Great Bend Borough held their monthly meeting on the 3rd of July this month, with all members of the council in attendance, with the exception of Councilman Jerry MacConnell and only two members of the public in attendance.

At the beginning of the meeting, it was noted that an Executive Session due to personnel issues would be added to the night’s agenda. Upon the announcement of the Executive Session, the session was briefly held. The Council stated that issue had been resolved at that time. Later, an additional Executive Session was held, very briefly, to discuss a scheduling issue.

Mr. Wellman, a local resident, was in attendance to discuss whether or not the Borough would hold “Great Bend Days” this year. Rick Franks stated that they were not holding specifically “Great Bend Days” but that they have since set aside the third weekend in July for sidewalk days/sales that residents are more than welcome to participate in.

Next in line for discussion were permits, parks, and roads. Council noted that one assessment permit was issued to Mr. Richard Flynn. Also, the Council wished to note that the new merry-go-round had arrived, but was not yet installed.

Moving right along to roads, the members of Council discussed in length the project and bids for Mountain Vista Lane and Orchard Road. Following a motion to approve the one and only bid for the project, a lengthy discussion was held as to where the $100,000 plus would come from. Not wanting to “wipe out” the street fund completely, the Council agreed to put down a portion of the money from the Impact Fees and borrow the rest.

It was also noted that the water lines on Washington Street that were being redone by the Pennsylvania American Water Company are now finished with the exception of the sidewalk.

It was also noted that the Borough was working on obtaining the permit for the new storage building, and also that bids for paving the garage/police parking lot were being advertised and due by the 6th of August 2014. Finally, on the last note of roads, the water issue on Hayes Street was also discussed and will be addressed accordingly with proper drainage, that the Council said should cost no more than $1,000.

Police Chief Jon Record then took the floor to discuss the monthly police report. He stated that there had been seventeen traffic citations and that the police department had given out twenty-one traffic warnings. There were five incidents other than routine-traffic stops. There were also two arrests made, the first being for drug possession and drug paraphernalia, the second arrest was for a DUI. Police Chief Record also relayed to the Council that all of the details were finished on the new police car and that at this point they are completing the transfer.

There was discussion regarding “National Night Out,” which is to be held at the New Milford Park this year on August 5th, between five and seven p.m. Chief Record stated that the event is getting “bigger and bigger” every year and that Great Bend Police would be participating in the event and will have their own booth set up, where they will be doing child fingerprinting. Great Bend Borough Council then made a motion to donate to the Police Department money to purchase promotional handouts for the event.

The Council then moved on to the Codes portion of the Agenda, where they stated that four property owners would be delivered letters from the police. The Council also wanted to let the public know that trash must be placed in secured containers and not just left in bags on properties.

There was also much in depth discussion regarding a Trehab project that would involve the placement of a “half-way house.” Secretary Sheila Guinan wanted to make note of the fact that it would not house violent sex-offenders or people who have committed violent crimes, but that it would be housing men. It would also be monitored and a curfew put in place. After a lengthy discussion in which Council members stated a number of concerns, they decided that a town meeting should occur in which the public could give thoughts and opinions on the matter and also, where they could receive more information on the subject.

Great Bend Borough Council’s next meeting is scheduled to take place on Thursday, August 7th, 2014 at 7:00 p.m.

It was a dark and stormy night …

The Harford Township Supervisors gathered on the evening of July 8th with a few friends and neighbors under threat of tornados to consider a sparse agenda, but one that quickly ballooned into debates on roads and sewers.  Barely 20 minutes along and the lights went out, then the rains came, the wind, the lightning.  Chairman Doug Phelps and Secretary and Supervisor Sue Furney, both members of the local fire company, considered whether to call an immediate recess.  Instead, the Supervisors decided to continue, for a while, in the gathering darkness.

The formal agenda was easily disposed of: an agreement on a “Dirt & Gravel” grant was signed; 3 ordinances will be published allowing the township to leave the county Council of Governments (COG) in favor of JHA, the local firm that promises to handle building and sewer permits more efficiently; and a resolution to formally establish Plank Road as a township thoroughfare.  In that last case, Ms. Furney said that some arrangements with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation will be facilitated by the measure, which recognizes the turnback of the road from the state in 1984.

The Supervisors also agreed to a year-long waiver of the township’s noise ordinance for a new natural gas wellpad on Route 547 between Harford village and Kingsley.

The rest of the meeting was devoted to problems with the roads and the sewer.

One resident of the Tyler Lake area said that the project completed last year to divert water from Tyler Lake Road into the “eddy” on the north side of the road instead of directly into the lake has never worked right.  He showed the Supervisors pictures of water and sediment flowing into the lake during a recent storm.  The Supervisors agreed to have another look at the area, perhaps with a view to installing a sluice pipe that an engineer on the project claimed wouldn’t be necessary.

Mr. Phelps described the work of the road crews so far this season, concentrating on the major roads in the 3 sections of the township before returning to work on the smaller roads.  The newest Supervisor, Conrad Owens, said that his study of the township’s problems centers on water, and how to keep it from washing out road surfaces.  He said that the township has more than 325 sluice pipes that need attention, and seemed confident that dealing with clogged and broken pipes over the next few years should help to keep the roads in good condition.  In some cases, the gas exploration companies may be able to help.

Mr. Phelps described the problems with the sewer system that broke out just ahead of the Independence Day holiday in the Tingley Lake area, due to a blockage in the main line on Tingley Lake Road.  He, Mr. Owens, and Joe Sheposh, the sewer system maintenance employee, spent long hours before, during and after the holiday clearing the blockage, replacing pumps and seals.  J.B. Birch was called in several times to pump out basins where pumps were not working.  And Rock Estabrook was brought in to help fix a break in the line that caused raw sewage to spill into Tingley Lake.

As a result of the sewer system problems, the township’s stock of the old-style Hydromatic pumps was nearly exhausted.  Some of those pumps need to be available to replace pumps at the truck stop and the fairgrounds.  So the Supervisors agreed to purchase 4 new ones from a local supplier, if they are still available, at about $5,000 apiece.

With the storm still hovering over the township, reports coming in about downed trees and power lines, and the room getting darker all the time, Mr. Phelps called for a recess until the following Tuesday.  The continuation will allow for more debate on roads and sewers; more information may also be available on issues raised this time.

By the time you read this, Part II will have been completed.  So be sure to stay tuned for the next episode in this thrilling story.

