| |
| MAIN NEWS |
|
Business Directory Now Online!!!
Please visit our kind sponsors |
|
||||||
|
HEADLINES: The July 18 Mountain View school board meeting was full of discussion, action, and one or two pointed accusations. Topics discussed included transportation issues, bonds, booster clubs and a number of other matters. Mr. Mirabelli explained that the district had discussed several times during the budget issue the idea of refinancing the bonds. In February of 2012, the district would once again have this opportunity. The reasoning behind this was due to interest rates being at a historic low; this would be an opportunity for the district to realize some savings. To start the process, the district would need to select a financial adviser. In the past, candidates had been interviewed at the board level, which he said was one popular choice. A second would be to utilize someone an administrator was comfortable with. The third option would be to put out a call for request for proposal, but this could be slightly redundant as the questions placed in the call for proposals would likely be asked during the interview process anyway. The recommendation he made was to conduct interviews. Various board members stated their acceptance of Mr. Mirabelli interviewing candidates, though he confirmed that it would not be he alone. It was said that the board would be made aware of the interview date to decide at their will to participate or not. Dr. Chichura explained that the board would likely be taking action on this during December of that fiscal year. Mr. Mirabelli was to look for people and arrange interviews. The subject of posting for a paraprofessional position for a secondary autistic classroom was broached. This would represent the addition of another position for the district. Seven board members voted against it, and only one in favor. The motion was made to appoint Corey Gesford as boys' basketball coach for the coming school year. Four board members voted against it, and four in favor of it; the motion did not pass. The business office secretary revised job description, originally adopted in November of 2006 and revised in August 2009, was re-adopted. The budget change triggered it, Dr. Chichura explained when asked. The board had re adopted two job descriptions, one due to the removal of a transportation work stipend. With this being removed the position was going back to its former job description. Mr. Griffiths spoke up stating that he did not feel the secretary would be managing the transportation, and expressed umbrage over the term “coordinates” in the description. This might involve talking to bus drivers or dealing with parents, which weren't his responsibility. He didn't think that she should be taken advantage of, he said, whether or not she was part of the union. He recommended that line along with one about the coordination of the field trip and athletic needs be removed, not feeling scheduling buses should be her responsibility. He felt they were stepping over the line, that this was management. It had always been the business manager's position. Mr. Phillips didn't think scheduling was management. A vote was taken about the motion as printed, without the changes. The motion was carried five to three in favor. An item was brought up for discussion regarding a proposed revision on the organizational chart. There had been some changes since then. There was no transportation responsibilities under the business manager on the old one, he said. Another change would be the switch from school nurse to school nurse LPN. Overall he wished to update it to the current situation. Basically, he said it was an organizational chart which should have a lot of board input. Before the August meeting, the administration was to review it to present to the board, with voting for a month after that. Dr. Chichura had sent information out two weeks ago regarding visitors in the school. There was no legal requirement, he said, for the district to allow visitors to the classrooms. There was no local policy regarding this, and he had researched with PSBA and some local policies on the internet and not found another school district which completely restricted visitors. Policies were in place, however, which provided guidelines for allowing visitors to come in, established a timeline for allowing them to explain their need to be in the classroom, and other topics. The purpose of this was to give the administration guidance for how to deal with such a request. The policy would basically require a written request two days in advance, and would allow the administration to accompany the person into the classroom. It would dictate that they could not participate in classroom activities, and that there had to be a good reason for their presence. The second policy, regarding booster organizations, was designed to try and provide some guidance for booster clubs. Currently there was no local policy to provide information to the board or to control them. In order for one to function in the district according to the policy they would have to