Trending
PENNSDALE -- Muncy Township residents whose properties will be impacted by the proposed data center on Yetter Road were vocal in their concerns about the impact it could have on their water tables, and property values at a hearing held this week on the curative amendment the township has drafted to set parameters on the operation of data centers in the community.
One thing that seemed to cause the greatest consternation for the residents was the lack of recourse the township has if the data center violates any of the restrictions placed on their operation.
"You have to issue a notice of violation. On that notice, it has to give them the opportunity to appeal the violation. You have to give them 20 days to appeal the
violation, and then you have to give them time to comply," said Victor Marquardt, the township's zoning officer.
"So if they don't appeal, that's basically an admittance of guilt... after their compliance time would be up. Currently, the ordinance allows that they could be fined $1,000 a day for every day they're not in compliance," he said.
He pointed out that right now, the municipality has the maximum penalties allowed under the Municipal Planning Code.
"And what do they have to give us in return? They don't have to give us anything. Everything's towards them. All fairness towards them, right? I've not heard anything that was in our favor," said Beth George, whose home will be directly affected by the proposed data center if it is built.
George criticized the penalty amount saying that a $1,000 a day for a developer would be like a "quarter to them."
"If you're talking money with what I have versus what they have. It's a quarter for them...What you have here is too vague. Seems like you're making this too easy on the data center. Why? What about the residents on Yetter Road and nearby? What are you doing for them, everything's towards the data center. Oh, we can't be too stringent on them...What are you doing for the residents," George asked the board.
Township Solicitor Joseph P Orso III, countered George's assertion that the township was being lenient on data centers by not making the penalties more severe.
"If it was nothing and it was for the data centers, why are they fighting tooth and nail in court to build their data center without this ordinance applying to them?" Orso, of Rudinski, Orso and Associates asked.
"All I'm trying to say is, if this ordinance was so pro for the data centers, why are they fighting for it not to apply to them? That's all I'm saying because it's not pro data centers," he said.
The developer for the proposed data center, DANKO Holdings II/Fishlips LLC, has claimed deemed approval because the township did not hold hearings on their proposal in a timely manner. The county and several residents have taken legal action challenging the legality of deemed approval.
George also questioned where the money from the penalty would go. Marquardt stated it would go to the township.
She argued that it should go "to people on Yetter Road that had to put up with it...it needs to go to the people on Yetter Road that are putting up with it. That's who it needs to go to. That needs to be put into the ordinance too," she said.
"How fair or is this to the residents of Yetter Road nearby? This has been our home for over 30 years, and now it's going to be ruined by all the noise and the dirt and everything. Our pool and our hot tub are going to be useless because we won't be able to go out there with the air quality and the noise and everything. But that doesn't matter as long as it's not too hard on the data center. Then our home's value would be almost worthless if we even wanted to try to sell it" she said.
In the course of George's back and forth with the board it was revealed that there had been a meeting between township officials and the owner of DANKO, Dan Klingerman, a fact of which Orso seemed unaware.
"I want to know, Is the reason you're so fair to the data centers is that because of the meeting that I heard about with Dan Klingerman and the supervisors and the planning commission and the fire company, and you want to make sure you get your new fire truck and whether money has greased your hands," George said.
Orso replied that there was no meeting at the same time as Supervisor Denise Artley stated that she would explain.
"I will talk about what happened. I sat down. Larry Spatz (chairman of the township planning commission) sat down. Scott Oldweiler (fire chief and a member of the planning commission) sat down with Dan Klingerman. We didn't have a quorum because we didn't have two supervisors. We just had one, and we just basically asked questions, and he answered the questions we asked, just kind of like to get to know the basics. I mean, he wasn't even sure as to what you know he was doing yet, as far as you know, you know, trying to build this or even have a developer to build it. I mean, he wasn't even at that point," Artley said. That
"He didn't offer a brand new fire truck. He didn't offer. Larry Spatz did ask him if they, in turn, would you know be able to do anything for the community, the whole community, the township, and then you know he asked Scott Oldweiller, "Does the fire company need anything?" And he said, "Well, we need a new fire truck, but that is as far as that went. That doesn't mean that they're going to give the fire company a new million-dollar fire truck," Artley said.
Artley also said that Klingerman had told them that there were letters that had been sent out to property owners.
When George asked the other residents if they had received letters from DANKO, no one said that they had.
"Then he must have sent them to the wrong address or the wrong state because none of us got one, did we? So that makes me feel really good. He's really on top of things," George said.
"We understand your frustration. I understand that. We don't live where they're proposing. Vic Marquardt looked at this ordinance. Dan Vassallo looked at this ordinance. Joe Orso looked at the ordinance," Artley said.
"And none of them live there. So what do they care," George said.
Several other residents spoke, also voicing their frustration with the wording of the ordinance.
Orso stated that the comments will be taken under advisement and a final version of the ordinance will be written which will then come up for vote by the supervisors on Dec. 9.
"So we wasted our time. You're just not even worrying about what we said," George stated.
"You say whatever you want. There's nothing I'm going to say tonight that's going to make you happy," Orso said.
"You're going to have to wait til you get the ordinance and we'll see," he said.