The Susquehanna County Commissioners held their first of two monthly meetings on Wednesday, the 9th of July. Commissioners Alan Hall and Michael Giangrieco were both in attendance for the meeting.

Following the usual business of approving the Agenda and ratifying the Cash-disbursement journal entries, as well as seminar requests, the Commissioners moved to advertise several different items for sale, including a 1989 John Deere Tractor, thirty-four LCD monitors, and a 2004 BMW.

Next, Commissioner Giangrieco made a motion to approve repairs to County Bridge #37 in Rush Township and County Bridge #40 in Gibson Township. The two projects would cost approximately $34,000-$43,000, and would come out of the Liquid Fuels Funds.

Thomas Jagel and Paige Huscha, both of Montrose, were then hired, per a motion by Commissioner Giangrieco, to the full-time positons of Dispatcher Trainee. Maggie McNamara of Friendsville, was hired for the full-time positon of Administrative Assistant to the Chief Clerk, while Salene Herman, of Montrose, was hired for the full-time position of 2nd Deputy Prothonotary.

Awaiting the hiring of a new Warden, Nicholas Conigliaro will then be transferred to the position of Community Corrections Officer, a position that supervises bail and operational functions of the jail, as well as people who are currently on work release.

Jordan Smith of Montrose was also hired to full-fill a part-time position of Corrections Officer, while Corrections Officers Carrie Guzy, Emily Gow, Jamie Plymill, Curtis Walker, and Ronald Gregory would be given open full-time positions, in place of the part-time positions they previously held. On a different note, a motion was made to approve the resignation of Justin Poklemba from full-time Corrections Officer to part-time.

Commissioner Giangrieco then made a motion to appoint Chris Caterson of Montrose to the Susquehanna County Planning Commission for a four-year term, beginning July 9th and ending December 31st, 2007. This motion was then seconded by Commissioner Hall.

Finally, the Commissioners arrived at the Public Comment section of the meeting, where there were a number of people wishing to speak. Several comments were made from Ms. Vera Scroggins, regarding the use of Act 13 money within the County. She began by asking if the money could be used for surveys and studies regarding things such as noise, dust, or drilling. Commissioner Hall stated that, from what he understands, Act 13 money could not be used for such things. She then asked whom the proper authorities were to discuss the usage of Act 13 monies and Commissioner Hall pointed her in the right direction. Mr. Craig Stevens, another local in attendance, also had discussion regarding the Act 13 money. He wondered whether or not the funds could be used to form a database to better and more promptly inform the public of issues and locations of drill sites.

Following what was said to be a ‘large explosion” at the Mead site in Bridgewater Township, another concern of Ms. Scroggins specifically was the number of violations that have occurred in the local oil and gas industry, stating that there have been over nine hundred violations since 2007. She then inquired where the best place would be to contact in times of uncertainty, to which Commissioner Hall stated that the public could contact Emergency Management.

Public Comment then closed shortly thereafter, with the second monthly meeting set to take place Wednesday, July 23rd, 2014 at 9:00 a.m. in the meeting room of the Susquehanna County Courthouse.  

Earlier this year I had the opportunity to sit down with District Attorney Jason Legg and Sheriff Lance Benedict concerning the growing problem of substance abuse in Susquehanna County. The idea for a story on drug abuse in the county was an outgrowth of a suggestion from a reader. Perceptive readers are aware that the District Attorney has a regular column in this paper and that drugs/alcohol have been the main or tangential subject of many of his columns during the first half of this year. There appears to be an increasing amount of substance abuse in the county, even accounting for population growth. For those who believe in the existence of immutable truths the unchanging nature of man’s flawed nature, in combination with negative exogenous circumstances exploited by drug pushers, accounts for much of the documented increase in substance abuse through criminal justice statistics.

I posited to the District Attorney and Sheriff the idea that heroin and prescription painkillers are the two main sources of serious drug abuse in this county. D.A. Legg added marijuana as a drug problem ever present. Then he explained marijuana’s link with the “harder” drugs, heroin and prescription opiates/pain killers, the use of which has exploded over the last year or two.

Typically teens get involved with alcohol as their first drug of choice, graduate to marijuana, and—if not turned around—move on to heroin and/or opiate prescription drugs in the quest for ever greater highs and a chemical escape from reality. In this continuing series of articles I propose to explore the inter-related problems of prescription drug abuse and heroin, as well as circle back to the problem of alcohol abuse in Susquehanna County.

The focus of this article is marijuana: the cultural ignorance and myths surrounding it, the devastating effects of recreational marijuana usage, and a peek at the future. This article sets out facts about the marijuana issue that readers may have forgotten, or perhaps never knew. For those readers—if any—with first-hand knowledge of marijuana usage, you possess knowledge of which I shall never fully comprehend since this entire story is based upon research, conversations, and interviews.

Think of marijuana as an unwanted houseguest who came to visit circa 50 years ago and never left. Instead it found a comfortable and increasingly welcome place to put down roots much as a parasite. The hosts into whose the lives it was introduced then oft-times introduced even more unsavory “friends” to exact ever greater damage.

It’s ironic that 50 years ago, as marijuana was bursting on the scene symbolically representative of the counter-cultural revolution, Dr. Terry Luther issued the first Surgeon General’s Report on Smoking and Health. That report is widely credited with laying the foundation for tobacco control efforts nationally. It is no accident that in this day and age tobacco smoking is heavily regulated, taxed, and even generally prohibited in public places. Incorrigible tobacco smokers are viewed as pariahs who are polluting the air and willfully menacing the health of innocents condemned to breathe the same air.

Yet, the trajectory for marijuana usage has moved in the exact opposite direction of tobacco‘s. Although a recent Pennsylvania survey shows that state residents still continue to view marijuana smoking as less moral than tobacco smoking, the trend line is clear. With each passing moment fewer and fewer Commonwealth residents oppose the use of marijuana on moral grounds. (Pennsylvanians overwhelmingly believe, along with some medical providers, that marijuana does have limited medicinal uses.)

Today few people dispute the ill effects of tobacco use, unlike 50 years ago when the first Surgeon General’s Report on the subject was made public. But smoking marijuana is NOT safer than smoking tobacco and to consider its use less serious is a very serious mistake. First of all, marijuana users often begin at a young age - 12 is not uncommon. That marijuana lowers the IQ of young people has been anecdotally apparent for years. And in a 2012 study published by the National Academy of Sciences, entitled “Persistent cannabis users show neuropsychological decline from childhood to midlife,” the study’s conclusion was that repeated marijuana use by teenagers lowers their IQ . . . permanently! “Further, cessation of cannabis use did not fully restore neuropsychological functioning among adolescent-onset cannabis users. Findings are suggestive of a neurotoxic effect of cannabis on the adolescent brain.”

