I’m responding to your recent article, “Chalfont councilman wants answers to Greenway Trail questions” (June 22). As I’m the councilman who submitted the questions, I’d like to clear up a few facts, respond to councilmen John Engel’s quotes and offer insight to what happened here.
Factually: I submitted a written sheet of questions to have on the record request; I stated I didn’t expect a reply during the June meeting; they were never read out loud as to not take up meeting time.
While it’s true that I voted three years ago for applying for the Neshaminy Greenway Trail grant, let us be clear — I didn’t vote “yes” on the clear-cutting of natural lands behind residential homes.
In fact, the work done by the borough was never brought before council for a vote nor was there ever an exact plan presented. Indeed one of the reasons the work was stopped by the county was that no approved plan was in place.
Council President Engel’s suggestion in the story that most of the answers were obvious flies in the face of the many residents who came to the previous meeting, as this paper wrote (on May 12) “to blast the council.”
I find Councilman Engel’s view insulting, misleading and reckless.
After the May meeting, there was a meeting between some residents, the borough solicitor and the borough manager. I spoke with the residents after and there is no solution to this problem of stated flooding concerns and property value damage. This is very important as this can cost taxpayers a lot of money to rectify issues; I do not believe the grant funding can be used to fix the mistakes that were made here, all done without proper approval.
Flooding caused by unapproved construction on an adjoining property is serious for the borough taxpayers and the property owner who was still negotiating the easement with the borough.
Background, this was presented three years ago as an 8-foot-wide trail. The borough cleared a 50-foot swath, and then stated that the water company appreciates the large access to their pipes.
I presented my first set of questions to help my constituents, not to take the position of defending council actions. What I found telling in Engel’s reply was it seemed to say, “well, since Meyerson voted for the grant then all is fine.”
I take that as “he’s as guilty as the rest so what’s the problem?”. I look forward to getting replies to the questions and being part of a solution to what happened.
Mitchell Meyerson lives in Chalfont and is a member of its borough council.
Join our readers whose generous donations are making it possible for you to read our news coverage. Help keep local journalism alive and our community strong. Donate today.
