Controversy over Keystone Landfill key issue in Dunmore council race

The right to vote is the greatest power we have in a democracy. Please remember to vote on Tuesday.

Click Here

**Disclaimer: Though we hope anyone running for any office, on any level, aligns with our mission, Friends of Lackawanna, as a registered 501(c)(3), cannot l endorse any political candidates.**

Excerpt:
The five candidates for Dunmore council say they expect the controversy over the proposed Keystone Sanitary Landfill expansion to be a key issue in deciding who secures four open seats in Tuesday’s general election.

Council President Michael Dempsey and Councilman Vince Amico say their recent votes against a zoning amendment that would have bolstered the landfill’s efforts shows they remain committed to opposing the expansion. They face incumbent Councilmen Michael Hayes and Michael McHale, who voted for the amendment, and newcomer Beth McDonald Zangardi, who opposes the expansion.

Landfill attorneys: Dunmore mayor's veto is invalid

The landfill lawyers are grasping at straws in a desperate attempt to get Mayor Burke’s veto overturned. It’s funny that years ago when Throop’s Mayor vetoed a zoning ordinance in favor of the landfill, it was all good. But now that the veto has worked against them, suddenly it’s “invalid.” More bully tactics—if our strongman can’t scare you, maybe our fancy lawyers can. As Mayor Burke said, “Let’s go to court.” We will not back down.

Full Article

Excerpts:

DUNMORE — Keystone Sanitary Landfill attorneys contended Monday that the mayor’s veto of a controversial zoning amendment is invalid.

Following a council work session Monday, which did not have a quorum, landfill attorneys David Overstreet and Jeffrey Belardi cited a recent court case where the Lawrence County Court of Common Pleas ruled that a city mayor’s veto of a zoning amendment was null and void.

The Lawrence County ruling from Oct. 9 says only city council has the power to enact, amend or repeal zoning ordinances — not the mayor.

“Mayors ... are to have no involvement whatsoever when the city council takes up zoning legislation,” according to the ruling.

Landfill opponents disagree.

“A veto, under the borough code, is allowing the mayor to simply exercise his or her authority to approve or disprove the ordinance presented to them,” said Pat Clark, a leader of anti-expansion grassroots group Friends of Lackawanna.

Clark also noted that the decision only came from a county court, and it pertained to a third class city, not a borough. As a result, the court analyzed the state’s Optional Third Class City Charter Law and not Pennsylvania’s borough code.

“To say it’s authoritative and persuasive is not, in my opinion, correct,” Clark said.

“Even if the mayor’s veto were valid, which we don’t think it is ... all it would do is remove the clarifying amendment,” Overstreet said.

The landfill would not have dedicated the time, energy and money that it has if it were “so unconcerned with a mere clarification,” Clark said.

“I think their actions speak louder than their words,” he said. “There’s a reason they want this.”

Landfill resistance proves times have changed

This is a MUST READ response by Pat Clark of Friends of Lackawanna to the threats and bully tactics of Keystone Sanitary Landfill’s consultant and ownership. They claim to be good neighbors bestowing generosity, but it is actually extortion. We no longer respond to threats. We will no longer be bullied by our “good” neighbor.

READ MORE

Earlier this year, Keystone Sanitary Landfill mailed a full-page color pamphlet to residents of Northeast Pennsylvania.

The front cover reads: “To have good neighbors we must also be good neighbors.” Last week, landfill engineer Al Magnotta published a column in The Times-Tribune, “21 million reasons to kill veto.” It is rife with threats, bully tactics and fearmongering and details what the landfill may attempt if the borough of Dunmore does not do exactly what the landfill orders, forever and always, until death do us part. Good neighbors, indeed.

The bully approach Magnotta employs is not a new addition to the landfill playbook. Rather, it has been the primary offense deployed to attack and intimidate those who disagree with it, especially local government and elected officials, since its formation. Consider:

■ In 1990, it sued the city of Scranton for $100 million to get its way regarding leachate disposal. Landfill leachate disposal still causes issues almost 30 years later, including three recent DEP violations.

■ In 1994, it sued officials from Throop for $16 million for passing a zoning ordinance that would have blocked an expansion at that time. Ironically, the Throop mayor later vetoed that zoning ordinance to the landfill’s benefit.

■ Now, the landfill threatens to recoup $21 million if Dunmore council does not override Mayor Tim Burke’s recent veto of a proposed landfill-friendly zoning ordinance.

In none of these matters did the landfill prevail, nor would it prevail, on any monetary awards from litigation or threatened suits. Instead, the landfill attacks economically strapped municipalities for leverage in hopes that residents’ fear of increased taxes will cause their elected officials to buckle. In the case at hand, Magnotta cites two agreements between Dunmore and the landfill: 1999 and 2014.

The three-page 1999 agreement guarantees the borough no benefits and the result was the same as if there had been no agreement: The landfill would pay Dunmore the state-mandated minimum for every ton of waste it swallowed.

The 2014 agreement is not much better with the exception of some financial increases. Worse, the 2014 contract contains no environmental protections because when the borough considered using environmental experts to help in the negotiations, landfill ownership would “not allow any of those people to speak to them.”

Each of the “benefits” the landfill claims to bestow upon its fortunate host residents, and noted in Magnotta’s piece, was reluctantly given, used as negotiating leverage or included strategically to enhance its expansion application currently under review with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.

With regard to these so-called benefits, consider the following:

■ The forgiveness of “delinquent amounts” owed by the borough for prior trash collection? The landfill regularly used that same tactic as leverage between 1989 and 2014.

■ The “host fee of $1.50 per ton” was dramatically increased from its initial 2014 amount offer only after opposition, led by Friends of Lackawanna, started to speak out. Even today, this is a below-market host municipality fee and it came after 25 years of paying Dunmore the absolute minimum, to the penny, that it legally could.

■ The “yearly contribution of $100,000 to the Dunmore School District” was only added to the agreement after public outcry in 2014.