It is clear to all but those who are incoherent that adolescents lack the mental maturity of their elders and that they have an underdeveloped sense of responsibility. These deficiencies are not merely attributable to adolescents having had an insufficient repertoire of experience from which to draw as they make decisions, it is also because of physiological development, or perhaps better expressed as the lack thereof. The human brain is not fully developed until a person reaches the chronological age of 25. (Ever wonder why car rental agencies won’t rent out a car to anyone under 25!) With the seat of decision-making still developing until 25, it is no wonder that substance abuse interferes with the brain’s proper functioning and development; impairments become permanent. The criminal justice system recognizes all of the above. Still, most youthful substance abusers remain unaware or in denial of the consequences of substance abuse.

There are, of course, numerous anecdotal reports of marijuana smokers tending to be less successful in scholastic studies, long-term relationships, and chosen careers. For at least some significant number of “pot users” life is tuned out and they become “pot heads,” cognitively categorized by others as losers.

Many other ill effects are associated with marijuana use. Tangible negatives can be tallied in many categories, but perhaps the biggest negative associated with it is the loss of opportunity. The “opportunity cost” is the cost not only of the drug in monetary terms, but the loss of time, the loss of creativity and productivity, and the loss of self-investment as one could have strived for tangible accomplishments in life-skills, career-skills, and spirituality. Instead, dissipating life’s energy to remain anesthetized on a mind-altering substance which purpose is generally recreational (chemical escapism) robs not only the individual of self-esteem, but robs civil society of the vast potential for good that the user could have contributed.

Marijuana is the most commonly used illicit drug, with an estimated 17.4 million users nationwide. A fraction of that number actually uses marijuana for its medicinal properties and legalization for that purpose has been realized in more than 20 states, with the list inexorably growing. Nevertheless, the vast majority of users, including those in Susquehanna County, see marijuana usage as a normal recreational activity.

How does marijuana usage achieve “normalized” status? Fifty years ago marijuana usage symbolized rebelliousness, nonconformity, and staking one’s claim in counterculture. Hollywood picked up on that trendiness and glamorized marijuana. With glamorization came popularity; with popularity came tolerance. Tolerance begat acceptance. The rest of the story has already played out in Colorado and Washington State where acceptance brought decriminalization, medical legalization, and finally regulated legalization (normalization) for recreational purposes. One might expect that this script will be repeated in state after state until marijuana is legal—and taxed—in every state.

On an individual level marijuana usage is normalized on a micro level. Teens not only emulate other teens who are users, but in some case their parents. What many readers may not realize is that the marijuana of today has little resemblance to the drug of the 1960’s and 70’s. The narco industry has greatly “improved” their product in the intervening years. The 70’s marijuana is a mere ghost of the product today, with the pot being moved today many, many times stronger than its predecessors. The consequences for teen users today are devastating by comparison, even if the teen user or those around him are not cognizant of those consequences. The consequences may not be apparent for years—or ever, if the user doesn’t even realize the opportunity cost of his bad decision to become a regular user of the drug. Any good feeling the user derives is only in the immediate, not in the intermediate or far distant future when the user may or may not connect the habit to the life-destroying consequence.

Individual users living in the rural environs of Susquehanna County may not have too much to worry about as far as being busted while smoking their pot—if only they could confine their habit to that small segment of their life while remaining disconnected from others. However, humans do not usually live hermetic lives. Those busted for marijuana are often caught in the commission of another crime, such as driving under the influence, theft, breaking-and-entering, etc. Almost to a person, those in the Susquehanna County Jail have been accused or convicted of a crime which has a connection to their drug habit, or to a past which connects their present circumstance to prior drug usage.

Marijuana is by far the premier gateway drug to harder drugs. Even as alcohol is usually the gateway to marijuana, marijuana usage seems almost necessarily a prerequisite for graduation to hard drug use. Every school is this county has anti-drug programs in place; the county has a comprehensive substance abuse program, and various social services are in place to help those who have a problem with marijuana. (And let’s be clear, if you’re reading this in Pennsylvania, and you possess or use marijuana you have a drug problem.)

So how is the marijuana problem to be properly handled? Solutions have usually centered around (1) law enforcement strategies to cut off supply and/or take down dealers and users; (2) rehabilitative strategy with medical care for what is perceived as addictive behavior; and (3) decriminalization, and eventual legalization with a strategy to tax the behavior while taking the profit away from organized crime. Of course, none of these strategies has been particularly effective. Each has its own drawbacks and limitations, which will be expanded upon in future articles.

I asked District Attorney Legg and Sheriff Benedict what their jobs would be like if substance abuse problems (the root cause requiring criminal justice interventions) suddenly disappeared from Susquehanna County. D.A. Legg said he would no longer need an Assistant D.A. and his job would essentially be nothing more than a part-time job. His court case-load would be reduced by 90%, he estimated. D.A. Legg was absolutely unequivocal about this, “Drugs cause crime. The vast majority of my caseload relates to the fruits of drug and alcohol abuse—DUIs, thefts, burglaries, assaults, criminal mischief, robberies—and the whole panoply of bad choices that people make while intoxicated.”

Likewise for Sheriff Benedict, the disappearance of drug and alcohol abuse in the county would eliminate most of his workload. Deputies would likely be let go, jail staff reduced, and jail nearly emptied. The one class of predators who would likely remain, both the Sheriff and D.A. opined, would be the sexual predators, a subset of criminals who seem single-minded in their focus and able to operate even without a connection to exogenous chemical substances.

But if school education and societal forces, including enforcement actions, are insufficient to slow down—let alone contain—the onslaught of marijuana use, what forces may positively impact the current users and future generations of users? Part II will delve into that along with an opening exploration of the prescription pain killer epidemic and its association with heroin. Stay tuned.

Mr. Chamberlain presided over the July 7th meeting of the Montrose borough council, in council president Mr. Lamont’s stead. Mr. Lamont, Mr. Schuster, and Mr. Pickett were absent that evening, a fact which would become very relevant shortly thereafter.

During the discussion of receipts, Ms. Skinner asked about Impact monies. Mr. Granahan said that these funds would be put into either a capital fund or the general account. Mr. Chamberlain thought it went into a capital account. Ms. Skinner asked if there would be discussion before it was spent. Mr. Granahan responded that there always was, and Mr. Chamberlain pointed out that they had to document where it was spent. Mr. Reimel noted that there was an impact fund designation, a special place in which the funds were put. The borough retained a residual balance, it was confirmed, from 2013.

