 |
| Malissa Davis |
Davis will be facing incumbent Marty Zawarski, a Republican, in November's election.
Phil Barnard, another incumbent Republican, is facing a challenge by Democrat Kim Jenkins in Ward 3. Tom Nolan managed to capture both the Democrat and Republican nomination in Ward 1 despite having two Republican opponents in the primary. Absent a write-in campaign, his re-election is assured.
Davis has been using the bully pulpit during Courtesy of the Floor to explain her position on various issues. At the September 21 meeting, she registered her concerns about the PennEast Pipeline, which is currently configured to go right through the Township. She indicated that she worked in the industry. Though she acknowledged that the risk of an incident is "very remote," it "could be catastrophic." She alluded to a case in which a gas tanker exploded and 20 people died. "It can happen to the best and smartest people in the world because they are people." She asked Township officials to keep the pipeline away from populated areas.
Earlier this year, the Township hired a consultant for a pipeline study, and just two weeks ago, directed the engineers to spell out in more detail how to minimize the impact.
Ben Hedrick questioned Commissioners about a report that there will be a tax hike next year. Tom Nolan called it a "false rumor," noting that Commissioners have yet to see a budget.
By a 3-1 vote, Commissioners called in streetscape deferrals that had been granted to CVS Drugstore and St. Luke's Hospital along Freemansburg Avenue. These include sidewalks, landscaping, lights, and fences that will promote walkability. Marty Zawarski voted against this measure because he opposes the fences. CVS and St. Luke's will have one year in which to complete these enhancements.
In other business, Commissioners voted 4-0 to send Canine Hugo and his partner, Officer Bryan Tollinger, for K-9 certification training at a cost of $4,250. The police department reported a prostitution sting resulting in several arrests. During August, Township police were dispatched to 80 accidents involving 155 vehicles and nine injuries. The department issues 198 traffic citations, 260 written warnings and 24 parking tickets. There were 34 felony and misdemeanor arrests, seven summary citations and four DUIs.
Manager Melissa Shafer reminded everyone of Bethlehem Township Community Day, which will be held at the Community Center on Saturday, October 3rd from Noon until 5:00pm. Over 20 businesses are participating. There will be hayrides, indoor pool fun, a moon bounce, a pumpkin patch and live entertainment.
Michael Hudak was absent from the meeting.
13 comments:
She would be a fine commissioner and a breath of rah air from the goons who run the township now.
MH was absent - best part of the meeting
Just not as much fun without Mikie.
He obtains from voting and now he doesn't come to a meeting. I think he gave up.
In all seriousness, too bad Glagola has withdrawn, he would have been a huge benefit for the Township. Looks like another 4 years of Bozo the clown!
"She alluded to a case in which a gas tanker exploded and 20 people died."
So she prefers trucks or trains over pipelines? She's essentially saying she opposes pipelines because the alternatives to pipelines dangerous. She seems a bit confused. And yes, tanker transport is very risky and mishaps are usually catastrophic. Most communities have no plan to deal with them and probably couldn't do so effectively, regardless. That's why pipelines are safer.
I looked back at ky notes, and am unsure whether it was a tanker or gas line. She indicated the companies involved are all excellent and tgat tge liklihood of something going wrong is very small. But if it does, it will be catastrophic. I can't understand why these common sense observations would set you off.
I thought my comment was measured and I was not "set off." She opposes pipelines. I think they're safer than alternatives and stated why. Perhaps you're a bit sensitive about potentially misstating her explanation and making her sound illogical?
Perhaps I'm sensitive about possibly misstating her position. But I notice in this and in a post two weeks ago that some anon was doing his level best to minimize the danger. The Solicitor's comment that the blast area on either side would be 500', was dismissed as fear-mongering. No, this is reality. Since no one seriously disputes that the pipeline is coming, any prudent person would want the work done as safely as possible. Davis' relatively innocuous remark caused you to call her "confused" and sound off about "safer" pipelines. It did set you off. That might be my fault, as I explained. I am also very leery of anonymous comments supporting the pipeline bc the industry has enough money to hire people to talk it up in social media. In my first year of blogging, i uncovered ATT doing that on this very blog.
Hi, this is Malissa Davis. My comment was that, although pipelines are safer than trucks and /or trains, they are still potentially dangerous and should not be located under populated areas such as the Southmont shopping area - particularly when there is a lot of available open space in Pennsylvania. I am not against pipelines per se, but rather the current location of this particular large, high pressure pipeline. My experience was with explosions in refineries that were well known for their engineering and inspection processes. I used this an example of how, even with the best effort, mistakes can be made in specification, inspection or construction. To me the illogical part is building something that could be dangerous in a spot where it could harm many people.
Ms. Davis, Thank you for your clarification. I believe I may not have captured your comments precisely.
That is okay. I may not have stated them succinctly.
1:11 PM
I believe its "abstained" not obtain
in the political forum that means that he felt the issue should not have even been on the agenda for a vote. Rather then choose yes or no, question should never be ask to begin with.
A pretty common response in the political world, not going to legitimize the item by casting a vote one way or the other. I think any good reporter would have ask him WHY he abstained on those three items, now thats something i would like to know. I can see why he voted no on the police hiring (not the #1 candidate) but whats the real story behind abstaining.
Missed that one Bernie
Post a Comment