provide an application to the board, and the board would have to vote to authorize them to function. The board would not get involved with the operation thereof, but they ought to have some guidelines as to their operation and the handling of finances. There would be a required annual financial reporting to the board by each organization regarding their financial situation and balance for that year. As of that time the board had not been requiring any such accounting. It would also prevent any of the booster clubs from utilizing the district's tax free number. Mr. Griffiths spoke up that he felt the dates ought to be considered, as at times clubs didn't realize they needed a booster club until after the season had begun, thus a three week advance requirement could be problematic. He asked if this had been run past the PSBA, and Dr. Chichura replied that it had not due to the fact that such changes generally were not submitted until after they were discussed at the board level. After he pointed out a few items, it was decided that the first reading of that policy would be held off for further information. During the superintendents comments Dr. Chichura spoke about the enrollment at the elementary level. At the kindergarten level there were currently 69 students, and back in May when the realignment of staff was done that had been his projection. However, enrollment of new students was scheduled for the first week of August, and it was thought that most likely a few students would be picked up. In discussion with the elementary principal, the district was considering holding four sections of kindergarten and reducing the third grade classes to only three sections. Third grade had 70 students enrolled. The district would not know about the final enrollment until much later, he said, due to the fact that some students were added but others were removed, and that the district would not really stabilize until after Labor Day. During Mr. Doster's report, he broached the subject of the five handbooks on the agenda for acceptance. The only changes, he said, reflected the organizational changes, such as furloughs. During Mrs. Piptone's report, she wished to speak with the board about the possibility for a grant which would target the high school. The grant would be for up to $42,000, and she wished to just alert the board of its existence. Mrs. Voigt spoke of the first website training, as part of the summer academy. The reading recovery window was coming along, she also reported. The audio system had been installed that day. She hoped that during the year educators from other districts could be invited to come and watch lessons at the school. Also, the Northeast Pennsylvania Reading Association had expressed interest in having a meeting at the school to see the room. Any students involved in the program would have parent permission before they were observed. She felt this would give the school good publicity. The international leader of reading recovery was actually scheduled to visit the school. Two new courses were being written, one a speech and debate course. The curriculum would be approved as part of the Language Arts curriculum, and the class would be an elective for any student grades nine through twelve. The other course would be on contemporary world issues. A visitor asked about the reading recovery program, and she explained it to be a comprehensive program for first graders which has been identified as a highly effective reading program. It was stated that the hot water tank at the elementary school had developed a leak. It was not yet catastrophic, but it could effect the temperature. It was the original tank for the school. It was recommended that a new one be purchased, which would likely be more efficient anyway. The process for obtaining supplies at the secondary level was discussed. Under the new process, the supplies would be kept in a locked room, with an inventory on the School Dude system. When staff needed a supply, he or she would order it from the system, which request would then go to Mr. Doster, who would approve it, and a work order would be dispatched to the maintenance supervisor to deliver it. It was hoped that in time the payment of money to departments for supplies could be eliminated. There was some discussion about new bus contracts. It would be tight, it was stated, to try to eliminate a bus run, especially at that time, so it was recommended that four new positions be posted. The superintendent was requesting the ability to post and advertise the positions, for fear that there would be a scarcity of interest. A visitor spoke up out of concern that if these positions were filled they would only be cut in coming years anyway, and a contractor would have invested the money in a bus. It was asked, and confirmed, that buses had a 72 student capacity. Mrs. Yarrish considered the number of students and wondered why four new contractors were needed, when some buses had room for up to twenty students more. A visitor pointed out that even the children who drove had to be rostered. Dr. Chichura said