Charlestown Township
Board of Supervisors Business Meeting
Minutes of January 27, 2003

The second business meeting for January was held January 27, 2003, at the Great Valley Middle School, Room 154. Paul Hogan, Chairman, Hugh D. Willig, Vice Chairman, Irene W. Ewald, Mike Rodgers, Kevin R. Kuhn, Thomas Oeste, Esq., Surender Kohli, P.E., Ed Theurkauf, Linda M. Csete, Township Administrator, Melanie M. Lammers, Recording Secretary, and those on the attached list were present.

At Mr. Hogan’s request, Mr. Willig chaired the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 7:32 P.M.


Mrs. Ewald announced there is a Pennsylvania Rural Access Guide, a great financial, technical, and other assistance resource for Pennsylvania’s rural communities, which she will make available in the Township office. Mrs. Ewald added she would like to thank Thomas Pyle for thinking of the Township and bringing this guide, as well as the Greenworks Gazette and PHMC Grants Programs brochure from the Pennsylvania Farm Show. She encouraged everyone to take a look, or at least at the Table of Contents, and feels it contains a lot of good information.

Citizen’s Forum - Non-Agenda Items

There were no Citizens’ Forum - Non-Agenda items.


Mrs. Ewald encouraged the appointment of Ms. Suzanne O’Brien to the Parks and Recreation Board, noting that she is not only extraordinarily well qualified, but she actively participated in the meeting and contributed from the very beginning. Mrs. Ewald moved to appoint Ms. O’Brien, and Mr. Kuhn seconded. Mr. Willig called for discussion, and there being none, called the vote. All were in favor.


Reorganization Meeting Minutes of January 6, 2003

Mr. Kuhn moved to approve the January 6, 2003 reorganization meeting minutes as written, and Mrs. Ewald seconded. Mr. Willig called for discussion, and there being none, called the vote. All were in favor.

Business Meeting Minutes of January 6, 2003

Mr. Kuhn moved to approve the January 6, 2003 business meeting minutes as written, and Mr. Rodgers seconded. Mr. Willig called for discussion, and there being none, called the vote. All were in favor.


Conditional Use Hearing - Cottone

Mr. Oeste indicated that evidence was taken the last time this hearing was on the agenda, and since no court reporter was yet available at this meeting, the meeting minutes would suffice. He said the record was previously left open for purposes of receiving any information from Mr. Kohli. He added that it was his understanding that Mr. Kohli really had nothing else to add. Mr. Kohli confirmed this, therefore, Mr. Oeste recommended closing the record and indicated a draft decision would be available within the applicable timeframe. He then asked if anyone had any comments, at which time Mr. Cottone answered he would like to comment. It was then decided to table this and the other hearings on the agenda until the court reporter arrived.

Official Map Ordinance

Mr. Willig referenced Mr. Comitta’s memo of January 27, 2003 which explained that the Planning Commission plan to re-examine the map designations and revise the map during their February and March meetings. Mr. Willig continued the hearing to April 7, 2003. Alexis McCarthy, Church Road, asked if her property would be corrected on the map, as it is shown incorrectly on the current draft. Mr. Theurkauf said it would be corrected if not already taken care of.

Altemose Conditional Use Hearing

Mr. Willig indicated this hearing was continued to February 24, 2003.

Old Business

Toll Bros Inc - Public Water Request

Chris Schubert, Esq. addressed the Board regarding the Toll Bros. Inc. request from PSW for public water to service the Charlestown Meadows development. He indicated that, after somewhat strong-arming PSW, a letter was obtained from a PSW representative, Dave McIntire, to Mr. Kohli, which provides that the lateral coming from West Pikeland Township and crossing over Newcomen Road into the development has to be sized to twelve inches as opposed to eight inches. The purpose given for this was for proper fire protection for the development. He also said the extension to the franchise would be limited to this Charlestown Township property, and anyone else wanting to tap into this water supply would need the approval of the Township. He added that the water main itself coming into this project would never make its way out to Route 401. Mr. Schubert’s hope was that the Township would be accepting of this requirement and take PSW at their word that the sizing of this water line is accurate. What he does not want to see is Toll Bros stuck in the middle.