During Mr. DiPhillips report, he related that the PA One calls were rolling in daily. This was kind of time consuming, going out and marking all of the pipes and lines. The month prior, council had requested him to get a price for curbing to address water issues on Wilson Street. He had done so, and reviewed it briefly with council. He mentioned the options of going with a contractor and purchasing their own curb forms. He said that if council wanted to continue to do curb projects, a contractor would cost $20 a foot. Mr. Chamberlain asked where the water would go, wondering if they were talking about putting in extra catch basins and where the water would go. Mr. DiPhillips did not think this would create a problem, as it crossed Wilson and then day lighted. Mr. Reimel said that just about everybody on the low side of that street parked their vehicles on that side. He wondered how curbing it would affect the parking for those people. Mr. DiPhillips agreed that it would have an effect. They could change the curb to better accommodate those without driveways, he said, but Mr. Reimel pointed out that doing so would encroach on those property owners’ yards. Otherwise they would have to park in the travel lane, which they could technically be ticketed for. Ms. Skinner said that most of the people there had driveways. Mr. Reimel said that if they were to continue the discussion, he would like to see Mr. DiPhillips put paint on the road so that they knew precisely where the curb would go. Mr. Chamberlain suggested that the homeowners be contacted as well.

In response to a question about how many homes would be affected, Ms. Skinner suggested that only one of the homes didn’t have a driveway. Mr. Reimel said that they could put a drop curb in front of that home. Ms. Skinner asked how the sidewalk entrance would be treated. Mr. DiPhillips responded that there would be a slight dip in the curb. Mr. Chamberlain felt that the matter should be brought in front of Mr. Lamont, and reiterated a belief that council should talk to the homeowners before a continuation of the discussion at the next meeting.

Mr. DiPhillips related a call he received from the county maintenance man. That man wanted him to ask council about installing crosswalks, one on Chenango Street at the intersection of Pine Street, and the other at the intersection of Lake Avenue and Prospect Street near the old jail. Neither was a mid block crossing. Mr. Reimel said Chenango Street was a state road, but Mr. DiPhillips replied that he had been informed this would not be a problem so long as it was not a mid-block crossing. The crosswalks were motioned and approved pending Ms. O’Malley’s review.

Mr. DiPhillips remarked that the plow he was running on the borough’s truck was tearing the roads up horribly. He said that he would like to get some facts and figures on trading the plow in for another one.

Council had spoken in the past about putting a fence up behind its property to keep people from walking there. A price had been obtained for the section from the exit down. It would be a six foot wood or vinyl fence. Council decided in favor of the vinyl.

During his report, Chief Smith said that the holiday had gone well, without major incidents. He asked if there was any update on the new vehicle. Mr. Chamberlain asked when they would need to submit something to obtain a 2015 vehicle. When Chief Smith responded that it would need to be submitted the next month, Mr. Chamberlain proposed that it be made an action item for the next meeting.

The Cool Cow, Chief Smith related, was offering to make small ice cream coupons available for the cops to give to children they saw wearing bicycle or skateboard helmets. It would be positive reinforcement.

Council went to vote on this, but a visitor pointed out that since Mr. Granahan had stepped out, council no longer had a quorum. For the rest of the meeting, therefore, they couldn’t act on anything.

One bid had been received regarding the Memorial Park restroom. However, without a quorum they couldn’t accept or reject it. Mr. Chamberlain confirmed that the bid was in the range they were expecting. Mr. DiPhillips was going to do a fair amount of the site work. Mr. Chamberlain suggested that they would have to have a mid month meeting to address such items. There had also only been one bid for the liquid fuels surface treatment and micro surfacing bid, from Vestal Asphalt.

The borough had named Council of Governments as their Pennsylvania state uniform commercial code official. In order to change this, they would need to make a new ordinance naming Joe Hunt Associates to the position. Until that was in place, Hunt Associates could not do codes work- although the company could still do the zoning work. COG would continue to do the codes work until the process was taken care of.

Mr. David Breese was present to discuss the subject of a burn ordinance. He said he had been a resident of the town for quite a while, and he had started complaining back in 2012 about burning issues. They were tired, he related, of the vapors, stench, etc. from people using burn barrels or open burning. He didn’t feel he should have to shut windows and wonder if they ought to hang out laundry or not, based on another person’s burning habits. He felt that a language change could occur in regulations that would give the police more power of enforcement. Mr. Reimel said there was something in the borough’s zoning which stated that people couldn’t burn noxious wet food items, but they could burn papers. Some people burned all sorts of items in barrels, including plastic. He felt that maybe it was time to add to the zoning, and ban garbage burning fires town wide. The ban wouldn’t include campfires or barbecues. He also pointed out that there was a nuisance ordinance, and that it didn’t matter if somebody was burning something, or setting off a can of lacquer spray, what the resident was experiencing could count as a nuisance. Some of the fumes were toxic fumes. In the meantime, while council was debating whether to change an ordinance on the books, he would like the see the police enforce such incidents under the nuisance ordinance. If the police couldn’t enforce the violation, they would have the information to hand on to the zoning officer. It was confirmed that all of the officers were to be informed that there was a new protocol for this. Mr. Breese thanked those present, and the police.

Mr. Earle Wootten spoke about a how the parking on upper Locus Street was sometimes a challenge. When there were events at the Community Foundation or the Bible Conference, people parked on the street. He had a proposal to make that evening, that the Foundation give the borough enough of their lawn to make it possible for the borough to put in parallel parking. If they did that, he could fix his sidewalk, he said. He brought with him a drawing of the plan, made by John Puzo. Under the plan, there would be eight spots placed there. This would mean that snow removal would be one quick shot. There would be a straight new sidewalk. He thought it was a great solution, if people parallel parked there on the street it would avoid traffic congestion concerns. Mr. Reimel said they had looked at the plan, and it all looked doable. And, he continued, this would be another new curbing project. He suggested that the borough could absorb the bill for bringing the curb down from Lake Avenue, if the Community Foundation was donating the land.

