LOWER SAUCON TWP., Pa. — Township voters could have the final say in setting two-term limits for municipal leadership, effective following the next election cycle in 2025.
This would limit council members to eight years served over two four-year terms.
This comes following a 4-1 council vote on Monday that would authorize the township solicitor to prepare the respective ordinance. If later approved, a referendum would go on the ballot later in 2023, giving the public a chance to vote on the matter.
The supporters included Council President Jason Banonis, Council Vice President Mark Inglis, as well as members Sandra Yerger and Thomas Carocci. The lone dissenter was member Priscilla deLeon.
- Lower Saucon voters may soon have the chance to vote on term limits for their elected officials
- The majority of Lower Saucon Township Council supported the construction of a cell tower at Lewis Avenue
- The Lower Saucon Township Zoning Hearing Board will meet to discuss the cell tower project on Thursday, June 29
Banonis said this move is common in other leadership groups, even at the federal and state levels.
“The purpose of those term limits is to promote good governance and to provide fresh ideas on the governing bodies,” Banonis said. “It also helps the elected officials to vote in the best interest of the residents and not necessarily voting to support their candidacy for reelection.”
DeLeon said she felt “mixed” on the topic, but ultimately voted against it.
“Knowing that we have a primary and during the primary, the voters get to pick what candidate they want to be in the general election,” deLeon said.
“She’s the only one that represents us and Steel City. The rest of us, we’re like the bastard child; we don’t belong to the township.”Russell Sutton, Steel City resident, speaking on council member Priscilla deLeon
Inglis was in support.
“I think it’s a good idea,” he said. “I think it should be on the federal level as well.
“I’ve always believed that, and I believe it should be here as well.”
Steel City resident Russell Sutton said he felt the ruling was made to target deLeon, a multi-decade member of council and opponent of the potential Bethlehem Landfill expansion.
“She’s the only one that represents us and Steel City,” Sutton said. “The rest of us, we’re like the bastard child; we don’t belong to the township.”
Other business
Council voted 4-1 in support of the construction of a 150-foot cell tower at 4235 Lewis Ave., sending the requested variance vote to the township zoning hearing board that will discuss the matter on Thursday, June 29. The lone dissenter from council was deLeon, as the proposed tower would be placed near her home, among a number of other residents as well.
Catherine Durso, attorney with Allentown-based Fitzpatrick, Lentz & Bubba, represented Verizon at the meeting. Durso said there have been complaints of inadequate cell coverage along nearby Riverside Drive.
Though the tower use would be allowed by conditional use on the property, the applicant would only apply for that use if they received some zoning variances, including a gravel access road instead of paved, allowance of the tower to be closer to property lines than the required 1.5 times its height, as well as the use of existing nearby woodlands to be used as “screening.”
“The location of the property we thought was in the best interest because it minimized the amount of land disturbance and tree removal,” Durso explained.
In the memo, she also added that granting the variances “will not substantially injure neighboring property values and is not otherwise detrimental to the welfare of the community.”
"It stands against the very reason we move to Steel City in the first place. And if it goes up, my family will eventually move."Danielle Yanchuk, Steel City resident, speaking on the proposed cell tower project
“I think there’s some benefit to the township and its residents in a number of ways in preserving the trees and limiting the stormwater management issues that may be necessary by creating greater roadways,” Banonis said. “And I tend to support that because to locate this elsewhere, it causes greater harm.”
Resident Danielle Yanchuk said the proposed tower would butt up against her property line.
“I only discovered through word of mouth and a little paper in my mailbox last week, giving residents, what, a weeks’ notice to prepare a testimony for the hearing,” Yanchuk said.
She said the tower isn’t an immediate need for township residents, and if it had to be constructed, it should be somewhere else on the 10.92-acre property that’s farthest from neighbors.
“Let’s face it, this isn’t a pool or a shed we’re talking about here,” Yanchuk said. “This is a 150-foot radiation-emitting tower.
“ … It stands against the very reason we move to Steel City in the first place. And if it goes up, my family will eventually move.”