■ Contrary to owner Louis DeNaples’ statement that the 2014 contract “...was a gift. Dunmore gives us nothing,” the agreement was not a gift. Instead, the host agreement, and the anticipated payments included, were promptly filed with the DEP and counted as a “benefit” of the proposed expansion. A gift that benefits the giver is not a gift at all.

The landfill can try to follow through on Magnotta’s threats by attempting to recoup money paid to Dunmore and by reverting payments to the state-mandated minimum. But it will fail. Moreover, with the letter’s brazen and openly threatening approach, the landfill has sent a clear message to DEP that the money paid under host agreements was never intended as a community benefit. Instead, those fees are being used as an extortionary tool wielded in the open, for all to see.

Magnotta’s letter was a last-ditch effort aimed at flipping one council vote needed to overturn Burke’s veto. Historically, without as much scrutiny, the landfill has been very good at ultimately getting municipalities to do its bidding. But council members Michael Dempsey, Tom Hallinan and Vince Amico honored their oath of office and stood their ground. The veto stands. Regardless of how the entire landfill expansion saga plays out, the borough, and the area at large, show that things have changed. We are willing to stand up to the powerful to protect our children’s health and our communities’ future. We no longer respond to threats. And we will no longer be bullied by our neighbor.

Pay the Piper

"Keystone Landfill apparently is willing to play rough with Dunmore in its bid to secure a nearly half-century extension on its lifespan. The borough might just now be realizing that there were strings attached to the financial benefits landfill owner Louis DeNaples has provided it over the years."

Landfill consultant to Dunmore: Override veto or pay back $21.55 million

Like Mayor Burke says, they think they can pay us to take their poison. But when we choose our health and future over their money, it turns into raw threats. Watch closely as this plays out because as Pat Clark says, it shows exactly how the owners of the landfill operate: Give us exactly what we want or we will come after you. Will they take back all the police cars and fire trucks they “donated” with the landfill money they made off the backs of our citizens, as well? Is generosity only given with the expectation of something in return?

READ MORE

From the Article:
If Dunmore Borough Council doesn’t override the mayor’s veto of a controversial zoning amendment for the Keystone Sanitary Landfill, the town will be on the hook to pay back $21.55 million to the landfill, a Keystone consultant contends.

Opponents view it as a threat.

Mayor Timothy Burke vetoed an ordinance last week that said sanitary landfills are not structures and therefore not limited to the 50-foot height restriction in the landfill’s zoning district. The zoning amendment was a devastating blow to efforts to prevent the Louis and Dominick DeNaples-owned landfill’s proposed 40-plus year expansion plans.

Council voted 4-3 in favor of the zoning change in September, but Burke’s veto halted the legislation. To overturn the veto, council will need a majority plus one, or a 5-2 vote.

In an opinion column published Tuesday in The Times-Tribune, landfill consultant Al Magnotta wrote that if council does not override the veto, the borough will be in violation of its 1999 and 2014 host agreements with the landfill.

‘Significant financial problem’

If Dunmore violates the host agreements, the landfill will only have to pay the state-mandated minimum of 41 cents per ton of garbage, Magnotta wrote, compared to the $1.51 per ton the borough is receiving in 2019.

Moreover, the borough will have to reimburse the landfill for the $21.55 million the town has received in reimbursements and debt forgiveness since 2014, according to Magnotta.

The landfill expects to bring in a bit more than two million tons of garbage this year, he said.

“I just don’t believe that the full ramifications of the actions of the council or the mayor actually … are understood by the vast majority of the people in Dunmore,” Magnotta said in a phone interview Tuesday, adding the mayor and the councilmen are setting the borough up for a “very significant financial problem.”

The landfill consultant pointed to a line in the 1999 agreement where the borough agreed “to facilitate the continued development and operation of the landfill.”

“If the mayor’s veto is sustained by the three councilmen, in theory, we’re in violation right now,” Magnotta said. “It has nothing to do with the expansion. … In theory, we’d have to shut down now.”

The landfill is about 550 feet tall at its peak.

‘Basically

threatening us’

Pat Clark, a leader of anti-expansion grassroots group Friends of Lackawanna, said the borough has to ensure it has the right to enforce zoning before it figures out what its enforcement options are.

Neither of the agreements have any basis for the landfill getting a refund, Clark said.

“Al draws plenty of legal conclusions, all of which are unfounded and designed to scare people,” he said.

He also noted that the 1999 agreement doesn’t mean the borough has to do everything to facilitate and enhance the landfill’s unmitigated growth.

“It’s not a blanket agreement to do the landfill’s bidding forever and for always,” Clark said.

Additionally, the mayor’s veto does not violate the 2014 agreement, he said. Magnotta cited a section of the agreement that said the landfill “is not a building under the current zoning ordinance pertaining to maximum building height.”

The veto has nothing to do with the landfill being deemed a building, Clark said.

“It has everything to do with it being a structure … therefore this veto is not in violation or contrary to the 2014 agreement,” he said.

Burke agreed his veto was simply about whether the landfill is a structure or not.

The mayor also noted the detrimental health effects from the landfill, including the impact on air quality and how it affects sensitive populations like children, pregnant women and the elderly.

“He’s basically threatening us,” Burke said. “He’s basically saying, ‘Take our poison. We’re paying you enough money to take it.’”

Clark said the landfill has a history of bullying, but now it evolved from “issuing threats behind closed doors” to challenging the town in a newspaper editorial.

“This letter is such a brazen, open threat to the people of the area that I have no idea why it was written,” he said. “It does, however, clearly show everyone exactly how they operate: Give us exactly what we want or we will come after you.”

‘Black and white’

Burke vetoed the ordinance on Oct. 14, and according to the state’s borough code, council has 10 days to take action on the veto. Otherwise, it stands.

As of Tuesday, council had not scheduled a special meeting, said Borough Manager Vito Ruggerio.

If the veto stands, council could vote on a revised ordinance, which would require submitting the ordinance to the county and borough planning commissions, holding a public hearing and voting again. Burke could veto the new ordinance, though.