that there had been the hope to eventually redo the routes. Mr. Griffiths spoke up that he didn't see the rerouting ever happen, calling adding buses the easy way out and leveling accusations at administration for doing so. Mr. Mirabelli felt that the best course of action would be to advertise for four spots, and then look at the situation in the meantime. The consolidation of routes, he continued, was not logistically the easiest thing to do. Mr. Griffiths said that the board was responsible when someone said that they had been hired and bought a bus, and had their route curtailed. He also said that the computerized system worked, but was not implemented. Mr. Zick pointed out that three routes were eliminated in the past. He felt if the bus restructuring were completed now, it would be beneficial. Mr. Mirabelli responded that for the record he was not taking the easy way out, that one of the retirements had just been announced. He felt that advertising the positions was the best recourse, which would provide them room to analyze data. Dr. Chichura rebutted Mr. Griffiths statements, saying that at this point in time it was not possible to reroute the routes. Someone pointed out that these were not new positions, but replacement positions. Mrs. Stine pointed out, when Mr. Griffiths again expressed concern that someone would purchase a bus and then lose the contract the next year, that no one would be forcing them to do so. Further, Mr. Griffiths felt that anyone pursuing the position should be made well aware that it might only be a one year slot. Mrs. Yarrish wondered if advanced awareness of retirement might not be placed in the contract, and it was suggested that this might be put in as two way notification. Posting for the positions was approved. Mr. Mirabelli that when he was contacted he would tell them that it might be only a one year position. It was suggested that if the coming year's bus contracts were to be approved that evening, a notification clause be put in. It was then asked whether the board would speak with the contractors first, and one board member threw out the question of whether the board or the contractors ran the district. Someone asked if the contractors saw the contract prior to signing it, and it was confirmed that they often did not. A visitor then asked what would happen if they refused to sign, and a second visitor stated that as this was their income they had no choice. When the motion was made, the early notification was included within it. There was one vote against it. A visitor pointed out that there had been no fuel discussions for the bus drivers. This, he suggested, might be something else which the district might want to consider, such as a reasonable escalation. The topic of the walking distance was touched upon. The superintendent asked if, when looking at bus routes again, the board would allow the district to consider not transporting students to their homes. Law allows a district not to transport children for up to 1.5 miles for elementary students or 2 miles for secondary students, from home to pick up. There had been objection to this in the past , it was said, due to the increased truck traffic in the area. This was the largest objection against abandoning door to door pickup and allowing the children to be picked up at the distance allowed in the school code. A contractor also pointed out that there were positions on main roads where she would not be comfortable stopping to pick up the children. It was confirmed that there were drop off points. This was not a decision which needed to be made at that time, it was clarified, but rather was a thinking point for the future. A few board members expressed their opinions that safety ought to be prioritized over savings. Another board member pointed out that many parents already brought their children to a given pick up spot, rather than letting them walk. This presumably would occur if the rules were changed. Concern with this was raised, however, due to potential crowding.
Pads Around Lyncott, Not On At the last meeting of the New Milford Township supervisors, cinder and maintenance shed bids had been opened but not acted upon. In the interim, the decision was made to reject all bids due to cost. New bids were sought, without a concrete floor this time. The supervisors opened these that evening, in hopes that something would come in low enough to accept. At the previous meeting there had been three bids on the building, at the current meeting there were only two. The first, from Very's Construction of Nicholson, came in with the shed at $112,565.88, and the garage at $85,831.42, for $198,397.30 total. The second bid was from Doubletree out of New Holland, PA, a division of CB Construction (not the local contractor). The cinder shed came in at $75,750, and the garage at $68,720, for a $144,470 total. That bid stated that it was with concrete floor, which caused mild confusion. The secretary said that their secretary was aware that it was without, and had probably forgotten to cross it out. The lowest bid came in roughly $54,000 