Ms. O’Malley asked about parking meters. Mr. Reimel said he would rather not, and she agreed she would rather not as well but that all borough parking had meters, and how would they exempt those locations. Mr. Reimel spoke of parking at the borough park which didn’t, but Ms. O’Malley saw a difference. The question was asked how often the parking was bad enough that it led to parking there. Ms. O’Malley expressed concern that if the borough created parking there, people who worked in Montrose would park there to walk to their given location. She pointed out that there were some school instructors who parked between the fire hall and the courthouse and then carpooled to the school.

Mr. Wootten asked for some direction. The solicitor said she was opposed, though she didn’t get a vote. Mr. Wootten said he had the parking he needed, but his problem was that he couldn’t clean up his lot because of other people parking on his property. Mr. Chamberlain said he wasn’t opposed to the parking, it had been discussed before. Ms. Skinner opined that it was a good tradeoff. It was suggested the cars could be chalked for two hour enforcement. Ms. O’Malley reiterated her opposition to putting uniform parking up there. She felt that current parking problems there weren’t frequent enough to warrant the action.

Mr. Wootten asked if there was another way to create a barrier between parking and his property. It was suggested that the property could still be curbed, where it was. If the parking was changed, council would be looking to curb it regardless. Mr. Reimel said no parking signs could also be posted. Mr. Wootten said that the Foundation wouldn’t be opposed to curbing it as it was, the important thing to them was keeping people from parking on their property (which really had an unsafe sidewalk they couldn’t fix until the parking situation was fixed). Mr. Reimel requested Mr. DiPhillips mark that location as a visual aid as well. For reference purposes, Mr. Chamberlain asked him to also look at what it would cost them to do it the other way.

There was a brief discussion regarding meter parking. Apparently some people had turned in notes, some of them “colorful”, regarding the situation. It was suggested, however, that other people liked the meters and that they served their purpose in turning over the parking spots for patrons to the businesses. A visitor proposed that the borough speak with the commissioners about parking, opining that the county was putting their parking problem on the backs of the borough.

Joe Hunt attended the meeting that evening. He had hoped to ask council for a decision that night with regards to the conditional use application, though he had not known that council wouldn’t have a quorum. The entity had met with the planning commission, and he believed the commission had written a recommendation in favor of approval - it was confirmed that they had. Mr. Hunt’s group had hoped to close on the property the next day, and to file a building permit application with COG on Thursday. They would need evidence of the borough’s permission to do so, however. He passed out some new elevation plans, and discussed proposed renovations. The most prominent would be a new entryway which would be vaulted. The uses for which they were seeking conditional use approval were in a letter previously submitted. These included business offices, a meeting hall, retail businesses, health services, and service establishments. He requested adding a restaurant to the list as well, feeling it would be good for the building to offer one food service (but to limit it to one). All of those uses were permitted by right under C-1 zoning, but once they were put together under one roof it became multiple use, and that required the nonconforming use.

Ms. Skinner asked if consideration had been given to EDU’s, if there was enough sewer capacity for that building. Mr. Hunt responded that there were 4 EDU’s allotted to that building. If they needed additional they would be willing to purchase more. Mr. Reimel thought that each of the entities would require their own EDU. Mr. Hunt, however, had passed out generic floor plans, and referenced these, noting a plan to put up generic shared bathroom facilities. They were using an area where the bathroom already was within the building. Mr. Reimel thought that would address the matter. Mr. Hunt said that he wasn’t familiar with the EDU’s being attributed to tenants; it was usually the property owner. Mr. Reimel thought that they were probably alright, but he still suggested Mr. Hunt check with the municipal authority. The change was to be gradual, with tenancy slow, Mr. Hunt related. Phase 2 occupants might be a year later.

Mr. Chamberlain said that there were lots of nonconforming buildings in the town. Mr. Hunt also related that they were able to get an agreement of sales on the Rafferty building. They planned to raze both of those buildings and make additional parking.

Without the quorum Mr. Hunt’s request could not legally be approved. Mr. Hunt asked if there was anyone on council who saw an issue with the application. None present did. Ms. O’Malley was to review it. Mr. Hunt spoke about parking, as they were purchasing a building which had perhaps 3 parking spaces, and per the zoning code it ought to have perhaps 60 to 80 spaces. He thought that some of the uses wouldn’t use the lot during events and weekends. Mr. Wootten said he had owned the building for two years and refused to show it to people who were going to make it a warehouse. He thought this was a really wonderful plan. Ms. Skinner said she was sorry, and apologized on behalf of council that they couldn’t do what needed to be done to forward the plan.

There was a Montrose Zoning Hearing board hearing on July 15th, Ms. O’Malley related. The borough meeting was adjourned until the 21st. Ms. Skinner made a motion to adjourn it, but no one could vote on it.

On July 7th, 2014, Great Bend Township held their monthly meeting. Supervisors David Hinkley and Sheila Guinan, as well as Chairman Brian O’Connor, were all in attendance, as well as six members of the public.

One of those members of the public, Mitchell Dossey, from Southwestern Energy was present to discuss once again the seismic survey and the use of vibrosis trucks on township roads. He stated that the planned start date is August 1st and that it should be completed by late October.

Next, Mr. Reed, a resident, was in attendance, first to compliment the roads crew on their work through the past winter. His next concern was that water trucks were coming down Downs Road, instead of the designated road they were supposed to be taking.  Supervisor Hinkley stated that he would promptly contact the company and state their concern. There was also discussion held on Locust Hill, Quarry Road, Tarzan Road, and Downs Road and concerns over parts of the road that are in need of repairs and material.

Ms. Elaine Andusko was in attendance as well, regarding the Sewer Authority. After she expressed her interest in fulfilling the long-vacant position on the Sewer Authority, the Supervisors made a motion to approve her appointment. There is still, however, another seat open on the sewer authority.

The last member of the public wishing to speak was Mr. Lee, who had some questions regarding Green Valley Road. A relatively lengthy discussion ensued as well as some confusion and concerns over the road’s condition. Inevitably, it was decided that Mr. Lee, the Supervisors, as well as the “equitable owners” would schedule a meeting to discuss a solution further.

Next, the Supervisors and Chairman moved to roads, in which they discussed that oil and chip work has been advertised and will be opened at the August meeting. Then, a motion was carried to advertise for road material, diesel, and heating oil.

On the subject of roads, there was also discussion regarding Deans Road, and a concern over a dip in the road, which a resident feared might be due to a water leak. Supervisor Hinkley stated that they would take a look at it before tarring and chipping the road, as the issue would be better off addressed before making the repairs to the top of the road.