While the landfill requested the current ordinance, Magnotta said proposing a revised ordinance is up to council.

“They could either go through with it, or they could send us a check,” Magnotta said. “I think this council has to decide what position they want to take.”

Councilman Michael Hayes, who has previously raised concerns about violating the agreement and voted in favor of the zoning change, said council should override Burke’s veto to “save this town from bankruptcy.”

“It’s what I’ve been saying all along,” he said. “Unfortunately, no one was listening. I’m glad now that people can see it in black and white.”

In the event that Dunmore did lose its host fees, the town will survive, Burke said.

“I see towns around that survive without a landfill. Dunmore could do the same,” he said.

21 million reasons to kill veto

Right on cue, Al Magnotta uses bully tactics and threats once again to try to scare us. In NEPA, we teach our kids to stand up to bullies so take your threats back to where they came from and know they don’t work on us anymore.

We will not cower to your threats. We will not praise the the 4 Council members who did. We are not the people and the town you could roll over in the past. Those days are gone. We will never stop fighting. We will never give in.

“Never give in–never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.” – Winston Churchill

Excerpt from the OpEd:

As a consequence of a breach of the 1999 and 2014 agreements, Keystone Sanitary Landfill will be only obligated to pay the borough the commonwealth-mandated host fee amount and will be entitled to reimbursement of funds paid to the borough.

Obviously, a significant tax increase of 35% to 40% and a major reduction in police, fire and public works services are the only possible solutions.

The taxpayers of Dunmore Borough owe a vote of gratitude to council members Tom Ehnot, Mike McHale, Chris Hayes and Carol Scrimalli who, in the face of intense public and media pressure, mostly from individuals and journalists who don’t reside in Dunmore, had the courage to honor the terms of the 2014 Host Municipality Fee Agreement and the 1999 Settlement Agreement for the benefit of all the Dunmore taxpayers.

Timer ticking for Dunmore council to take action on mayor's landfill veto

“We, on the other hand, have expected and had no doubts that the landfill would continue to threaten the borough with legal action, just as they have with every municipality ... that has not agreed with them over the years,” he said. “They think their hand is stronger than it is.” —Pat Clark, Friends of Lackawanna

READ MORE

Borough council has less than a week to take action on Mayor Timothy Burke’s veto of a controversial zoning amendment that benefited the Keystone Sanitary Landfill, according to state law.

Under Pennsylvania’s borough code, a mayor has the ability to veto an ordinance with objections at the next scheduled council meeting after the ordinance passed. On Sept. 19, council voted 4-3 that sanitary landfills are not structures and thereby not limited to the 50-foot height restriction in the landfill’s zoning district. The zoning change dealt a major blow to efforts to prevent the Louis and Dominick DeNaples-owned landfill’s 40-plus-year expansion plans.

During Monday’s council meeting, Burke announced that he was invoking his authority as mayor to veto the ordinance.

According to state law, council can either reconsider the ordinance at the meeting when the veto occurred, or it can hold another meeting no later than 10 days after the veto. If council chooses to do nothing, the veto stands.

Council did not take action Monday, and solicitor Thomas Cummings told council he would issue a written opinion on whether the mayor’s veto is effective. Repeated attempts to reach Cummings were unsuccessful this week.

Council’s options

Council President Michael Dempsey, Vice President Thomas J. Hallinan and Councilman Vince Amico voted against the zoning ordinance last month. Council members Michael McHale, Michael Hayes, Thomas Ehnot and Carol Scrimalli voted in favor. The landfill requested the amended ordinance.

To override Burke’s veto, council needs a majority plus one, or a 5-2 vote. To achieve that, either Dempsey, Hallinan or Amico would have to change their vote. All three said they stand by their votes.

Chester Corse Jr., an attorney based in Pottsville who has practiced municipal law for 40 years, said he has never seen a council override a mayoral veto.

“I’ve had a lot of vetoes, but I’ve never had one where they overrode the veto,” he said.

If council fails to overrule the mayor’s veto, it can still revise and pass a similar ordinance, he said.

“That’s the more likely course that people will follow,” Corse said. “That happens more than anything else.”

To pass a revised ordinance, council will have to start the entire process from the beginning, he said. They will need to submit the ordinance to the county and borough planning commissions, hold a public hearing and vote.

The mayor can just veto it again, though, he said.

If council does override Burke’s veto, Dunmore residents and businesses will have 30 days to appeal, Corse said.

Precautionary veto

State law says the mayor must be presented with the ordinance, either through hand-delivery or certified mail, which Burke said never happened.

The presentment statute is to ensure that the mayor gets the ordinance to consider, Corse said.

“Well, he’s considered the ordinance, and he vetoed it,” he said.

Someone could potentially argue that the mayor can’t waive his right to be presented because the statute doesn’t say a mayor can waive it, Corse said. Then, Burke would have to wait until he was presented to veto it again.

“That’s a legal question that a court would have to rule on,” he said.

Burke said he didn’t want to take any chances.

“When I didn’t receive it, I thought they must be up to something, so I followed what (the borough code) said,” Burke said. “Our borough solicitor did not follow through with the borough code and have Vito Ruggerio send me a certified letter.”

Ruggerio, who is Dunmore’s borough manager, directed questions to the solicitor. He refused to say whether he mailed Burke a certified letter.

New ordinances are rare in Dunmore, but when the town does have an ordinance, it’s always at the borough office for review, Ruggerio said.

Pat Clark, a leader of anti-expansion grassroots group Friends of Lackawanna, lauded Burke’s decision to veto the ordinance, even if the mayor had yet to be formally presented with it. By vetoing it Monday, Burke removed any argument that he didn’t follow state law and veto the ordinance during the next scheduled meeting after the ordinance was presented to him, Clark said.

“I think Mayor Burke is very prudent in his approach here,” he said.

Al Magnotta, a consultant for the landfill, said they expected Burke’s response.

“I can only say that we anticipated that the mayor would resort to political expediency,” he said. “We have already developed a plan.”

Magnotta refused to elaborate on what the plan is.