less than the previous month. The township's solicitor, Mr. Briechle, suggested that perhaps the concrete bid be opened, to take that into account before awarding the other. This advice was followed. The first concrete bid was from Master's, offering six foot blocks at $60 a piece, two foot pin blocks at $50, and corner blocks at $75 a piece. The second was from Barney & Dickenson, Inc., with six foot blocks at $60 a piece, three foot blocks at $45 a piece, and corner blocks at $60 a piece. The Barney and Dickenson bid was accepted, followed by the Doubletree bid for the buildings. Southwest sent the township a notice of intent for use on Bark'm Squirrel Road, (named for a hunting camp). This was for pad 18, just at the bottom of the Lyncott Landfill. In the meantime paperwork had also been received for the same thing on the Zeffer pad, the Grizzanti pad, the Scott pad, the Roman pad, and the Cramer pad. Permits had been approved by DEP for all of these. Pad 18 was the only one on landfill property, and was not actually on the landfill. Two other pads were included in that area as well, number 20 was on the Roman property. They had originally wanted to run the road through the landfill but supposedly they were now looking to relocate the road to aver this. Pad 19 was also to be redirected to go around the landfill property, the last the supervisors had known. Those permits were just for the water. The company also had Erosion Sediment General Control Permit applications, it was presumed, for putting the pads in. This would include pads 18, 19, and 20, as well as pads 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33 (near the blueberry road area). These others were not right around the landfill area. Mr. Hunter stated that the township was always in desperate need of money, and was looking for some ideas. In the past they'd had to borrow money or raise taxes. Mr. Shibley brought up the idea of an earned income tax. Mr. Briechle explained that, according to his understanding, if someone lived in the township up to one percent tax could be collected by the township. If that resident worked somewhere that the tax was already in place, he was already paying it to the other municipality. His understanding was that it would affect any townsperson living in the township. If the supervisors enacted such a tax, the money would be collected by the township. Someone working where there was no eit however would see an additional tax, but someone working where one existed would see no real difference. At times this was just a moving of money from one township to another. Mr. Briechle said that one nice thing about an eit was that it was a quick money maker. If Blue Ridge enacted their own eit they could take up to half of this tax. It was thought that this was something they should look into; Mr. Briechle said that the vast majority of municipalities had one. He offered to investigate the subject, an offer the supervisors decided to take advantage of. The supervisors had been hashing out a road maintenance agreement with Southwest, which the solicitor had been working on for some time to get things in the township's favor. Southwest had approached the township weeks ago, asking them to enter into a road maintenance agreement. Mr. Briechle said that this was not technically what came about from discussions between he and the company's representatives, that what was negotiated was a non-binding memorandum of understanding. This was not necessarily an agreement but more an understanding between the township and the company in regards to what the company's roles were when they utilize the township roads for access to their various pads and production sites. The company agreed that they would repair any kind of damage that their overweight vehicles did to township roads by employing an excess maintenance plan. The township would reserve its obligations to perform normal maintenance. This would require that Southwest come to the township seven days before they utilized a road with heavy equipment, and identify the road, the use, and a proposed maintenance plan. It also didn't waive any of the townships' right to impose weight limitations. An indemnification clause was included such that if Southwest caused injury in repairing roads the township would be held blameless. The township would have to authorize their fixing of the roads. In the event that the township had to do excess maintenance if the company failed to do so, the township could do it and then bill Southwest for the labor, equipment, and material. The solicitor was content with the deal, as he said the township had three options. One, nothing could be done, two, this understanding could be accepted, or three, a sophisticated bonding process could be pursued. This, he felt, would protect the roads while not binding the township's ability to work. They had offered to build up the roads, but would not have to do so. The roads would have to be maintained in the shape they were in prior to the damage being perpetrated. The motion was made, and a resolution number assigned.