It was also decided to look into blacktopping the Mountain Vista Cul-de-sac, which was a topic of discussion last year, pending Great Bend Borough’s decision to blacktop the rest of the road. The Supervisors discussed that the work on the cul-de-sac should be done at the same time as the rest of the road.

Permits were next to discuss and Simmons Rockwell submitted plans to COG, which were denied at first because the plans did not comply with the Floodplain Ordinance, however, the necessary changes were made and they were issued a permit to make improvements to their showroom on Route 11.

Firework permits were also issued to Mark Wolfe, Lisa Carpenetti, and Tammy Barnard.

In the last order of business, the walking trail was discussed. Even though the survey had been paid for, they are still in wait again as a proposed “water holding area” is being discussed in the area. Now it is another waiting game until more details are obtained.

Having said that, the meeting came to a close. The next meeting is scheduled to take place Monday, August 4th, 2014 at 7:00 p.m.

It seemed like a mere formality, so who could have guessed.  When Jeremy White of Southwestern Energy made his pitch to the Borough Council at the June meeting, council voted unanimously to allow seismic mapping in the borough, dependent upon only one small proviso: that the Oakland Water Authority give its blessing to the proposed project.  That small proviso sealed the fate of Southwestern’s plans when Oakland Water Authority denied approval based upon concerns over the effects of vibrations upon the water pipes and sewer system running under the borough’s terra firma.  

The stunning announcement of Oakland Water Authority’s decision is at odds with what had previously been seen as non-controversial in a number of other municipalities.  How Southwestern Energy will proceed with seismic mapping on State Roads 171 and 92 in Oakland Borough is now an open question.  Gentle readers will recall that in his presentation to Oakland Borough Council in June Mr. White stated that “Southwestern already has the state’s approval to conduct vibration operations on state roads within the borough, but Southwestern takes the additional step of obtaining each local municipality’s approval for those same roads, and makes requests for some additional streets, as necessary from time to time.”  Westfall Avenue was the one thoroughfare not a state road which was of particular interest for vibration operations.  Again, the purpose of seismic mapping through vibration operations is to locate every water source and the routes of water travel throughout the borough.

Present for the July 10 meeting of Oakland Borough Council were President Brian Rhone, Councilmen Doug Arthur, Gary Boughton, Eric Page, Nelson Towner, and Dave Trevarthan, along with Mayor Ron Beavan and Secretary/Treasurer Flo Brush.  Councilman Jack Agler was absent.  President Rhone gaveled the meeting to order at 7:02, and by 7:55 p.m. council had wrapped up all its business on the agendum save for an executive session to discuss River Bounty.  Executive session for an indeterminate length necessarily required my evacuation, though council promised to notify me if any official action were to occur upon resumption of the meeting and prior to adjournment of the meeting.  No notification of action occurred after the meeting. Therefore, it is conclusive upon their word that no official action was taken concerning River Bounty after the Executive Session. 

In the 53 minutes of open meeting preceding River Bounty Executive Session, council covered routine approvals and reviews, and proceeded through the Codes, Parks, and Mayor’s Reports, along with Old and New Business.  The Codes Report covered the five properties which have been the subject of regular oversight in the last year.  Some are actually making progress in upkeep and repairs; at least one will require continuous monitoring in virtual perpetuity.

The Parks Report was presented by Councilman Boughton.  He noted that Little League Season was over and Reorganization Meeting would be coming up soon.  His priority is still to get the severely deteriorated retaining wall at the park replaced as soon as possible.

Mayor Beavan presented the Mayor’s/Police Report for the month of June.  There were some 13 incidents to which Oakland Police responded.  Nearly half of those were traffic stops or involved motor vehicles in some way.  The remaining lowlights included a smattering of domestic incidents, a pair of boaters requiring assistance, a patient harassing his nurse, and a bear caught in a trap. 

Mayor Beavan additionally reported that police had successfully made contact with half a dozen of the young ATV riders formerly driving on the borough’s streets.  The youngsters have had the law explained to them, as well as the negative consequences in store for them should their past behavior extend into the future.  Oakland borough has returned to a pacific state of quiescence on streets where it was for months thought a lost virtue.  Oakland residents extend their thanks to their borough’s police and council, as well as the youths who have seen the error of their ways. 

In Old Business, Councilman Arthur notified council that according to his research, a “Welcome to Oakland Borough” sign is eminently legal and feasible at the intersection of Veterans Bridge and State Street.  Council members discussed various sizes and types of signs, and Councilman Arthur agreed to look into the various options to determine a range of prices so council can proceed from that point at next month’s meeting.

New Business consisted of money—big money.  The borough received a check in the amount of $1,793.40 for logs.  Council agreed to earmark that money for the Water Authority.  The second check in Treasurer Brush’s possession was in the amount of $37,922.24.  The near $38K is Oakland’s share of Act 13 Impact Fee money for this year. Council spent a fair amount of time discussing how it might be used.  There appears no shortage of needs for which it might be spent.  But after extended debate the only conclusion Council reached was to deposit the check in the borough’s savings account while the borough researched for what purposes the borough might legally spend the moneys and account for them.  Once investigation is completed, prioritization may proceed.  That the borough is proceeding with conservatism and caution bodes well for all involved. 

Finally, before moving to Executive Session, each council member and Mayor Beavan were afforded the opportunity to bring up any other topic not mentioned, but requiring redress.  Three topics were brought up during this portion of the meeting.  Street problems were discussed: State Street potholes are growing to epic proportions, and the intersection of Chestnut Street and State Street was cited as a problem area. 

A second topic was the problem of burnt-out/blinking street lights.  Council members explained that should residents notice problem street lights they should bypass notifying council and make a call directly to Penelec.  When doing so, report all numbers obtainable from the light pole.  Those numbers are identifiers, and those numbers combined with the address of the nearby resident making the trouble call provide the essential data for Penelec to make an expeditious response.  Mayor Beavan noted that residents should notify Penelec as soon as they notice the street light blinking.  Blinking is a symptom of deterioration, and Penelec actually has a good track record of responding to fix “dying” lights. The reason is that it is much more economical for the utility to service lights that are going, but haven’t gone.

 Finally, Mayor Beavan asked Councilman Page for a report of how the planning is going for a new borough building.  Mr. Page explained that the committee is next scheduled to meet on July 24.  An architect has been invited to review preliminary plans and make suggestions.  Current plans still call for a 30’x 60’ building with a 20’ garage. 

Oakland Borough Council next meets on the second Thursday in August at the Lanesboro Community Center . . . vibration or no vibration.