Expansion opponents expected Keystone to respond, Clark said.

“We, on the other hand, have expected and had no doubts that the landfill would continue to threaten the borough with legal action, just as they have with every municipality ... that has not agreed with them over the years,” he said. “They think their hand is stronger than it is.”

Burke Veto

From the always on point and forever creative John Cole.

"Dunmore businessman Louis DeNaples’ push for a 40-plus-year expansion of his Keystone Landfill hit a bump in the road this week. While Borough Mayor Timothy Burke’s surprise veto of an unpopular ordinance — one that doesn’t recognize landfills as “structures” subject to zoning regulation — won’t end the debate, it’s notable for being an act of leadership in a place that usually always gives DeNaples what he and his businesses want."

In Dunmore, sudden spurt of leadership

The Scranton Times-Tribune Editorial Board commends Mayor Tim Burke's act of leadership in the public interest and states that it should remind all local voters that their choices can make a long-term difference for their communities.

READ MORE

In Dunmore, sudden spurt of leadership
BY THE EDITORIAL BOARD / PUBLISHED: OCTOBER 16, 2019

Mayors of Pennsylvania’s boroughs have limited power under the nominally strong-council form of government. But Dunmore Mayor Timothy Burke has stepped into the leadership void created by the weak-kneed borough council.

Burke acted in the public interest by vetoing borough council’s misguided amendment to the borough zoning law at the direction of the Keystone Sanitary Landfill, which is owned by politically powerful borough businessmen Dominick and Louis DeNaples.

The giant landfill has proposed an expansion plan that would allow it to accept an additional 100 million tons or more of mostly out-of-state garbage over more than 40 years, which is clearly against the broad public interest not only of Dunmore but of Northeast Pennsylvania.

The landfill faced an obstacle. The borough zoning code restricts structures in the landfill’s zone to a height of no more than 50 feet. And, a state appellate court already has found in another case from Mercer County that a landfill is a structure for zoning purposes. That would be a difficult precedent to overcome in state court, so the landfill company prevailed upon the reliably malleable borough council majority to change the borough zoning law in the landfill’s favor. Council recently did so by a 4-3 vote.

Such special-interest governance is disgraceful and Dunmoreans should not let it stand when they go to the polls Nov. 5 to determine the next borough council majority.

Meanwhile, Burke’s veto is a well-founded blow for the public interest. He cited the existing case law finding landfills to be structures, that the amendment is an unwarranted end run around litigation already pending in the Keystone zoning case, and that the Lackawanna County Regional Planning Commission did not make a recommendation in the case due to ongoing legal challenges.

Burke’s veto could be subject to a legal challenge of its own. Yet it is an act of leadership in the public interest that should remind all local voters that their choices can make a long-term difference for their communities.

Chris Kelly: Daring to defy Caesar

“It was the right thing to do,” he said. “I had to do it.” --Mayor Tim Burke as quoted by Chris Kelly, The Times-Tribune in Kelly's World regarding his veto of an amendment to the Dunmore zoning ordinance that would have hurt the community and only benefited Keystone Sanitary Landfill.

READ MORE

Chris Kelly: Daring to defy Caesar
KELLY'S WORLD / PUBLISHED: OCTOBER 16, 2019

Of all the revolutionary innovations conceived by the social engineers of ancient Rome, leave it to the mayor of a tiny Northeast Pennsylvania borough of 13,000 to shine a spotlight on trash collection and the veto.

Historians credit the Romans with embracing the radical realization that garbage shouldn’t be piled high in the heart of a community. They developed landfills, which are occasionally excavated by archeologists who jump for joy at the sight of a 2,000-year-old take-out container.

The Romans also invented the veto, which is Latin for, “I forbid.” After rejecting the rule of “divine-right” Caesars, it was exceptionally risky for Senate patricians to trust individual officials with the power to block bad policies backed by suspect majorities.

Dunmore Mayor Tim Burke may as well have been wearing a toga at Monday night’s borough council meeting. His veto of an amendment to the zoning ordinance echoed Roman tribunes who refused to sell out the common good to benefit an elite few.

It was a big deal. Maybe historic.

“Tonight, I am invoking my authority as mayor to veto this proposed legislation,” Burke said, thrusting a spear into council’s naked tribute to the Caesar on the throne at Keystone Sanitary Landfill.

In a brazen attempt to sidestep the judicial system, Keystone asked council to exempt the landfill from height restrictions on the ridiculous grounds that it is not a structure. The question of whether landfills are structures for zoning purposes is being decided in the courts. Council could have waited for an independent ruling, but chose to intervene on Keystone’s behalf.

On a 4-3 vote on Sept. 19, council members Mike McHale, Tom Ehnot, Carol Scrimalli and Michael Hayes rejected the obvious and overwhelming will of the people to grease the skids for a 46-year expansion of the landfill in Dunmore and Throop.

Council President Michael Dempsey, Vice President Tom Hallinan and Councilman Vince Amico stood up for the common good and voted against the amendment. On Monday, all three stood by their votes and their mayor.

McHale, Ehnot and Scrimalli were conspicuously absent from Monday’s meeting, but Hayes was there, still selling fear of phantom legal ramifications and the financial consequences of defying Caesar.

Hayes pointed to a line in the borough’s 2014 host agreement with Keystone that agrees the landfill “is not a building under the current zoning ordinance pertaining to maximum building height.”

If that sentence had the power to resolve this situation, the landfill surely would raise it. Hayes not only betrayed his professed opposition to the expansion and his oath to serve the common good, but now argues that Dunmore can’t survive financially without a landfill seeking permission to kill it over the next half-century.

“I have to look out for the 6,000 homeowners and taxpayers,” Hayes said, somehow with a straight face.

Someone should be looking out for homeowners and taxpayers, but I wouldn’t count on borough solicitor Tom Cummings, who has a history of “rendering unto Caesar” at public expense.

On Monday, Cummings cryptically refused to answer questions about whether he has researched the efficacy of the mayor’s veto powers. He said he will issue an opinion. If there’s a way this still works out for the landfill, Cummings will find it.