Courthouse Report DEEDS Robert B. and Patricia M. Reeder to Brian E., Sr. and Pamela D. Burke, in Auburn Township for $400,000.00. Clara May (estate) and Carol May (AKA) Carol M. Lyman; Linda Jane and Anthony P., Jr. Litwin; and Esther and Lorne Clarke to Linda Jane Litwin, Carol M. Lyman and Esther Clarke, in Springville Township for one dollar. Clara May (estate) and Carol May (AKA) Carol M. Lyman; Linda Jane and Anthony P., Jr. Litwin; and Esther and Lorne Clarke to Carol M. Lyman, in Springville Township for one dollar. Clara May (estate) and Carol May (AKA) Carol M. Lyman; Linda Jane and Anthony P., Jr. Litwin; and Esther and Lorne Clarke to Linda Jane Litwin, in Springville Township for one dollar. Clara May (estate) and Carol May (AKA) Carol M. Lyman; Linda Jane and Anthony P., Jr. Litwin; and Esther and Lorne Clarke to Esther Clarke, in Springville Township for one dollar. Peter M. and Marilyn K. Ashe to Steven M. and Katherine M. Deriancho, in Forest Lake Township for $170,000.00. John D. and Jennifer L. Gregory to James and Anita Hastings, in Silver Lake Township for $225,000.00. Julianne and James Wildenstein to David J. and Linda L. Hanf, in Forest City for $50,000.00. US Bank (by POA) to Patrick Kurt Kipar, in Auburn Township for $60,000.00. Roger M. and Jeanne C. Dube to Edward J. Kozlowski, Jr. and Amanda S. Marcy, in Clifford Township for $139,500.00. John P. and Arline Drann to JA Drann Family Limited Partnership, in New Milford and Great Bend Townships for one dollar. Dolores Hannigan to Garrett and Mona Anne Hannigan, in Lenox Township for one dollar. Michael K. Hinkley to Ardine, Jr. and Lacy E. Stilloe, in Hallstead Borough for $130,000.00. Kevin R. (AKA) Kevin A. and Katherine (AKA) Catherine A. Evans to John Joseph and Patricia Mavoureen Brennan, in Uniondale Borough for $259,000.00. Robert J. and Barbara Fields and David F. Bianco to David F. and Janette Young Bianco, in Forest City for $2,000.00. Harold Jeffrey Smith (by sheriff) and Berneda Blaisure (by sheriff) to Peoples State Bank of Wyalusing, in Dimock Township for $3,379.04. Connie Marie Giamanco to Mark A. and Kacey Horrigan Lockett, in Silver Lake Township for $2,000.00. Nettie H. Swingle to Jeffrey D., Peggy M., Curtis J. and Jamie Swingle, in Great Bend Township for one dollar. Bonnie Brainard to Bonnie and Kevin Lynn Brainard, in Harford Township for one dollar. George J. and Catherine M. Donovan to John S., Jr., Antonia F. and Megan L. Kintzer, in Herrick Township for $57,500.00. Frederick Bellowons (estate) to Elizabeth C. Fuller, in Rush Township for one dollar. Angela Maria, Alfred H. and Cyrena M. Kuss to Patrick V. Milos, in Harford Township for $138,900.00. Paul David Heller and Susan Kristine Urahn to Paul David Heller, in Herrick Township. MARRIAGES Kenneth Davis, III and Catherine Caterson, both of Montrose. Joshua M. Wood and Chelsi Marie Russell, both of Meshoppen. Joshua David Hunsinger and Lorelle Adell Bomford, both of Nicholson. Jason R. Birtch and Jaimy L. Watson, both of New Milford. Mark A. Golden of Montrose and Brandy M. Oakley of Nicholson. Samuel C. Little and Marie L. Donohue, both of Montrose. Kyle Herbert of Susquehanna and Courtney Twining of Thompson. Chad Hall and Jennifer Brown, both of Montrose. Timothy A. Thorick and Rebekah Ann Evans, both of Binghamton, NY. Thomas W. Chappell and Erika K. Edson, both of Shortsville, NY. Benjamin Shadduck and Patricia A. Albrecht, both of Meshoppen. Timothy R. Premo and Samantha Joy Wickizer, both of Greene, NY. Michael Fitzsimmons and Audrey Lynn Hugli, both of Kingsley. Michael E. Sharon and Melissa Sue Martin, both of Friendsville. Ryan Patrick Miller of Montrose and Amanda Jo Henry of Hallstead. Edward Allen Lawson and Christine Marie Compton, both of Susquehanna. Justin J. Seamans and Jessica Renee Coulombe, both of Susquehanna. BENCH WARRANTS The Susquehanna County Domestic Relations Section has bench warrants for the following individuals as of 9:00 a.m. on July 22, 2011. Craig J. Anderson, Edward R. Ashman, Melanie M. Barber, BillieJean Beemer, Tonya S. Birchard, Douglas Buckman, Howard A. Burns, III, Bradley C. Button, Douglas Carey, Jason J. Carroll, Christopher J. Clark, Randall L. Cox, Heather R. DeBoer, Charles S. Dunn, John F. Feeley, David J. Fischer, John S. Frisbie, Jr., Dustin Godfrey, David Haines, Jr., Shannon J. Hollister, John J. Jenisky, Jr., Christopher J. Kingsbury, Eric C. Kohlhepp, Erik E. Krisovitch, Lee Labor, Charlie J. Legere, Carlos L. Leiser, Lydia M. Marvin, Michael Maryasz, Matthew S. Miller, Donald Palmer, Jeremy Presson, Shane M. Repsher, Perry Rohan, Roy E. Rosenbaum, David J. Shiner, Peter S. Showalter, Eric J. Snell, Justin Thompson, Steven G. Warner, James M. Warner, Steven G. Wormuth. Please contact the Domestic Relations Section at 570-278-4600 ext. 170 with any information on the location of these individuals.