Mrs. Ewald asked for the size of the pump. Mr. Bruce Panczner of Toll Bros answered that the only pump is at the top of the hill, and is there only to service eight units. Mr. Kohli added that the connection coming into the development is an existing eight-inch line. Mrs. Ewald responded that she would like to explore this further, because at ten feet per second on a twelve-inch pipe, you’re looking at 3,600 gallons of water per minute. She added that without the rest of the information about the pressure at the pump, etc., she doesn’t feel the Board can have any kind of reasonable data to make a decision on. She said she would simply like to have more time with Mr. Kohli and a further explanation. She questioned the necessity of a twelve-inch pipe servicing 200 homes when an eight-inch pipe currently services approximately 400 homes in Charlestown Hunt, which is at a higher elevation. Mr. Kuhn asked if having the larger line would cause decreased pressure. Mr. Kohli answered that there would be more volume in the pipe, but the pressure would remain the same. Mrs. Ewald reiterated the need for more information to make a decision.

Mr. Schubert answered that, unfortunately, PSW is not willing to provide the calculations used in determining the need for a twelve-inch line. He added that PSW is treating this information as if it were a trade secret. He said again, he does not want Toll Bros to be stuck in the middle, and that if PSW, for whatever reason, says they require a twelve-inch line, Toll Bros does not have a choice in the matter. Mr. Schubert added that if PSW would want to extend the franchise in the future, they would need to ask the permission of the Board. Mr. Willig said their asking permission would simply be looked at as a professional courtesy. Mr. Pansner said he agrees with the Board that PSW should provide their supporting data, however, added that he is in no position to force them to do so.

Mrs. Ewald said she would do anything in her power to look into this issue. She said she’d like the Board to be able to meet with their engineer and pursue this further. Mr. Oeste suggested that PSW would possibly agree to release the information if everyone involved entered into a Confidentiality Agreement. He added that they would talk to Mr. Kohli and try to move this forward.

Mr. Schubert brought up an additional topic regarding the proposed traffic signal at the corner of Newcomen Road and Route 401. He indicated the application was submitted by Traffic Planning & Design and asked if the Board needed a copy. Mr. Oeste said he would like a copy to take to West Pikeland Township along with a copy of Toll’s calculations on the Eaby easement that will be required. Mr. Schubert said he would make copies for all and give the original to Mrs. Csete

Hearings (cont’d.)

The court reporter was unable to attend the meeting, therefore, the minutes will be considered the official record of these hearings.

Conditional Use Hearing - Cottone

Mr. Robert Cottone, a resident of 30 Eastwick Drive, summarized his request for Conditional Use. He indicated that the outcome of the last meeting had the Board requesting him to deed restrict his property as one of the conditions of approval for constructing a swimming pool in steep slopes. At that time, he was amicable to doing that, so long as there were no adverse affects to doing so. He continued, stating that he is now leaning away from deed restricting his property and wanted to share with the Board his reasons. He feels that the request to put the pool in and increase the building envelope is fair and is not in conflict with the comprehensive plan. He also feels it has no environmental negatives and believes it is a reasonable request. He said there is nothing gained with the restriction. He is asking to use less than one acre of his total seven plus acres, and feels that’s reasonable. Mr. Willig questioned whether the one acre he plans to use includes his house, driveway, etc., and Mr. Cottone indicated it did. It would be 38,000 square feet of impervious surface coverage on the property. He continued by respectfully asking for a favorable vote at the meeting in order to be able to move this project forward.

Mr. Kuhn questioned Mr. Cottone as to what is preventing him from wanting to move forward with a deed restriction, if, by his own admission, nothing would be gained or lost by having this restriction. Mr. Cottone’s answer was two-fold. First, he felt it was a matter of principle. He felt his request was fair and there should be no need to deed restrict his property. While he would most likely be unable to subdivide it in the future, it might be possible that an opportunity would come up for a lot line change that might involve property transfer. He explained how he went to great lengths to work with the Township engineer months in advance to make sure he was compliant with the Township requirements. Secondly, he felt it was a matter of time. He would like to move forward with approvals, so he can begin with the design and development of the pool, rather than take more time to get to that point.

Mrs. Ewald suggested an Executive Session be held with the Township engineer, therefore, the Board recessed for five minutes. Upon return, Mr. Willig asked if there was any more discussion on the topic. There being none, he moved to continue this request until the February 24, 2003 meeting in order to give Mr. Oeste the opportunity to review the record. Mr. Kuhn seconded, and Mr. Willig called the vote. All were in favor.