For now, we’ll go with the state’s borough code, which seems to support Burke’s position. Override of his veto would require a majority-plus-one, or 5-2 vote. One of the three dissenters would have to change his vote. All said they won’t, but voters have heard that before.

McHale and Hayes campaigned in the May Primary on an anti-expansion platform and betrayed voters with their zoning ordinance flip-flop in September. Voters can do Dunmore and the region a public service by voting them out on Nov. 5. Friends of Lackawanna member Janet Brier launched a write-in campaign and Beth McDonald Zangardi — a planning commission member who opposes the expansion — is on the ballot.

The Romans lost their republic when their leaders sold out the common good in exchange for the conditional favor of a greedy few. Tim Burke stood up to save his borough and set an example for the people he swore an oath to serve.

I called the mayor on Tuesday. He said his phone was ringing all day, and he was naturally feeling frazzled. It’s not easy siding against Caesar, but Burke said he stands by his veto and will not back down.

“It was the right thing to do,” he said. “I had to do it.”

Et tu?

The fight isn’t over for the Keystone Sanitary Landfill.

Thank you, Mayor Burke, for taking a stand for the community by vetoing the proposed zoning amendment that would allow the landfill to have no height restrictions. The fight isn’t over! Thank you!

READ MORE

Excerpts from the article:

DUNMORE — The fight isn’t over for the Keystone Sanitary Landfill.

Mayor Timothy Burke announced Monday night he is vetoing a controversial zoning amendment that ruled the landfill is not a structure and not required to adhere to the borough’s height restriction of 50 feet in the landfill’s zoning district.

“Tonight, I am invoking my authority as mayor to veto this proposed legislation,” Burke said.
Council passed the ordinance Sept. 19 with a 4-3 vote, dealing a crushing blow to efforts to prevent the landfill’s 40-plus years expansion plans. Although the vote boosted the landfill’s plans to continue piling trash higher than 50 feet, it still needs the state Department of Environmental Protection to approve its expansion plans. The DEP has only ruled the expansion’s benefits outweigh the known and possible harms.

Council members Michael McHale, Michael Hayes, Thomas Ehnot and Carol Scrimalli voted in favor of the amended ordinance last month, which was requested by the landfill, owned by brothers Louis and Dominick DeNaples.
McHale, Ehnot and Scrimalli were all absent from Monday’s council meeting.

Overriding a veto

According to the state’s borough code, if mayors do not approve of an ordinance, they can return it with objections.

Council would have to vote with a majority plus one, or 5-2, to override the mayor’s veto. In this case, someone on council would need to change their vote. Burke also believes an override would necessitate a new public hearing. During council’s previous public hearing, residents spent nearly two hours pleading with officials not to vote for the zoning amendment.
Council President Michael Dempsey, Vice President Thomas J. Hallinan and Councilman Vince Amico voted to reject the ordinance last month, and all three said they stand by their votes after Monday’s meeting.

“This amendment is designed to benefit one and only one entity at the expense of the community at large,” Burke said. “The amendment removes or greatly diminishes the borough’s ability to protect its citizens by enforcing the borough’s zoning codes.”

Integrity betrayed

A powerful Letter to The Editor today by Francis X. Kranick, Jr. highlighting the integrity that 4 Dunmore Council members and 4 Dunmore Planning Commission members traded in to the benefit of one company that will effect Dunmoreans and the surrounding communities for generations to come.

Letters to the Editor 10/6/2019 - Letters - The Times-Tribune

READ MORE

Integrity betrayed

Editor: Having lived in Dunmore all my life, it’s profoundly sad when by the slimmest of margins the greater good has been cast aside twice for the aggrandizement of an extraordinarily small handful.

First was a 4-3 vote by the Dunmore Planning Commission, followed two weeks later with a 4-3 vote by borough council. But one changed vote by either body would have helped Dunmore shed its nickname of “Dumpmore.” It seems that degrading moniker will now stick.

Not once, through all the hearings, public meetings, Department of Environmental Protection reports, or politicians’ urgings has it ever appeared that Keystone Sanitary Landfill is good, as in good for the environment of Dunmore and Throop or good for the citizens of Dunmore and Throop.

Yet, it’s a boon to the people who operate the landfill, the same people who have exerted their sphere of influence over the elected officials of Dunmore for decades. The grossly misnamed DEP cannot think for itself and has produced nothing of worth in these discussions, aside from pointing out financial gain — primarily benefiting that same small handful.

Of the council members who voted to grant yet another landfill wish, only one said more than one word that night, even if it was just window dressing. The other three simply added their singular utterance in their vote. There was no explanation, no reasoning, no comment to the assembled citizens, landowners and business persons of Dunmore.

When elected or appointed officials trade in their integrity, probity and transparency, we get hobbled governance. We get the Dunmore we now enjoy. These officials will move on, out of the spotlight, the self-painted targets on their backs will fade, but the choice they made for 14,000 fellow Dunmoreans remains. I cannot forget that.

FRANCIS X. KRANICK JR.

DUNMORE

Write-in effort exposes pretzel logic

Todays OpEd by the Scranton Times Tribune Editorial Board exposes the pretzel logic used by two of the Dunmore Council members who rolled over for the landfill despite running on campaign promises to oppose it leading to a write-in campaign by Dunmore resident, Janet Brier. As stated in the OpEd, Brier’s campaign gives borough residents the opportunity to hold borough officials accountable, to condemn their government’s rolling over for a powerful special interest, and to give voice to their opposition to the expansion.

READ MORE

Write-in effort exposes pretzel logic

BY THE EDITORIAL BOARD / PUBLISHED: OCTOBER 4, 2019

Some Dunmore politicians still want borough residents to believe that they oppose the Keystone Sanitary Landfill’s massive expansion, even after they recently rolled over for the project in a crucial zoning case.

The expansion would keep the landfill open for more than four more decades, during which more than 100 million tons of mostly out-of-state trash would be added to the millions of tons already there.