Following is the Susquehanna County sentencing report for July 2011 as submitted by the county District Attorney’s office. Clifford Paul Johnson, 47, of New Milford, PA to 30 days to 23 1/2 months in Susquehanna County Correctional Facility, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee, pay cost of prosecution, pay $500 fine, receive a drug and alcohol evaluation, not to have contact with anyone on supervision, not to enter any establishment whose sole purpose is the sale of alcohol, not to possess firearms for Recklessly Endangering Another Person on November 11, 2009 in Susquehanna Borough. Timothy Graham Gumble, 22, Vestal, NY to 30 days to 18 months in Susquehanna County Correctional Facility, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee, pay a total of $750 in fines, pay cost of prosecution, abide by a 11 p.m. curfew, not to possess weapons for Fleeing or Attempting to Elude Police Officer in Great Bend Township on September 10, 2010. Karl Kevin Marshall, 49, of Springville, PA to 30 days to 6 months in Susquehanna County Correctional Facility, pay $750 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $100 Act 198 fee, pay $100 CAT surcharge, pay $10 EMS fee, attend alcohol safe driving school program, receive a drug and alcohol evaluation for Driving Under the Influence in Springville Township on February 10, 2011. John D. Salansky, 23, of Uniondale, PA to 30 days to 6 months in Susquehanna County Correctional Facility, pay $750 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $100 Act 198 fee, pay $100 CAT Surcharge, pay $10 EMS fee, receive a drug and alcohol evaluation, attend alcohol safe driving school program for Driving Under the Influence in Herrick Township on April 17, 2010. Rory Stephen Sicovitch, 42, of New Milford, PA to 16 months to 36 months in a State Correctional Facility, pay $750 fine, pay $100 Act 198 fee, pay cost of prosecution, pay $250 DNA testing fee and submit sample, not to possess, transport or consume alcoholic beverages, pay restitution to the Susquehanna County Drug Task Force, receive a drug and alcohol evaluation for Delivery of a Controlled Substance in Great Bend Borough on May 10, 2010. Sean Robert Rogenkamp, 25, of New Milford, PA to 90 days to 18 months in Susquehanna County Correctional Facility, serve 45 days incarceration followed by 45 days of home confinement dependent upon good behavior, pay $300 Act 198 fee, pay $1500 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $100 CAT surcharge, pay $10 EMS fee, abide by Pennsylvania Ignition Interlock Law, receive drug and alcohol counseling, attend alcohol safe driving school program for Driving Under the Influence in Montrose Borough on June 19, 2010. Philip Scott Seber, 34, of Susquehanna, PA to 1 year to 2 years in a state correctional facility, receive mental health evaluation and treatment, receive anger management, pay $500 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee, receive drug and alcohol counseling, not to have contact with the victim in this case for Simple Assault in Forest City Borough on March 24, 2011. Mr. Seber also received 2 years probation to run consecutive to the above sentence, pay $250 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee, not to possess firearms, not to have contact with the victim in this case for Recklessly Endangering Another Person in Forest City Borough on March 24, 2011. Edwin Paul Bell, 46, of Kirkwood, NY to 12 months to 24 months in a State Correctional Facility, pay $500 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee, receive a mental health evaluation, not to have contact with the victim in this case for Resisting Arrest