On the second Wednesday of the month, July 9th, 2014, Susquehanna Borough held their regular Council meeting. All members of the Council were present at the meeting, with the exception of Roberta Reddon. There were also about nine members of the public present for the meeting as well.

President Joe Varsik led the meeting and after the approval of the Agenda and Bills list, moved directly into the Public Comment section of the meeting.

Mr. and Mrs. Plonka were in attendance to speak on the oil spill and run off issue occurring on their land. They had previously received a letter from the insurance company, who denied their claim. However, they wished to discuss with the Council the run-off pipe that leads to their property and has been flooding the basement of the Starrucca House, causing issues with the foundation of the building as well as the surrounding land. Though President Varsik noted that the Borough is not responsible for cleaning up the mess, per the letter received from the insurance company, he agreed to discuss it with the Sewer Authority and also look into the pipe causing water to flow onto their property so that perhaps a resolution could be found.

Two separate people in attendance also wished to discuss matters relating to Police Chief Sweet, Mrs. Plonka, as well as Ms. Johnine Barnes. However, matters involving personnel cannot be discussed in the public comment portion of the meeting, and both women then set aside time, separately, to speak with Mayor Hurley on their issues, which were not disclosed nor seemingly related to one another.

Mr. Dan Wolfe was in attendance at the meeting as well to discuss methods of removing yard waste and clippings. He stated that particularly in town, it is difficult to remove such waste without having a proper place or means to dispose of it. President Varsik stated that currently there is no place within the Borough that the waste can be transferred to and that the Borough would have to hire-out to take care of it. The Council then suggested Mr. Wolfe create a list of acceptable items to be disposed of and considered “yard waste,” and meanwhile the Council would look into a possible way to remove the waste properly and that the issue would again be discussed at next month’s regular meeting.

Mr. Pat Barnes, a local resident, had some questions regarding a “reserved parking” sign that had been placed on Washington Street, near 5th Ave., recently. He was curious whether it was permitted to have a reserved sign on a Public Street. The Council agreed that they would investigate the matter further.

Southwestern Energy was also present again this month to discuss the changes that were necessary for the Borough to sign their contract regarding seismic surveys and the vibrosis trucks, which for the most part will not be used on the Borough’s roads.  

Following Public Comment, the meeting moved to Mayor Hurley’s monthly police report. She stated that there were a total of thirty-one incidents in the past month, just some of these incidents that were included were traffic violations, a larceny, a PFA, three domestic, an offense against a child, and two assaults.

Mayor Hurley also wanted to tell the street department “great job” on their work and that she is “looking forward to Hometown Days,” as well as the new 5k run or walk that is being held for the first time this year.

President Joe Varsik also wanted to thank the DPW for doing an “awesome job” patching, and to tell the public to bear with them while the patchwork is being done.  He also wanted to thank Councilmen Roy Williams and John Hendrickson for their help with the DPW as well.

Further, there were some public safety concerns regarding street work. President Varsik urged the public to “be patient” and take your time while going through Construction zones, as recently a driver sped through the work zone and side-swept a dump truck. These necessary safety measures are for not only the drivers safety, but also the men and women working in these areas. He also stated that they try and keep the roads open partially while doing street work, but if drivers aren’t being careful enough, it may become necessary to close roads off while work is being done.

Mr. Roy Williams then spoke on the DPW, who stated that underground utilities have been marked and that work between Franklin Avenue and Center Lane will begin in July.

Also briefly discussed was the bid opening for a new street-paving project. The Borough received three different bids and upon reviewing the bids, made a motion to accept Wayco Inc.’s bid from Waymart, Pennsylvania, at just over $161,000.

Also, regarding the long-awaited completion of the bridge over Drinker Creek in town, it was noted that Fozz Construction again requested an extension from PennDot for the completion of the project, this time until October. However, Roy Williams stated that it would be completed by winter.

It was also mentioned that they are not only working on filling potholes, but also trimming bamboo and branches, cleaning out catch basins, and performing routine maintenance. Also, they have ordered new speed limit and no parking signs.

Codes were also on the Agenda. There have been twelve issues. Six were grass related, three trash related, two decks not properly being supported, as well as parking variance issues.

In New Business the vacant Council seat position was discussed, previously held by Mr. Jamie Koziol. The Borough had received two letters of interest for the position, from David Scales, who was not present and also from Kaylin Lindquist. Following a couple brief questions from President Joe Varsik, the Council then moved to the nominations of both interested parties, with only the nomination for Ms. Lindquist being successful, the Council then voted to appoint her to the position of Council member, which passed in a three-to-two vote. The swearing in process, however, will occur at next month’s regular meeting.

In a last minute discussion, James Davis from DGK Insurance was in attendance to discuss the renewal policy. He then went in-depth in describing what would be covered by the insurance policy.

With that, President Joe Varsik adjourned the public meeting to recess into an Executive Session to discuss legal issues. The next regular meeting will be held on August 13th, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in the Susquehanna Borough Building.

Lanesboro’s normal monthly meeting is held on the second Tuesday of each month. But National Weather Service tornado warnings on Tuesday evening precipitated postponement by 24 hours. So it was that Council came together on Wednesday, July 9, at the Community Center. Present for the meeting were Council President Todd Glover, Vice-President Dan Boughton, and council members Regina Dilello, Dale Rockwell, and Tom Nitterour. Also present was Secretary/Treasurer Gail Hanrahan. Absent were Mayor Chris Maby and Councilmen David Glidden and Jason Fissel.

No tornado was cited in Lanesboro on Tuesday evening. Neither was any mention of tornado damage made during the course of the 45 minute meeting. However, an announcement just prior to meeting’s end created a political—if not atmospheric—vacuum. Note to Lanesboro residents who have a yearning to serve on council, polish your resume and prepare your letter identifying your availability for service. More on that later.

After the meeting’s opening formalities, Secretary Hanrahan read the only letter constituting correspondence to the borough, a thank-you letter to the borough for all the support extended concerning the upcoming Marathon beginning at 5 a.m. on Saturday, July 26, and ending around noon on Sunday, July 27th. The annual event has grown larger with each succeeding year, and with the Rails-to-Trails under the Starrucca Viaduct serving as the alpha and omega for the scenic run, popularity amongst marathoners only continues to increase.

The Streets Report was discussed at length. What it came down to was that the three separate initiatives approved at last month’s meeting, i.e., concerning street paving, pothole patching, and inlet construction and repair have not been accomplished to date. Explanations were made as to why what had been approved had not yet happened. Responsible council members resolved to make contacts where necessary to expedite those things which can be done, even as other items await action on the county level. The actions most likely to be accomplished before August’s meeting are those (pothole patching) for which the borough is contracting with Harmony Township to perform.