Ordinance to Prohibit Parking on Warner Lane

Mr. Oeste called for any public comment. There being none, he motioned to enact Ordinance #106-03. Mr. Kuhn said he spoke with the Fire Marshal and confirmed the Township has no enforcement power. Mrs. Ewald asked if the Board could appoint an enforcement official, and Mr. Oeste answered yes. Mr. Kuhn voiced his concern that in order to ticket or tow a car, the official would need to notify the owner and doesn’t have access to the system. Mrs. Ewald asked if enforcement could be discussed separate from the ordinance. Mr. Kohli said if the ordinance exists and signs are posted, the State Police can be called to enforce it. Mr. Kuhn suggested looking into enforcement and said he was agreeable to the ordinance.

Mr. Rodgers moved to approve the ordinance, and Mr. Kuhn seconded. Mrs. Ewald asked Mr. Oeste if he could highlight the contents of the ordinance for those in attendance. Mr. Oeste read Section II of the ordinance. Mr. Willig asked when the road would be opened, and Mr. Kohli responded that although most of the roadwork is complete, there is a need for a retaining wall on the Phoenixville Pike entrance side. Mr. Willig asked for an estimate of time, and Mr. Kohli answered that it was dependent on the weather. Mr. Willig called for discussion, and there being none, called the vote. All were in favor.

Old Business (cont’d.)

Resolution to Discourage Parking Along Public Streets

Mr. Oeste’s draft parking resolution was discussed. Mr. Kuhn indicated he is opposed to adopting a resolution to discourage parking on public streets, because it is unenforceable. He feels it is a wasted effort. Mrs. Ewald believes having the Resolution is better than nothing. Mr. Kuhn disagreed, stating the same affect could be had by sending a letter to residents. Mr. Willig agreed that a letter could be sent to residents periodically to remind them not to park on the streets. Mrs. Ewald felt a resolution had more impact. Mr. Willig said there is a resolution on the table and asked for any discussion. Mr. Philips doesn’t feel something should be passed in a resolution which cannot be enforced. Mr. Kuhn moved to disapprove the Resolution, and Mr. Willig seconded. The vote was called. Four were in favor. Mrs. Ewald abstained.

No Left Turn - Union Hill Road

Mr. Kohli said he talked to Don Fein of PennDOT again and asked if he would be willing to meet with the Board, and Mr. Fein agreed. Mr. Kuhn suggested a site meeting at Union Hill Road and Route 29. Mr. Willig asked if PennDOT might change their mind from their previous refusal of the request for “no left turn” signs onto Union Hill Road, or if they were simply coming to explain the rationale behind their position. Mrs. Ewald added that the site meeting should occur during peak hours and asked Dr. Stewart when the morning peak time is. He responded 8:00 A.M. Mr. Willig suggested having both a site meeting and a meeting back at the office, and Mr. Kohli said he would arrange the meetings.

Township resident, Ms. Donna Casciola, voiced her concern over the lack of enforcement, and said there would be cars continually making illegal left-hand turns at this intersection. Mr. Willig responded that the signage is meant to be a deterrent, but not expected to eliminate the problem entirely.

Mrs. Ewald said the State Police would be able to enforce the signage; however, Union Hill resident Gil Mariano, said he hasn’t seen police in that area for approximately 1.5 years. Mr. Rodgers said he has seen the State Police a lot in the area of Rees and Hollow Roads. Mr. Mariano said they are present, but just driving through, not stopping. He said the Township can try the deterrent and see if it works. Dr. Stuart added that this is another example of why there is a need to pursue installing speed bumps, and Mr. Kuhn agreed. Mrs. Csete said if a No Left Turn sign is not an option, that spring time would be the timeframe for installing speed bumps.

2003 Signal Service Contract

Mrs. Ewald moved to approve the revised contract dated January 17, 2003 for $625.00, and Mr. Kuhn seconded. Mr. Willig called for discussion, and there being none, called the vote. All were in favor.

New Business

Scipione Preliminary Subdivision Plan last revised 1/14/03

John C. Snyder, Esq., presented the preliminary subdivision plan for “Highlands at Charlestown”. He showed the loop road, in lieu of a cul-de-sac, as recommended by the Planning Commission. He mentioned that the Planning Commission walked the site and several issues were discussed and resolved. Mr. Kuhn asked if the Planning Commission’s recommendation took Mr. Theurkauf’s issues into account. Mr. Snyder answered no and voiced his dismay with regard to the issues outlined in Mr. Theurkauf’s letter dated 1/23/03. He added that the mapping of contours has been done by licensed professional surveyors and that a positive review had been received from the Township engineer. He questioned Mr. Theurkauf’s expertise in these areas and does not understand why the word of the professional surveyors does not prevail. He indicated that he was agreeable to the Planning Commission’s recommendation to have a note added to the plan stating that lot #3 would be field surveyed prior to the issuance of a building permit, and that no conditional use could be granted should the contours prove that area to be in steep slopes. He said he forwarded a copy to Mr. Churchill of the Planning Commission and Mr. Churchill had no issues. Mr. Oeste said he might want to alter the wording of the conditional use restriction, and Mr. Snyder agreed they could take another look at it.