in Great Bend Township on June 22, 2009. Mr. Bell also received 12 months probation to run consecutive to the above sentence, pay $300 fine, pay cost of prosecution, for Disorderly Conduct in Great Bend Township on June 22, 2009. Douglas Thomas Soller, 36, of Montrose, PA to 6 months to 23 1/2 months in Susquehanna County Correctional Facility, to run concurrent with all other sentences, receive a mental health evaluation and treatment, not to have contact with the victim in this case, receive a drug and alcohol evaluation, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee, pay $400 fine, pay cost of prosecution for Simple Assault in Great Bend Township on May 7, 2011. Mr. Soller also received 2 months to 23 months in Susquehanna County Correctional Facility to run concurrent with all other sentences, pay $350 fine, pay cost of prosecution, not to have contact with the victim in this case for Institutional Vandalism in Great Bend Township on May 7, 2011. Finally, Mr. Soller received 6 months to 23 1/2 months in Susquehanna County Correctional Facility to run concurrent with all other sentences, pay $350 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee for Escape on May 7, 2011 in Great Bend Township. Jessie Steven Erickson, 20, of Montrose, PA to 12 months to 24 months in a state correctional facility to run concurrent with other cases, pay $300 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee for Theft by Unlawful Taking in Gibson Township on May 4, 2011. Mr. Erickson also received 12 months to 24 months in a state correctional facility to run concurrent with other case, pay $50 criminal justice enhancement act fee, pay $500 fine, pay cost of prosecution, receive drug and alcohol counseling, pay restitution to the victim for Theft by Unlawful Taking in Jackson Township on May 4, 2011. Daniele Marie Upright, 31, of New Milford, PA to: 6 months to 2 years in a state correctional facility to run concurrent with other sentences, pay $200 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee, pay restitution to the victim for Theft by Unlawful Taking in New Milford Township on June 21, 2010. 6 months to 2 years in a state correctional facility to run concurrent with other sentences, pay $150 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee, pay restitution to the victim for Theft by Unlawful Taking in New Milford Township on June 20, 2010. 4 months to 12 months in a state correctional facility, pay $100 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee for Theft by Unlawful Taking in New Milford Borough on September 26, 2010. 6 months to 2 years in a state correctional facility, pay $200 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee, pay restitution to the victim for Theft by Unlawful Taking in New Milford Borough on October 7, 2010. 5 years probation to run consecutive to the other sentences, pay $200 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee for Receiving Stolen Property in New Milford Township on December 15, 2010. 6 months to 2 years in a state correctional facility , pay $250 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee, receive mental health counseling, receive drug and alcohol counseling for Theft by Unlawful Taking in Bridgewater Township on November 19, 2010. 15 months to 5 years in a state correctional facility, pay $350 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee for Aggravated Assault in Bridgewater Township on November 22, 2010. 18 months to 5 years in a state correctional facility, pay $350 fine, pay cost of prosecution, pay $50 Criminal Justice Enhancement Act fee for Contraband in Bridgewater Township on November 20, 2010.