In the absence of Mayor Maby, President Glover presented the June Police Report. Among the lowlights of crime in the community (resulting in charges being filed) were one case of disorderly conduct and one case of marijuana possession. Police made 38 traffic stops in the borough, resulting in the issuance of 21 citations and 17 warnings, with the following reasons cited for stopping of motorists: Speeding Violations - 24; Inspection Violations - 3; Registration Violations - 3; Equipment Violations - 4; Suspended Driver License - 3; and Careless Driving Violation - 1. Lanesboro PD hours for the month of June totaled 196, with 22 of those contract hours for Thompson, and 32 hours on school patrol. President Glover also mentioned that law enforcement officers also had an interaction with resident wildlife. Seems a deer ran into the passenger-side door of the borough’s Impala cruiser. No word on whether the deer was cited; Cleveland’s Garage hammered out most of the dents on the Impala.

During the Parks and Recreation Report President Glover explained to council that last month’s action to accept Mr. Boughton’s offer to cut grass and weed whack on the 11 properties now under the purview of the borough could not legally stand. While the board had publicly advertised in this paper for an employee to perform the job—no person had applied for the job—and while Mr. Boughton had offered to do the work for a price he freely negotiated with council—in the absence of anyone else expressing interest—and while the borough council had conducted a roll call vote to authorize Mr. Boughton to perform the work, Borough Solicitor DeWitt advised the borough to re-advertise as the terms under which Mr. Boughton is working are as a self-employed contractor rather than as a borough employee, as was originally the position advertised. Council agreed to re-advertise the position for a contractor who is self-insured, individually responsible for workman’s comp, and provides all the implements necessary to carry out the work. The August meeting will provide council with the opportunity to settle this matter in accordance with legal technicalities. In the meantime volunteers may cut the grass while the employment/contracting situation awaits legal resolution. The reason why the borough has so many properties is because of FEMA buyouts. Under FEMA’s terms no man-made object may be placed on such properties, but the grounds must be maintained by the borough.

Several topics came up within the Sewer/Refuse Report. First was the opening of bids for the borough’s old garbage truck. Two bids had been received, one for $6,125 and one for $3,375. Not surprisingly, Council accepted the higher bid. Councilman Rockwell moved to accept the higher bid; Councilman Nitterour seconded; council unanimously agreed. The winning bid was from a firm in New York State, “Hometown Hauling.”

Concerning sewer rate-payers in serious arrears, liens are now being placed on properties as quickly as possible. Secretary Hanrahan gave a hat-tip to Magisterial District Judge Jodi Cordner’s office for providing the information necessary to effect the liens.

President Glover reported that Tri-boro Sewer Authority is still interested in buying the borough’s sewer system. However, just not at this time, as other priorities have resulted in a liquidity squeeze such that the sale cannot be effected immediately.

Concerning refuse, some 12 inhabited households still have not contracted with Freddy’s Refuse for garbage pick-up. The borough’s refuse ordinance is posted on its website: www.lanesboropa.com for anyone in doubt as to their duty to contract for service. All garbage originating in the borough must be disposed of by way of the authorized hauler, and no person may haul garbage out of the borough without a permit. The borough, long patient with those recalcitrant in contracting, will at a time of their choosing apply enforcement actions as provided in the borough’s ordinance. Dirty Dozen beware!

In old business, Councilman Boughton provided council members with flyers to advertise the borough’s Community Yard Sale on August 15, 16 & 17. “All Lanesboro residents are welcome to hold yard sales on this weekend.”

Under “News and Events” on the borough’s website is a link to the “Ice Cream Social” of June 21st, hosted by Lanesboro resident Ashley DePew. Miss Amanda Cook, the borough’s webmaster, made mention of this news and noted that pictures of the event are also at this link. Also she extended special thanks from Miss DePew to Schneider’s Market, Ed Arzouian, Gail Hanrahan, and Joel Rivenburg. Positive comments about the event were aplenty at this point in the meeting.

Finally, under New Business, Council President Todd Glover announced his resignation from both his presidential position and his council seat. Mr. Glover noted that he had missed the two previous meetings, and in his current career position he had insufficient time to serve effectively at the level he expected of himself. He provided council members with procedural information for filling his just vacated seat and he outlined the procedures verbally. They can be summarized as thus: council has 30 days to fill the vacancy; if council fails to fill the seat in the specified time-frame, the matter is transferred to the Vacancy Board to fill the seat; should the Vacancy Board be unable to fill the seat, the matter will be placed before President Judge Kenneth Seamans to appoint the new council member. Council will also need to elect a new President from their number.

The loss of Todd Glover from the office of Borough Council President is a huge loss and is so recognized by anyone who is familiar with his accomplishments in that capacity. Individual council members volunteered high praise for Mr. Glover’s hard work over the years and his dedicated service to the borough. It may not have been a tornado hitting Lanesboro, but the loss of Mr. Glover from the council had the impact of a punch to the gut. His successor, whoever that may be, has some very large shoes to fill. With Mr. Glover passing the gavel to Vice-President Boughton, council adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, August 12.

The Susquehanna County DOMESTIC RELATIONS Section has outstanding BENCH WARRANT’S for the following individuals as of 10:40 a.m. on July 11, 2014: Duane M. Aldrich, Brent V. Birtch, Daniel M. Brown, John R. Bush, Gerald E. Case, Anthony M. Choplosky, Tina M. Clark, Christopher J. Clark, Jonathan Fathi, David J. Fischer, Jeremy W. Hall, Shannon J. Hollister, Nathan Hollister, Todd J. Layton, Charlie J. Legere, Casey M. Lehman, Derrick Lezinsky, Jennifer L. Martel, Robert J. McCrone, Ethan A. Meagley, Ronald N. Mitchell, Jordan L. Payne, Wallace J. Penny Jr, Vincent S. Perico, Matthew J. Peters, Veronica D. Phelps, Eric A. Pike, Sherri M. Rosa, Todd J. Slater, Anthony L. Smith, Frederick Swingle, III, Tessa E. Thomas, Kurtis Tracy, Donna N. Tunstall, Kirk L. Vanteger, John H. Walter, Steven G. Warner, Kevin H. Welch. Please contact the Domestic Relations Section at 570-278-4600 ext. 170 with any information on the location of these individuals.