Peters Township Residents Host Meeting to Oppose Home Rule Charter Amendment

Those walking into Wednesday night to listen to speakers regarding flaws surrounding the amendment to the home rule charter being voted on Tuesday in Peters Township were greeted by the opposition with a hand out of their own.

Inside, more than 30 people—including supporters, opposition, commissioners and curious residents—attended the special informative meeting held by Peters Township resident Suzanne Kennedy and her husband Jimmy Moran.

According to Matt Carl and Leslie Peters, attorneys from Blumling and Gusky, LLP, hired by Kennedy to explain the issues with the amendment, voting for this change to go into effect will not stop drilling from happening in Peters.

“Once the referendum is passed it becomes effective and it rescinds any previously enacted inconsistent ordinances, which would include the drilling ordinance previously enacted by the township,” said Peters.

Peters claims that legal precedent shows that if this referendum passes, it will be appealed and most likely overturned. The referendum was written with the help of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund, led by Tom Lindzey.

Peters stated that in every previous case that Lindzey has presented the same arguments regarding the limited rights of corporations included in this referendum, he has been denied by the court.

She also said the amendment is in direct contrast to both the Pennsylvania Municipal Planning Code and the Gas and Drilling Act. In addition, the way the amendment is worded it would prohibit the township from using brine to salt the roads in winter, and would prohibit gas lines to be running to homes for heating purposes or to gas stations.

“There is no gray area here. It is a violation. (Tom Lindzey) knows it is a violation, the group knows it is a violation. I’d just like to be sure the township and the residents of the township know it is a violation. I believe that the township solicitor knows what is going on,” said Peters.

Peters also stated that residents are leaving themselves open to more drilling with less regulations if the referendum passes. According to Peters, the current drilling ordinance would not be enforceable during the time that the amendment is in appeal.

During this time, she said drillers would be able to apply for site specific relief based on the assumption that ultimately the amendment will be found to be illegal.

According to Kennedy, she did not hire Peters because she wants to see drilling all over Peters. Rather she realizes the inevitability of drilling in the region and wants to be certain that if it must be allowed, it is done in the safest, most responsible way possible.

“I feel very strongly that drilling needs to be done properly. I think that ultimately all of this will be resolved federally, not at the state level. We really need to have watch dogs with all of this,” said Kennedy.

The points presented by Peters were not enough to dissuade those in attendance who support the referendum and who want Peters Township residents to make a statement against drilling by voting in favor of this amendment to the home rule charter.

“This is not a perfect process but I will never vote to allow drilling in Peters Township. I just won’t allow it,” said resident Carol Jaworski.

According to Carl, both sides have plenty of arguments they want to make for or against it, but ultimately, the best statement they can make is by heading to the polls Tuesday.

“The way you get your voice heard is by voting,” said Carl.