Clifford Twp. Police Report BURGLARY On June 4 Patrolman James Smith investigated a burglary to a residence at 1147 Jones Road Clifford Township belonging to Kirk and Diana Smith who are summer residents. The homeowners found their back basement window smashed. After rummaging through their drawers, the burglar(s) stole approximately $2500.00 worth of DVD’s. Under investigation at this time. ANIMAL CALL On June 4 Patrolman Timothy Cramer received a complaint from a homeowner at 868 Church Street Clifford. Mrs. Lori Cook stated that a black bear has been a nuisance over the past several weeks and getting into the garbage. Mrs. Cook was provided with tips on how to keep the bear away and the number for the local State game commission. MVA On June 5 Patrolman Timothy Cramer was dispatched to a motor vehicle accident on the 1100 block of Lake Idle Wild Rd. A ford pick-up truck operated by William Resseguie of Harford was crossing a blind corner on to TR Williams’s road and was struck by a motor-cycle operated by John Canfield of South Gibson. No reported injuries to either party, but the motorcycle had to be towed. FRAUD On June 6 Patrolman James Smith investigated a theft by unlawful taking involving Dr. Russell Swetter of Clifford. Mr. Swetter reported to police that his credit card was being used at Sam’s Club in Ocoee Florida on 05-25-2011. The total charges were estimated at $2628.00. Unfounded at this time. BURGLARY On June 8 Patrolman Timothy Cramer investigated a break-in to a cabin in the area of 1084 Jones Road. The cabin owners, Donald and Judy Hess of Willow Grove, PA, stated that their summer cabin was found broken into on June 6 by a concerned neighbor. Entry was made through a back window that was pried open and smashed. Suspect(s) rummaged through the cabin but no property appeared to be stolen. Damages to the window used for entry was valued at approximately $150.00. Under investigation at this time. DUI On June 11 Patrolman James Smith responded to a DUI crash located at the intersection of Union Dale Road and SR0247. Upon arrival Police spoke to the driver, Mr. John Carl Phillips. Phillips was heading South on Union Dale Road while operating his vehicle, a Dodge pick up truck, at speeds greater then the posted speed limit when he began skidding out of control for approximately 301 feet before hitting a tree and fence located in a residence yard on the opposite side of the roadway. Phillips did show signs of impairment and was placed under arrest for suspicion of driving while intoxicated. Phillips was transported to Marian Community Hospital for a blood alcohol content. Charges pending at this time. THEFT On June 24 Chief Donald Carroll investigated a theft by unlawful taking at the Cavallaro residence located at 1316 Elk Dale Rd, Clifford Twp. Mr. Cavallaro, the property owner, stated that he returned home on the 24th and found his reflectors at the end of his driveway along his stone wall missing. This occurred between June 17 and June 24. The reflectors had an estimated value of $40.00. Unfounded at this time. DUI On June 24 Chief Donald Carroll responded to a one car motor vehicle accident on SR0171 near Upper Still Water Road, Clifford Township. Upon arrival Police made contact with the driver, Amanda Reph from Dickson City. Reph did show several signs of impairment. After submitting to a field sobriety test Reph was placed in Police custody and transported to Marian Community Hospital for a blood content. Reph stated that she was in route to a friend’s house when she lost control of her vehicle leaving several hundred feet of skid marks while hitting the guard rails and stopping. Charges pending at this time. ALARM On June 6 officers responded to a residential alarm located at 3730 Church Street, Clifford Township. The alarm company stated it was a kitchen door entry. Upon arrival officers spoke to the home owner which arrived on scene shortly after officers arrived. The owner stated that it was a malfunction with the alarm. Everything was secure. BURGLARY On June 27 Chief Donald Carroll responded to the Eastern Industries Building located on SR0374 in the 5000 block for a theft of copper wire. Upon arrival officers spoke to manager Ellis Arthur. Ellis directed police to the electrical contractors located near the area where the wire was taken. Officers spoke to Mark Paules, an electrician on site. Mark showed police a white trailer which is parked near the back area of the yard. The trailer’s rear door pad lock was cut with a lock cutter. Several roles of black coated copper wire were taken. Value of the copper wire is estimated at $5600.00. Under investigation at this time.
News
|
Living
|
Sports
|
Schools
|
Churches
|
Ads
|
Events
Military | Columns | Ed/Op | Obits | Archive | Subscribe
|