At issue in the zoning case was whether the landfill could be regulated as a structure, which is important because of height restrictions in the borough zoning code pertaining to structures. State appellate courts already have established that landfills are structures, so the landfill asked the borough to alter its zoning ordinance to specifically hold that landfills are not structures, and council complied.

Two councilmen who are up for re-election, Michael McHale and Michael Hayes, voted for the change after campaigning against the landfill expansion.

Now borough resident Janet Brier has launched a write-in campaign against the pair in an effort to prove that they can’t have it both ways. McHale won a Democratic nomination in the heavily Democratic borough; Hayes won a Republican nomination by write-in.

Hayes, remarkably, recently claimed that his zoning vote doesn’t conflict with his political position against landfill expansion. There is no doubt, however, that his vote facilitates the landfill’s expansion.

Hayes also claimed that he protected taxpayers with his zoning vote by warding off potential litigation from the landfill company. Sometimes, however, litigation is necessary to protect the public interest. And the long-term negative impacts of the expansion on the borough and the region are likely to be far more expensive, in many different ways, than the cost of a lawsuit.

The councilman also claimed he was protecting millions of dollars that the borough receives from the landfill in host community fees, but that contradicts his supposed opposition to the expansion.

Hayes, at least, has stated his case. McHale has remained silent about it since the vote.

Brier’s campaign gives borough residents the opportunity to hold borough officials accountable, to condemn their government’s rolling over for a powerful special interest, and to give voice to their opposition to the expansion.

Bad move on landfill

This Letter to the Editor in the Scranton Times Tribune by Julia Betti emphasizes what the saddest and most devastating repercussion will be if the Keystone Sanitary Landfill expansion happens--bright young minds will not return to a place surrounded by mountains of garbage that affects the health and lives of those in our community.

READ MORE

Letters to the Editor 10/3/2019

TIMES=TRIBUNE READERS / PUBLISHED: OCTOBER 3, 2019

Bad move on landfill

Editor: History was made recently when Dunmore Borough Council voted to make it easier for Keystone Sanitary Landfill to expand.

As a young adult who has lived in this area her entire life and followed this pressing issue, I am extremely saddened by this decision. The repercussions of this monumental decision will be felt for decades.

Throughout college, the topic of life after graduation comes up frequently. I regularly think about where life will take me and where I will potentially settle down. Ideally, I would love to eventually move back to Northeast Pennsylvania. Younger people can come back to their hometowns and bring their knowledge and expertise to help their local communities with fresh, new perspectives.

However, many people, including myself, do not want to live in a place surrounded by mountains of garbage that affects the health and lives of many individuals. Bright, young minds will refrain from using their innovation to create economic opportunity and help revitalize NEPA because they will not want to live in an environmentally unsafe place.

The four Dunmore council members who voted in favor of the landfill should think of the repercussions this immense decision creates. Please think about the little children running around Sherwood Park in Dunmore who smell the odors from the landfill and the health complications that can arise.

Please think about students at the Dunmore and Mid Valley school districts who may be impacted. Please think about residents of surrounding areas who have leachate in their groundwater.

Four votes are not worth risking the lives of thousands of people or the profits to be made from this expansion. Every vote matters and sadly the four votes for the landfill expansion were not made in the citizens’ best interests or the best interests of NEPA for decades to come.

JULIA BETTI
DICKSON CITY

This Letter to the Editor in the Scranton Times Tribune points out that democracy should come first for our elected representatives, but in this case four Dunmore Council members betrayed our trust.

READ NOW

Neighbors sold out

Editor: Keystone Sanitary Landfill and its owner’s politics are present every day.
We saw evidence of that on Sept. 19 when Dunmore Borough Council ruled that the landfill is not a structure.

That’s meant to be assumed. That’s why the yearslong fight by Friends of Lackawanna seems newer than it is to Jeffrey Belardi, the landfill’s attorney, along with council members Thomas Ehnot, Michael McHale, Michael Hayes and Carol Scrimalli, in particular.

The precursors to the nation’s founders believed it necessary for society to act in the eye of the people and to develop a higher moral authority, to be a “city upon a hill.”
Puritan leader John Winthrop, who often is credited with making that original reference in public, is long removed.

But what we should assume and believe is that our leaders are willing to be scrutinized, aware that the will of their electors ought to be recognized, and sacrifice for their constituents. We ought to expect democracy to come first.

Ehnot, Hayes, Scrimalli and McHale did the opposite for their community on Sept. 19. It’s not new. Some reportedly chose to take dinners with a once-indicted business owner. Some chose to make purposefully misleading public statements. All thought they wouldn’t feel the heat from the people who mattered.

Say their names again: Thomas Ehnot, Michael Hayes, Carol Scrimalli and Michael McHale all chose to sell out their neighbors. Those four people chose to betray our trust. They chose the interests of one businessman over the public will.

The “hill” isn’t ours, and neither are our representatives. Vote them out. Live in a borough on a real hill.

SEAN CUFF
PITTSBURGH

Four Powerful Letters to the Editor

Four powerful Letters to the Editor in the Scranton Times-Tribune voicing outrage at the results of the recent Dunmore Council vote. The public continues to make it abundantly clear that this expansion is not in the best interest of our community!

READ MORE

Pity for Dunmore

Editor: After reading the story, “Piling it on” in the Sept. 20 issue of The Times-Tribune, regarding Dunmore Borough Council’s declaration that Keystone Sanitary Landfill is not a structure, I extend my sincere and genuine condolences to the survivors of Dunmore.

Its death, although no surprise, is certainly disturbing. The shortsightedness of its council has sealed the fate of this community.

Re-emerging as “Dumpmore” or “Dumptown,” the survivors can call themselves the Dumpmore Dumps rather than the Dunmore Bucks. School logos will, of course, have to be changed, but I’m sure the school district is prepared for such. On the bright side, Dunmore’s contract with Keystone Sanitary Landfill will be intact even as the town is obliterated. Perhaps it could be renamed Centralia.

