Township disbands planning commission
UPPER POTTSGROVE >> With little fanfare, no input from the public and little-to-no public discussion, the Upper Pottsgrove Township Commissioners voted 4-1 Monday night to dissolve the township’s planning commission.
Councilman Martin Schreiber cast the only vote against the motion.
The vote came at the end of a work session meeting at which the commissioners interviewed and chose a new pension investment adviser, CBIZ Investment Advisory Services LLC; got an update on the investigation of selling its sewer system — an update from the public was barred — and hired a special counsel to handle the sale of said system, should it come to pass.
After the special counsel was hired, Schreiber asked “are we voting at work sessions now? Because we used to try not to do that, to do it at a more public meeting.”
“This is public,” replied Commissioners Chairman Trace Slinkerd. “And we vote when we have to.”
Slinkerd then asked for a motion to dissolve the planning commission, which was provided by Vice Chairwoman Renee Spaide and seconded by Commissioner Dave Waldt.
Schreiber then asked “has anyone talked to the planning commission about this?”
Commissioner Cathy Paretti replied that given “the lawsuit,
they don’t seem to be interested in talking.”
And with that, and no comment from the public, the vote was taken.
“The lawsuit” to which Paretti referred is likely the Jan. 17 filing made by Elwood Taylor, the former township commissioner and now former planning commission chairman.
Taylor’s legal action sought no money or damages, but rather asked the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas to declare the “conflicts resolution adopted in August by the commissioners to be unconstitutional.
That resolution forbade sitting township commissioners from also serving on other boards, as several other board members at the time, including Taylor, did.
It was this resolution that seems to have been the trigger for the cascade of events that followed.
The short version is, Taylor refused to resign and said the resolution was unconstitutional. Before they could vote to remove him from the planning commission, Taylor asked for a hearing, a process set out in the law.
The township commissioners held the hearing in October but never took action on removing Taylor.
It soon became moot when he lost his reelection bid in November. He remained a member, and chairman, of the planning commission with a term that expired in December.
Four days after Taylor filed his motion, the township commissioners, with little public discussion, voted unanimously at its Jan. 21 meeting to advertise its intention to dissolve the planning commission.
In an email response to by The Mercury regarding questions posed afterward the rationale for dissolving the planning commission, Slinkerd responded: “The intent is to vote on rescinding the ordinance on 3 Feb; the rationale is to create a planning committee (a provision provided by the municipal planning code) that supports the governing board,” which is the board of commissioners.
Slinkerd added, “the majority of the board of commissioners feels that the current planning commission disposition does not do this.”
Asked what “supporting the governing board” means, and for a specific example of the planning commission not providing said support, Slinkerd demurred.
“The ordinance status will be considered on 3 Feb where all commissioners can comment where appropriate,” was his only reply.
However, other than Schreiber’s question and Paretti’s response, there was comment from the commissioners Monday night.
It is not immediately clear what will replace the planning commission, although it seems likely that whatever comes next will be under control of the township commissioners, beginning with appointments.
Ironically, commissioners having too much influence over other boards is what the August resolution Taylor is fighting in court was meant to avoid.