenced a prior meeting where Department of Community and Economic Development Local Government Policy Specialist Frederick Chapman spoke on the home rule charter process.
“He spent about 45 minutes advising the committee on how they should go forward with this study, and they haven’t done much of what he recommended. He must have said it a dozen times that the average study is at least nine months,” Warner said. “And even that is kind of tight.”
Warner suggested residents really think hard on the issue before heading to the polls.
“I understand people are upset about the sewer. We are a Democratic Republic, not a democracy, and one of reasons we are a Democratic Republic is because we elected people to pay attention to details, to attend meetings, to understand the entire picture of the township, and make decisions based on the entire picture of the township.”
Commission Solicitor Gallagher told Warner that Chapman was not an attorney and was not offering legal advice to the commission.
“We have reviewed the process. It is compliant with the law, and so Mr. Chapman was clear that nine months is not mandatory. It is what is permitted by statute, but not required,” Gallagher said.
Towamencin Supervisor Rich Marino asked if a referendum process would be allowed to amend the zoning or subdivision and land development ordinances in the charter.
Osei said zoning changes are exempted from the home rule in state law because of the Municipalities Planning Act.
Marino then asked what was the purpose of the community town hall on April 24, since it is occurring after the public hearing and after the vote. Osei replied that the town hall is to answer any last minute questions before casting a vote.
Resident Shannon Main, who helps oversee the Facebook group SAVE Towamencin, said the commission is doing the “very minimum” with the public hearing and the town hall sessions and that the entire thing is being rushed through to the end.
Main asked for an explanation on the amendment process in the charter. She was concerned that, as has happened in other municipalities with a home rule charter, numerous amendments could be put through with one vote.
“Every time an amendment happens in this township, according to what you told us, there is a petition period, a 10-minute process where you explain each petition amendment, and we all have to go to the polls and vote on these amendments,” she said. “We already vote to have supervisors in this process to make decisions for us.”
Solicitor Gallagher said there will be a five-year freeze where nothing can be done to the charter, if adopted.
Resident Rich Costlow asked the commission to be cognizant of potential litigation should the home rule charter go through.
“I ask that the home rule charter contain a restriction that does not permit the home rule government to obligate the township to any litigation regarding the sale of a public asset that involves projected expenditures in excess of $250,000 unless that projected cost of litigation is agreed to in a ballot referendum by the township,” Costlow said. “This protects individual assets of the township from abuse. Protecting the financial assets of the township is one of the provisions that this home rule commission put up in their mission statement. What it seems to me is, this home rule charter, if it moves to litigation, will obligate the township to significant expenses that we do not now have.”
Resident Kris Kazmar said he opposed the home rule charter because it adds authority for initiatives and referendums, and he believed it would result in a small group of residents monopolizing the township’s agenda.
“They will give ordinances great sounding names and carefully worded ballot initiatives to sound like they are doing something good, but in the end, they are underhandedly seeking something that is the opposite of the name of the ordinance,” Kazmar said. “We know that whoever has the power to define the ballot question has the capacity to shape its outcome.”
Kazmar said home rule can give a lot of power to local leaders or the loudest voices without oversight from the state.
“The very fact that a charter can be changed by a simple vote can lead to instability if, say, a municipality changes its charter frequently,” he said. “And even though this charter does not currently propose any new taxes or changes to tax limits, it does allow for them through charter amendments.”
Kazmar said the potential of new and higher taxes concerns him because Osei suggested land value taxes and taxes on backyards in public meetings.
“I believe this home rule charter hijacks the sewer system sale for a much larger socialist agenda, and it will do so through carefully worded and misleading referendums,” he said.
Osei said since 2012 there have bene only two home rule-enabled referenda and “very technical amendments” that occurred in Horsham Township, a home rule charter municipality.
“To go through the initiative process repeatedly means you have a lot of trust in the township,” he said. “I can’t imagine a group of five residents that could repeatedly put an ordinance on a ballot but couldn’t elect different supervisors.”
Township Solicitor Robert Iannozzi said the charter is fraught with ambiguities that lead to confusion, and that the charter referendum process is in danger of being in violation of the Sunshine Law. He urged the commission to take more time and look at the study.
“There’s no question that this commission has committed their time and want to ensure that this is a charter … that is legally enforceable. And I respectfully submit it is not,” Iannozzi said.
Resident Peter Jacamuzzi told the commission he found out about the whole situation recently, even though the entire process has been going on for nearly two years and the home rule charter question was on the November ballot.
“At one end, there’s a possibility of raising taxes, and at other end, you sell the sewer to an investment-owned utility company. When I invest, I want a return. I don’t want rates increasing,” he said. “(The sewer) was mismanaged from the get-go, or we wouldn’t be here today. If you sell it, offset the price increase, and give the money back to taxpayers.”
Resident Brendan Foley said he was not hearing any solutions from people against the vote for home rule.
“If this is the only option we have to stop the sale and privatization of the sewer system, then what’s your solution? If this is the only solution, then I’m behind it,” he said.
Resident Laureen Sendel-Grant said she did not believe in changing the form of government to solve one issue that everybody disagrees with. Sendel-Grant wanted clarification on the referendum process.
Solicitor Gallagher said any five citizens can initiate a referendum, but they must get signatures of 15% of voters in the township, or 1,500 people.
Resident Mike Hunsicker said death and taxes are promised, but he would “rather retain an asset and control it, then sell it for short term gain” with no profit.
Resident Joseph Meehan asked if there will be any changes to the proposed charter between its approval and the Primary.
Osei said the actual charter voted on by the commission that evening would be the one presented to voters.
Resident Holly Bechtel, of Kulp Road, said there was a lot of ambiguity in the home rule report.
“That makes me concerned, and I’m typically not a one-issue voter,” she said. “As someone who owns a good amount of land in the township, I’m concerned.”
Osei said the amendments are an implicit part of the home rule law.
“Regardless of what type of charter we write, we would have to have an amendment process in there,” he said. If the Towamencin residents are willing to go through this entire process for the sewer sale, I think they would be OK with having referenda initiative in the charter.”
Watch the meeting on YouTube here for more resident commentary.
See also:
Proposed Commercial Montgomery Township Development is Deja Vu for Residents
Montgomery Township Residents Sound Off on Proposed Penn Medicine Ambulatory Healthcare Center
Upper Gwynedd Pursuing $1.15 Million Grant to Help Acquire Martin Tract
