Towamencin supervisors Rich Marino, Laura Smith, Joyce Snyder, and Chuck Wilson listen to comments on the sale of the township’s sewer system during a
Township officials have voted down a proposed mailer meant to update residents on the township’s long-running sewer sale debate, while residents opposed to that sale show no signs of letting up.
The township’s supervisors voted on Sept. 13 to table the mailer amid debate on whether such a communication should be sent out to residents during campaign season.
“Before we go any further with this, I did hear what you guys had to say,” said supervisor Rich Marino.
“I’ve been out there talking to people, knocking on doors, and it does run the gamut between people who are very well-informed, and people who really don’t know much about it at all. And then there’s a large group in the middle — your typical bell curve,” he said.
Residents and the supervisors have debated the sewer sale for much of the past three years, with a vote by four of the five supervisors to sell in May 2022 followed by a series of voter referenda on establishing a government study commission, writing a home rule charter with provisions that advocates claim would make the sale illegal, and the adoption of that charter in a vote this past May.
After the charter took effect July 1, the supervisors said they would continue with their efforts to close the sale, prompting a suit from members of the “Towamencin NOPE” group alleging the board has disregarded the will of the voters, and a subsequent round of debate in August on a proposed expenditure from the board for a mailer to township residents.
That debate continued on Sept. 13, against the backdrop of a municipal election just weeks away, pitting Marino — an incumbent Republican who voted for the sale and has argued the sale proceeds could tackle infrastructure projects around the township — against Kofi Osei, the Democrat who founded the NOPE group, chaired the study commission that wrote the home rule charter, and subsequently cosigned the suit against the board.
“Every time we’re a few weeks from an election, that would seem to have an effect on the sewer sale or have my name on it, you get real chatty about the sewer sale for some reason. We’re not dumb. Why are you sending mail?” Osei said.
“I’ve been trying to move on from the sewer sale. We have a legal disagreement about what the charter means, and we’re solving legal disagreements in court. That’s how that works. So I would respectfully ask you stop sending any communication about the sewer sale until that legal issue is resolved,” he said.
Jenn Foster, the other resident who filed suit against the board, said she also opposed “yet more spending” on the mailer, and cited board comments from workshop meetings last fall about the tight township budget.
“We have no money for stormwater management (projects). We have no money for a comprehensive plan. We have no money to repair bocce courts. We have no money for a slat shed. What exactly have you done with the 24% tax increase you passed this year, other than send mail, and pay your special counsel for the proposed sale?” she said.
“We’ve already won in the court of public opinion. So do us all a favor: let this play out in the court of common pleas, and not in our mailboxes,” Foster said.
Public Sounds Off
Marino read several emailed public comments, all along the same lines. Lynn Sweet-Reimel said she saw an “unsettling trend of our concerns being disregarded by our elected representatives,” and “stop the sewer sale, and stop wasting taxpayers’ money.” Gus Fox echoed the sentiment, saying he saw “a pattern of expenditures that we believe do not align with the community’s best interests, or priorities. Stop wasting money,” for legal expenses and the mailer.
Valerie Skripek asked the four who voted for the sale to “show some respect to your constituents, who have emphatically told you, in many ways, that no information that you recirculate or regurgitate is going to change our minds,” and said she’d shred and return any such mailer to the township. Craig Goldsmith said “we all know where the four supervisors — well, three supervisors, and the shadow wife of the fourth supervisor, stand on this issue. Sending more materials is now unnecessary. Either vote to abandon the sale, or let it play out in court.”
Michael Miller asked for detailed info from the board on “the need for more communication,” including what questions the board had heard and over what time frame, and said he has heard “clear, consistent resistance” against the sale and not any questions, and said he thought the recent court ruling against a similar sale attempt in East Whiteland Township prompted the communication. Patty Schaffer said, “I hope you would honor the residents’ wishes, and stop the sale,” and Scott Francik said he thought “the board refuses to acknowledge the majority of the public opinion on the sewer sale,” noted during the study commission and home rule charter votes.
“The taxpayers of this community are getting a raw deal, and this should have been settled when the initial sale was voided. Instead, we now have pending litigation into the matter. Please stop wasting our time and money,” he said.
Paul Andrews said he thought the mailers would misstate total costs to residents, like he claimed earlier mailers from the township had done, and said it “seem(s) like electioneering, for Rich’s board of supervisors seat, and that should not be paid for with taxpayer funds,” and Mary Jane Moroz said she had recently realized “four of our five supervisors just don’t care about the residents of Towamencin.”
Can Sale be Stopped?