Next on the list is Throop, which could be renamed “Throw-up.”

I will not be alive in 50 years to see the outcome and the end of the proposed expansion of the Keystone landfill, but the apocalyptic takeover and destruction of two towns for the menial scraps being thrown in their direction is truly a heartbreaking loss.

My sympathy goes out to both.

SANDRA NEWAK

MAYFIELD

https://www.thetimes-tribune.com/…/letters-to-the-editor-9-…

Motivation from ‘no’

Editor: On July 18, 2016, I wrote these words and testified at a Department of Environmental Protection public hearing regarding the proposed enlargement of Keystone Sanitary Landfill: “The idea ... suggesting that it’s hard to care about what we don’t see does not suffice in the case of this proposed expansion. Because when it comes to the Keystone Sanitary Landfill, we can and we do see.”

I had just finished my freshman year of college.

Beyond the structure, I testified: “What we see is the expansion of a mountain that is only expanding the divide within our community between those who speak out and those who are silenced by offers they cannot refuse.”

Same story, different day.

I wanted Sept. 19 to be a different story. But Dunmore Borough Council members Thomas Ehnot, Michael Hayes, Michael McHale and Carol Scrimalli said, “No.”

I’ll graduate with my master of public health degree in May 2020 with the same resounding “no” motivating the rest of my career.

EMILY CUFF

DUNMORE

https://www.thetimes-tribune.com/…/letters-to-the-editor-9-…

Unnatural splendor

Editor: Driving along Interstate 81 through the Scranton and Dunmore corridor offers beautiful, scenic vistas.

Now, a lovely complement to the potato-peeled West Mountain vista, which helps deliver cheaper electrical power out of the area, is Dunmore’s majestic “devil’s tower,” looming higher and higher in its unnatural splendor.

Perhaps Steven Spielberg will do a “Close Encounters” sequel locally. Just think of the money it would generate.

PAUL McHALE

SOUTH ABINGTON TWP.

https://www.thetimes-tribune.com/…/letters-to-the-editor-9-…

Make torment dream

Editor: Keystone Sanitary Landfill will shut down at the end of its current license.

No jobs will be lost. All employees will be transferred to landfill owner Louis DeNaples’ other businesses. Since his D&L Realty owns tens of thousands of acres of land from Forest City to Nanticoke, the DeNaples family has decided to go green.

The family will soon begin construction on two new factories, one to build windmills in Luzerne County and the other to build solar panels in Fell Twp. While they are being constructed, the family plans to reclaim thousands of acres of abandoned, scarred mine land. The leveled, open land will be used to build many solar farms. The mountaintops will be dotted with windmills.

These devices all will be made locally with high-paying union jobs that will greatly enhance the local economy and help to establish the region as a leader in alternative energy.

The pros from this development include:

■ No more imported garbage

■ Reduced truck traffic on local interstates and other roads.

■ An abundance of cleaner and cheaper renewable energy.

■ No more environmental threat from the landfill to the area, the Lackawanna River and the Chesapeake Bay.

■ Higher wages and a potential influx of new residents.

■ Spinoff gains to local businesses, increased local spending and higher tax revenue at all government levels.

■ Reclamation of mine land and an improved regional environment.

■ Exports of finished products nationally and worldwide.

■ Respect.

The only negative is a lack of courage to bring this concept to reality. Wouldn’t it be nice if it came to fruition?

FRAN GRAYTOCK

UNION DALE

What's your caption?

Editorial Caption Contest time! Today's is below via The Scranton Times-Tribune for a Coletoons - John Cole political cartoons. To formally enter, send your caption, name, address and daytime phone to letters@timesshamrock.com. Please feel free to share your suggested caption here as well by leaving a comment (we don't need your name, address or phone).

Democratic structure: next election

The Editorial Board at The Scranton Times-Tribune has been steadfast in their stance and coverage of the Landfill since this expansion was first proposed.

Today's editorial urges more civic engagement.

Full Article

*******************************

Democratic structure: next election
BY THE EDITORIAL BOARD / PUBLISHED: SEPTEMBER 22, 2019

Even though a majority of Dunmore Borough Council abandoned the public interest Thursday by supporting the interests of the massive Keystone Sanitary Landfill, the majority was narrow enough for borough residents to re-establish the public interest in the Nov. 5 council election.

Council voted 4-3 to amend the borough zoning law to state specifically that a landfill is not a “structure.” That’s an important distinction because the zoning law precludes any structure higher than 50 feet in the manufacturing zone that includes the landfill.

Keystone needs a new definition to facilitate its 40-year expansion plan, under which it will climb several hundred feet above the borough as it accepts more than 100 million more tons of mostly out-of-state garbage.

Facing a precedent in state appellant courts that it likely cannot overcome — a determination that a landfill in another county is a “structure” for zoning purposes — the landfill turned instead to malleable borough politicians to do its bidding. The borough planning commission recently and narrowly recommended that council change the definition, and council members Michael Hayes, Michael McHale, Thomas Ehnot and Carol Scrimalli did so Thursday.

Four council seats are on the general election ballot in overwhelmingly Democratic Dunmore. The Democratic nominees are McHale, council President Michael Dempsey and Vince Amico, who both voted against the zoning giveaway; and Beth McDonald Zangardi, a planning commission member who opposes the change.

Hayes, who voted to do the landfill’s bidding, lost in the Democratic primary but won a Republican write-in nomination with 18 votes. Zangardi, Dempsey and Amico also won GOP write-ins and will be on both sides of the ballot.

Surely, if the zoning law can be manipulated to benefit the private interest of the landfill, it can be changed anew to serve the public interest — which is why zoning exists in the first place.

Borough residents should flock to the polls in November to reclaim the public interest.

Today's Christopher J. Kelly column succinctly covers the ongoing corruption and warped power structures which need to come to an end in NEPA.

He covers three sad stories, all making headlines this week. One of which, of course, was Dunmore Borough's vote on Landfill's customized zoning amendment.

Very much worth the read as the threads tie together.