Mr. Willig asked where the house on lot #3 would be located. Mr. Snyder indicated it would be located just as it is shown on the preliminary plan. Mr. Oeste asked Mr. Theurkauf if he had any issues with it, at which time Mr. Theurkauf went through the series of issues as written in his letter to the Township dated October 9, 2002. In summary, he felt there was still a question of accuracy and was asking for verification.

Mr. Charlie Philips, a meeting attendee and member of the Planning Commission, told Mr. Snyder that Mr. Churchill is not the Chairman of the Planning Commission and that he, himself, never received a copy of this document. Mrs. Ewald confirmed that the correct procedure to follow would have been to submit it to the Township Administrator, who would then distribute it to everyone.

Mr. Rodgers asked if the survey in question had been done before the Planning Commission meeting, and Mr. Snyder responded yes. He added it was that survey that came back sealed from the surveyor saying that is what it is. He felt Mr. Theurkauf’s memo implied that if the contour lines changed to the developer’s benefits, and not to that of the Township, it must be incorrect. Mr. Oeste interjected that Mr. Theurkauf did not say that. Mr. Theurkauf added that was not the basis for his objection, nor what is in his letter. Mrs. Ewald suggested they problem-solve together.

Mr. Snyder reiterated the Township has a sealed plan by a registered professional surveyor in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Mr. Kuhn asked what type of survey was done, and Mr. Snyder answered the original survey was an aerial survey and the second was a field verification of the aerial topography. Mr. Rodgers asked what was surveyed, and Mr. Snyder answered it was the area in question. Mr. Hogan questioned if an error could have been made. Mr. Kohli said errors could happen, but the Township does not routinely go out and get independent surveyors to verify applicant’s surveys.

Mr. Willig asked what implications there would be regardless of whether the survey was incorrect or not. Mr. Snyder answered that with the note on the plan, there would be none. He said that is why this compromise was acceptable to the Planning Commission. Mr. Willig asked what the implications would be if the note was not added to the plan. Mr. Snyder said one way was to have a conditional use to build and subdivide, and the other would be to build the house outside the steep slopes and without a conditional use application. Mr. Kohli added that if Mr. Theurkauf’s mapping is correct, a conditional use would be needed to build there. Mr. Willig questioned whether septic and other services would be in jeopardy, and Mr. Snyder said they would not be an issue. Mr. Kohli concurred.

Mr. Willig asked if the applicant is also the builder, and Mr. Snyder replied yes. The builder, Mr. Vaughn, said he hasn’t built in Charlestown Township before, but has built in neighboring townships and has 30 years of experience. Mr. Willig asked Mr. Vaughn if he had control over the house placement, and he answered yes.

Mrs. Ewald said there are three issues: a historic resource issue, a slope issue on lot #3, and the trail issue, and asked Mr. Rodgers if he’d like to meet with the Township’s consultants before moving forward. She added that if the Board understood their consultants’ advice a little better, they would be better prepared to render a decision. Mrs. Ewald mentioned the possibility of addressing this first in an Executive Session, to which Mr. Snyder was opposed.

Mr. Oeste asked what the time clock was for this issue, and Mrs. Csete indicated the Township has an extension letter to February 15, 2003.

Mr. Snyder discussed the tree protection issue, which he said was a result of the site visit by the Planning Commission. He said the plan was designed to stay away from the trees; however, the Planning Commission requested they pull back from the road, regardless of trees. Mr. Snyder indicated they complied and redesigned. He added he is convinced that no additional trees will be affected due to septic on lot #2.

Mr. Willig questioned why Mr. Snyder responded to Mr. Kohli’s issues, but not to Mr. Theurkauf’s. Mr. Snyder indicated he did not respond to Mr. Theurkauf’s letter, because he just received it on Friday, January 23, 2003. Mr. Kuhn asked if written responses to any of Mr. Theurkauf’s letters had been received. Mr. Snyder answered no, because he felt, based on the letters from the other professionals, they were already past the issues in Mr. Theurkauf’s letter.