James Collins asked why the mailers were needed, if the sale were irreversible: “If it’s final, there’s nothing we can do about it, then why are we sending out mailers to tell people about the sewer sale?” before comparing the rate hikes to an outsourced tax increase on ratepayers. Tina Gallagher said she thought “the timing of this communication is suspect. Perhaps it’s politically motivated,” and said she’d rather see tax dollars spent on paving roads, maintaining parks, or other infrastructure.
Rich Costlow said he thought the mailer had value, citing a difference of about 500 votes in the recent home rule vote in May, versus roughly 60% of registered voters in the township who didn’t vote. “I would argue that sending information to the 60%, which is three times the amount of opposition, and three times those in favor, makes some sense,” he said. He then asked if the board or solicitor could clarify the cost of terminating the sale agreement, and if the township would be liable for any penalty, saying he had heard a figure of $10 million in possible liability to the township: “I want to know, on paper, what it would cost me to fight this.” Martin Cohen countered that the home rule charter now being in effect meant the township could not fulfill the sale agreement: “There will be no penalties. It is literally impossible at this point” to complete the sale.
Attorney Weighs In
Gaynor then said the $10 million penalty figure had come from “rumors and lies” based in township communications, not the contract agreement, and solicitor Bob Iannozzi said “the reference to tens of millions of dollars” in a township FAQ spoke to “the possibility of damages, attendant to a litigation for a material breach. That would not be referenced in any contract.”
“If the township decides to unilaterally breach the contract, and PA American decides to sue out on that, they will seek a series of damages. And those damages could be upwards, and including, the cost of the sale,” Iannozzi said, calling it “the worst-case scenario.”
“So when that FAQ was prepared, to notify the public as of the potential liabilities, that was the worst-case scenario. That was not a misrepresentation — there is a possibility of that. It’s ultimately going to be ferreted out at the courts, but that is a possibility,” Iannozzi said.
Osei replied that the FAQ refence to the $10 million figure was in reference to original buyer NextEra, not new buyer PA American: “we were told that NextEra was going to sue, and they left the entire industry.”
“We could have just had no lawsuits. But this is where we’re at, and this is what our four supervisors have put us into,” he said.
Collins added that he thought “this whole thing is ridiculous,” asking why the board entered into the new contract with the second buyer, and was more worried about the high legal costs than the projected sewer rate hikes for residents.
“These are the same people that they say ‘Hey, they’re going to sue you for tens of millions of dollars.’ But hey, don’t worry as far as the rates are concerned,” he said.
Collins and board Chairman Chuck Wilson then engaged in a shouting match over the timing of the first sale contract with NextEra and the second contract with PA American, with Wilson stating the first contract “was not cancelled until we signed the agreement with PA American.”
Could board have pulled out of sale?
After the board proceeded with other business, the final listed agenda item sought “approval for expenditures for sewer sale communications,” with board meeting materials stating a price tag “of no more than $9,000.” In reading the request, Wilson said the township has roughly 7,000 households and only about 1,800 are signed up for the board’s emailed newsletters, and the proposed mailer would go out to the larger number.
“Our only way to make sure we reach everybody is through direct mailings. I guess the only other option would be for us to go door to door and talk to people, and that’s really not feasible,” Wilson said. “We have repeatedly been asked why are we doing (the sale), and what are the benefits of it, and we would like to re-communicate that.”
Marino added that he heard a similar question from a resident in a recent meeting, and Wilson said he and other board members had recently heard similar questions about the sale and subsequent litigation: “There’s a lot of people that don’t know what’s going on. And that’s why we’re going to do some additional communications.” Marino then said he’d heard those questions, and the objections from the NOPE group too, and asked for a postponement on the mailer.
“I hear you, about the timing with the election. I would certainly not want it to be perceived that I am doing anything on the township’s dime to help myself. So for that, I’m going to ask that we defer this for a little bit,” Marino said.
Wilson then said the board could send out info in a regular township newsletter, and Marino said he’d “give it a shot at doing it myself, before I have that perception of the township somehow benefiting me.” The board then voted against the expense.
Towamencin’s supervisors next meet at 7 p.m. on Sept. 27 and Oct. 11 at the township administration building, 1090 Troxel Road. For more information visit www.Towamencin.org.
This article appears courtesy of a content share agreement between North Penn Now and The Reporter. To read more stories like this, visit www.thereporteronline.com.
See also:
Letter: In Wake of Lawsuit, Towamencin Board’s Actions are Wasteful and Disrespectful
Towamencin Supervisors Issue Public Statement in Wake of Residents’ Lawsuit to Stop Sewer Sale
As Towamencin Continues Defending Sewer Sale, Residents Sue to Stop It
Towamencin Supervisors to Continue with Sewer Sale Despite Passage of Home Rule Charter