Full Article

**************

CHRIS KELLY: Spinal tap dance
KELLY'S WORLD / PUBLISHED: SEPTEMBER 22, 2019

The spine is a complex structure that keeps humans upright. “Backbone” is a simple metaphor that supports the same function.

Everyone needs a spine. Backbones are optional, like integrity, honesty and choosing to do the right thing without fear or favor.

Sometimes, the right thing to do is nothing. Dunmore Borough Council had that option Thursday night. Instead, four of its elected vertebrae bent over backward to sell out the future of a proud community to the immediate interests of a single family whose business is literally dumping on its neighbors.

It was that kind of week for “representative democracy” here in Our Stiff Neck of the Woods:

Dunmore officials chose to bury their own community in exchange for the occasional “donated” firetruck.

The judge overseeing a statewide grand jury investigating corruption in the Scranton School District found it necessary to warn against obstruction of justice and intimidation of witnesses.

The Lackawanna County Democratic Party Machine went to court to remove independent reformers from the ballot in the Sept. 5 special mayoral election and disenfranchise thousands of voters who had no say in choosing the Democratic and Republican candidates.

Each of these hunchbacked headlines reflects a crooked power structure in spasm. New blood and fresh ideas threaten a sclerotic system of rigged government that serves a favored few at the expense of the marginalized many. The Old Guard is on its last legs and sprinting to get away with whatever it can before the torches and pitchforks catch up.

I was in Scranton City Council chambers when the Dunmore council hearing started. The Housing Appeals Board met to hear an appeal from PSN Realty, the real estate alter ego of notorious landlord and garbage fee/tax deadbeat Ken Bond.

Neighbors showed up. Bond did not. The board denied his appeal and declared that none of his 20 rental properties are registered with the city, which I reported months ago. Bond has tenants in at least half of them, illegally profiting while blowing off hundreds of thousands in back taxes and fees.

Bond’s neighbors joined me in asking city solicitor Patrick Hughes what action the city would take.

“I can’t comment,” he said. The neighbors had plenty to say, but it can’t be published in a family newspaper. All taxpayers and homeowners who play by the rules and pay their fair share, these solid citizens expected city officials to show some backbone. They went home disappointed.

I went to Dunmore.

I got to the community center at 6:30 p.m. and couldn’t get into the hearing. A fire marshal told me the meeting room was at capacity. I didn’t blame the guy. He was just doing his job.

It was council who decided to hold a hearing about changing the borough zoning code to clear the way for a 46-year expansion of Keystone Sanitary Landfill in a medium-sized room and not the gymnasium, which, like the landfill, is extra-large and a structure.

I squeezed into the hearing about 10 minutes later and caught the tail end of Keystone engineer Al Magnotta’s spiel, which amounted to, “Nice little town ya got here. Be a shame if anything happened to it.”

Magnotta joined Keystone attorneys Jeff Belardi and David Overstreet in painting a grim future where Bucktown is a financial basket case ruined by sky-high taxes and unnecessary legal expenses, a forlorn wasteland that might have been saved by a sky-high mountain of out-of-state trash.

Oh, and landfills aren’t structures because they don’t have roofs.

The crowd was neither impressed nor intimidated. The first speaker, Janet Brier, called Keystone’s argument “ludicrous” before turning to council.

“What I’m here tonight to ask of all of you is to just think about our beautiful little town,” she said. “And have the courage that I know all of you have in your hearts, to speak truth to power and to defend our town.”

The second speaker, Kevin McDonald, pointed out that landfill roofs are called “caps.” Every landfill has one, eventually. Pat Clark, a co-founder of Friends of Lackawanna, reminded council that it had no legal obligation to acknowledge Keystone’s request to amend the zoning ordinance, let alone grant it.

The question of whether landfills are structures subject to zoning is being decided in Commonwealth Court. Keystone’s request was an end-around the judicial system. Council had the choice to sit it out and let the bench call the game.

Speaker after speaker sang the praises of a tightknit community with a proud past and a bright future and begged council to protect and preserve it for generations of Dunmoreans.

It was impossible to resist the sense of hope and determination swelling in the room. The people put their trust in the seven neighbors they elected. Maybe they could be swayed, after all.

Then Mike McHale’s backbone snapped. In a scenery-chewing soliloquy to his troubles, the sad-eyed councilman said he’s been unemployed for almost a year and is facing bankruptcy, but has never taken a bribe. That’s some badge of honor.

McHale said he and his children had been harassed and called names by expansion opponents. The martyr act was a preamble to McHale asking preemptive forgiveness for the sin he was about to commit.

Council President Michael Dempsey, Vice President Thomas J. Hallinan and Councilman Vince Amico voted to reject the request.

McHale, Councilwoman Carol Scrimalli, and Councilmen Thomas Ehnot and Michael Hayes voted to embrace it, and the shame and public scorn that come with it. Their names should be engraved on Dunmore’s tombstone.

Michele Dempsey, a co-founder of Friends of Lackawanna, looked back on the five-year fight the grassroots group has waged against the expansion and shook her head in disbelief.

“This is the night Dunmore died,” she said.

The obituary seems premature, but the sentiment is dead-on. A landfill is a complex structure that undermines a community and keeps its people down. A dump is a community whose leaders lack the backbone to stand up and do the right thing, even when all they have to do is nothing.

CHRIS KELLY, The Times-Tribune columnist, will have a Ken Bond update in his Wednesday column.

Contact the writer:

kellysworld@timesshamrock.com, @cjkink on Twitter. Read his award-winning blog at times-tribuneblogs.com/kelly.

Listen Now: Michele Dempsey Speaks to WILK Radio about expansion

FOL core member, Michele Dempsey, talks to Nancy and Webster on WILK this morning about the Dunmore Council Meeting last night where 4 Council members—Michael Hayes, Carol Scrimalli, Michael McHale and Tom Ehnot—chose to bypass the law and serve the interests of one man and his company instead of living up to their oath to serve the the citizens of Dunmore.

Listen Now