Mr. Kuhn asked Mr. Theurkauf if he felt there would be a tree issue with regard to the septic. He answered that as long as septic testing was done and the results were acceptable, that question would be answered. Mrs. Ewald asked Mr. Theurkauf if he received any soil testing results, and he responded he had not. He added that the tree issue was not of universal agreement within the Planning Commission.

Mrs. Ewald asked what the historic resource issue was. Mr. Vaughn answered that Mrs. Scipione said her house is not historic and has been totally renovated. Mrs. Ewald said it is designated as a Class One historic resource. Mr. Theurkauf added that his comments with regard to the historic structure were his opinion based on sound planning practices, as opposed to strictly code compliance. Mr. Snyder commented on the placement of the houses and indicated that Mrs. Scipione likes the layout they have designed.

Mr. Kuhn asked about the trail issue, and Mr. Snyder said this is the most difficult issue to discuss without Mrs. Scipione present. He said she is strongly opposed to a traversing trail on her lot, lot #10. Mr. Theurkauf said he has investigated the land and believes a foot and equestrian path could be made on lot #10, which wouldn’t be a significant invasion on her privacy. Mr. Theurkauf said she remains skeptical but is willing to work together to see whether the issue could be resolved in the field. Mr. Kuhn asked Mr. Theurkauf if he felt confident that he could find a good place for the trail on lot #10. He responded he could, but that Mrs. Scipione would have to be in agreement. Mrs. Ewald suggested talking to nearby resident Sally Dixon, as she rides and knows where the existing trails are.

Mr. Snyder asked if there were any other issues. Mrs. Ewald said the Board would have a path forward after they meet, and Mr. Willig told Mr. Snyder it would be helpful if he could provide a written response to Mr. Theurkauf’s concerns.

Mr. Oeste asked Mr. Snyder if he was willing to comply with everything in Mr. Kohli’s letters, and Mr. Vaughn answered yes, except for outside governmental permits of which he has no control. Mr. Kohli requested that the Township solicitor review the Planning Commission’s notes.

Mr. Vaughn mentioned that he has a third party contractor to maintain the on-lot septic systems. He said he has made it the responsibility of the Homeowners Association, as opposed to each individual homeowner. Mr. Oeste said he would like the third party mentioned in the Homeowners documents.

Mr. Willig asked if the road is to be dedicated, and Mr. Snyder responded yes. Mr. Willig also mentioned the drawing he has is dated January 14, 2003 and asked if there is anything more recent. Mr. Kohli said he would review and respond accordingly. Mr. Willig asked if there were any questions. Mrs. Csete asked if everything can be prepared by February 3, 2003, or will an extension be needed. Mrs. Ewald asked if Mr. Kohli could have his review and response done by February 3, and he responded yes. Mr. Rodgers asked if the builder would grant an extension to February 28, and Mr. Vaughn answered yes. Mr. Snyder wrote out a letter to this effect.

Dixon Preliminary/Final Plan

Mrs. Csete stated she wrote a letter to the Applicant’s attorney asking for an additional extension to the review time clock for the Dixon subdivision. She received a voicemail message from Joe Ryan on Friday, January 24, 2003 but since then her return voicemails weren’t returned prior to the meeting. Mr. Kuhn moved to deny the Dixon plan due to noncompliance to the consultant’s review letters and township ordinances, and Mr. Rodgers seconded. Mr. Willig called for discussion, and there being none, called the vote. All were in favor.

Lapio Homes Inc. - Escrow Release #7

Mrs. Ewald asked if the release of these funds could be conditional based on the contractors’ compliance with the noise ordinance. Mr. Kohli indicated, to his knowledge, the contractors are in compliance. Mrs. Ewald moved to approve the Lapio Homes Inc escrow release #7, and Mr. Kuhn seconded. Mr. Willig called for discussion, and there being none, called the vote. All were in favor.

Earned Income Tax

Mr. Rodgers opened by telling the Board that in order to have an earned income tax, they would have to submit a petition 13 weeks prior to the Tuesday before the primary election. One quarter to one half percent is being considered to be used for open space.

Mr. Kuhn indicated he thought the purpose of the referendum was to poll the people as to what they would like the Earned Income Tax to be used for, not as to whether they want an earned income tax. Mr. Willig asked how the Township wants to fund open space. He asked if they want to fund it through an Earned Income Tax.

Mr. Kuhn told of the estimate he received approximately four years ago from Berkheimer and Associates. That estimate indicated that forty to sixty percent of residents are already paying an earned income tax. Mr. Hogan added that for someone who is working outside of the Township, he felt they would rather pay it to Charlestown Township than to somewhere else.

Mr. Rodgers felt the reason for the referendum was to get an opinion from the residents as to whether or not they would be in favor of an earned income tax. Mr. Oeste warned that if an earned income tax was levied for open space purposes, it cannot be used for anything else. Mr. Kuhn added, however, that a new referendum could change the purpose in the future. Mrs. Ewald read part of an article brought up by Mrs. Csete and asked that Mrs. Csete distribute it to the Board.

Mr. Kuhn asked where the Board stood on the issue of an earned income tax. He asked if the purpose of the referendum is to ask the residents if they want this type of tax, or how to spend this type of tax, and Mr. Willig answered that it was both. Mr. Kuhn asked what the Board was prepared to do if the residents were not in favor of the tax. Mrs. Ewald answered that getting a ‘no’ vote from the residents would indicate the proper groundwork was not laid. Mr. Kuhn felt it would not be possible to educate the residents within eight weeks. Mrs. Ewald reiterated the need to properly lay the groundwork with the people of the community. Mr. Rodgers felt the purpose of the referendum was to get an opinion from the residents as to whether or not to have an earned income tax. He agreed it would be necessary to campaign and educate the public on why it is necessary. Mrs. Ewald suggested if you simply want an opinion, a questionnaire should be sent. On the other hand, if you want something that is binding, take it to referendum. Mr. Rodgers felt there would be a better response from those voting than from a questionnaire.

Mr. Kuhn felt there was a narrow time window available to preserve open space, and again asked what the Board was prepared to do if the people were against the tax. Mr. Rodgers said they would have to ‘bite the bullet’ as open space preservation takes money. Mr. Kuhn felt that if instituting an earned income tax was an eventuality without the consent of the residents, then why not institute it without asking, rather than ask and then appear to not have listened. He reiterated the Berkheimer statistics and added that even at a conservative estimate, the Township was losing $250,000 per year to other townships.

Dr. Stewart stated that it is well and good to say the money is needed, but feels the residents are much more interested in how it would be used. He said the concept of open space is a viable issue, but how will monies collected be used for open space. He added that the Township doesn’t render many services to the residents, therefore, he feels it is important to educate the residents on how this money will be used, prior to instituting another tax. Mr. Kuhn responded with a summary of items the Open Space Commission is currently working on, stating that their overriding goal is to procure easements on desirable properties. In order to do this, however, money is needed.

Mrs. Ewald referenced the Homebuilders Association Adopted Open Space Preservation Policy, which are crafted to made open space initiatives more difficult to pursue. She said this paper should be taken seriously, as this group of people is lobbying in Harrisburg. She summarized some of the points of the document and said the Township needs to know what their points are, and that they will succeed on some of them. She asked that Mrs. Csete distribute this document to the Board members.

Mr. Philips commented that he has been paying an earned income tax to East Whiteland Township and would much rather pay it to Charlestown. He agrees it should have dedicated uses. Mrs. Ewald asked Mrs. Csete to get current data from Berkheimer and Associates.

Resident Mr. Gil Mariano, said he doesn’t currently pay an earned income tax. He agrees it is necessary to get buy-in from the residents, and suggests doing this via several meetings. He feels if people were educated about the uses for the funds that many may not be happy, but would understand and be agreeable to it. It is his feeling that education is more important than the referendum. Mr. Kuhn asked Mr. Mariano if he felt one-half of one percent was a lot of money, and Mr. Mariano responded that we’re in a downed economy and it depends on how much money you make.

Mr. Willig said the Board agrees on the need to educate, but asked how soon it can be done. Resident Sue Staas suggested neighborhood meetings be scheduled. She offered the idea that residents in favor of the need for the tax could go out and educate their neighbors on the topic. Mr. Kuhn asked how the Board felt about her suggestion. Mr. Hogan agreed, and Mr. Willig said it was worth investigating.

Other Business

There were no Other Business topics discussed.


Mr. Willig adjourned the meeting at 10:49 P.M. The next meeting will be held on February 3, 2003, 7:30 P.M. at the Great Valley Middle School, Room 154.

Respectfully submitted,

Melanie M. Lammers
Recording Secretary