QuickTopic logo Create New TopicNew Topic My TopicsMy Topics News
Skip to Messages
"Troop 84 has a paper drive" every third Saturday of the month, weather permitting.
They will be picking up next to the water tower at Bartís Centenary Methodist Church on E. King St.

^     All messages            16601-16630 of 16630  16571-16600 >>
Harry C,Person was signed in when posted
04:06 PM ET (US)
Here is a part of the letter to the editor from the Times. It was about the GASD but this part refers to several embarrassing comments/actions by our school board.

"I shudder hearing elected and un-elected school officials say, “I hate to leave any tax money on the table!” when discussing additional taxing authority through Act 1 exceptions, or “We need to build our financial reserves to more comfortable levels!” and “Raising taxes less than the maximum permitted is permanently lost tax revenue!” when considering whether a smaller tax increase or perhaps no increase might be sufficient. I believe these comments and others like them are cause for serious taxpayer concern. Officials pontificate about frugality and financial stewardship while property taxpayers, virtually helpless except for Act 1 annual limitations, get little consideration. Some of the “holy virtues” are forgotten in public education but, of course, any hint of religion is forbidden. Some of us recall the military mess hall sign, “Take all you want, but eat all you take”. The philosophy for school officials should be (but isn’t) “Take all you need, but need all you take”. Administrations and boards don’t seem to have money to renovate and properly maintain their existing facilities but borrow millions for building new facilities and destroying structurally sound existing ones.
I have watched the “Steward-ship” sail loaded with $70,000+ stadium art and sundry other superfluous bells and expensive whistles that do nothing to improve educational opportunities for students or to maintain/upgrade facilities. Taxpayers attending board meetings can be recognized to question the value derived from expenditures and increased tax levies but don’t any expect answers."
Harry C,Person was signed in when posted
08:24 AM ET (US)
Good luck to the football team tonight at Bermudian.
snowbirdPerson was signed in when posted
06:43 AM ET (US)
For the average and less than average folk's, what in the hell did he say?
CapricornPerson was signed in when posted
03:48 PM ET (US)
Poll: 1/3 of Americans Pass Citizenship Test, Blame Climate Change for Cold War
“Americans need to understand the past in order to make sense of a chaotic present and an inchoate future. History is both an anchor in a time when change assails us and a laboratory for studying the changes that are occurring. It offers the promise of providing a common bond among Americans in an era in which our divisions are profound and our differences threaten to overshadow our commonalities."
Harry C,Person was signed in when posted
08:03 AM ET (US)
In my opinion, not spending a $1,000,000 for a social hall was a smart choice. I wish I could say the same about the decisions on the soccer field.
S LaughmanPerson was signed in when posted
10:16 PM ET (US)
Snowbird- There will not be a social hall/room in the new firehouse. We looked at having a space like that, however it would have required there to be a second floor to the building when it was going to be a steel and block building. Even having the maximum space we could, it wouldn't be able to accommodate over half of our fundraisers anyhow. Combine that space with an elevator installation, commercial kitchen, etc. and the cost just for a second floor was another $1-million added to the project.

Without having the land development plans in front of me, I'm pretty sure the total parking space number is somewhere around 54 if memory serves me correctly. There will be 13-14 spaces along the side between the firehouse and the church with the remaining 40ish spaces to the rear of the station. Couple that with Sells Alley parking lot and the lot to the rear of the church & there will be ample parking for the firehouse, church, funeral home, and general public to use like before. Hope that answers your questions.
snowbirdPerson was signed in when posted
06:02 AM ET (US)
Look's like they are going to have lot's of room in new fire house. Are they going to a room where they may have fun raising event.s. Also I can't see were they are going to park many car's. Just wondering. Thank's to all the people that pulled this off.
Harry C,Person was signed in when posted
04:13 PM ET (US)
Thanks Cap.
CapricornPerson was signed in when posted
04:04 PM ET (US)
/m16621 - Thumbs up Harry. I thought only Steeler fans had a contrarian disposition.
Harry C,Person was signed in when posted
11:34 AM ET (US)
Simple Ravens Fan, don't read them if you don't like them. We should welcome debate. Anyone who has a "I don't agree so I want to limit your speech" attitude is narrow minded and lacking in the mental capacity to carry on an intelligent debate.

Limiting comments about the crossing guard/bus subject because they are counter to your opinion is silly and frankly so was your comment.
ravensfanPerson was signed in when posted
06:12 PM ET (US)
Too bad we don't have that option here so we could turn your posts off!
Harry C,Person was signed in when posted
10:23 AM ET (US)
Seems to be a lot of negative comments posted on Facebook about the elimination of crossing guards. I had to laugh the Facebook page admin. didn't like the comments so she shut off anymore posting. LOL.
Jamie ChurchPerson was signed in when posted
05:12 AM ET (US)

If you are a renter in Littlestown borough you need to be aware of the buroughs proposed Rental Inspection Ordinance. This new Ordinance is going to affect you directly. In addition to requiring you to allow the buroughs to inspect your home. It also intends to force your landlords to modify your lease by mandating an additional contract with the burough.
Harry C,Person was signed in when posted
08:24 AM ET (US)
Great fireworks Friday night! Thanks to all who made it happen.
Harry C,Person was signed in when posted
07:53 AM ET (US)
What is sad is that the Jaycees couldn't get younger people to join.
 It speaks volumes about millennials. A sad state of affairs.
Edited 08-14-2018 07:54 AM
Hey YouPerson was signed in when posted
06:09 PM ET (US)
WOW it's weird being at the carnival without the Jaycee pizza booth! Though I did try the firemen's pizza and thought it was good. I'm glad to know they are upholding the tradition.
citizen79Person was signed in when posted
02:07 PM ET (US)
The borough needs to learn from their past and stay out of the real estate business. If the PNC project cost 700K, do you really think the taxpayers will recoup even 1/4 of this? We will not come close to breaking even on the old PNC bank. Lucky to get anywhere near 200K for that building...Stay centralized downtown, make the improvements,and stop making excuses why the move should be made. This "shooting from the hip" mentality needs to stop when you don't understand the market, cash flow, depreciation, etc. I'm sure the citizens will let this sale go through, just like always-striving to be average. Too bad for our community.
major momPerson was signed in when posted
07:44 PM ET (US)
Harry C - I completely agree with you.
mar39Person was signed in when posted
04:59 PM ET (US)

Come out to the Music in the Park for some fun and good entertainment
Harry C,Person was signed in when posted
08:28 AM ET (US)

Thanks. To me, the Community Center issue was simple. We should have either decided to fix and maintain the building or moved on. My point is, if the current building, as the council is claiming, is not a good fit, has issues, etc. then it was a bad decision to buy it in the first place. It seems it was, "any port in a storm" rather than making the decision to get a building that works.

If I could also add, it is easy when you want a shinny new building to make claims that it "isn't worth fixing" as justification. Case in point tearing down Rolling Acres because they wanted a new soccer field. The truth is usually somewhere in between.

The airplane sculpture that the school wasted $73,000 taxpayer dollars on has to be the worst decision ever in the history of Littlestown.

Again, thanks for the response.
major momPerson was signed in when posted
08:29 PM ET (US)
Harry C. Not everyone thought it was wrong. I wasn't there, but to me it tumbled downhill. Everyone hated losing the Community Center but no one wanted to put money into it. That seems to be a mentality....I don't understand it. They won't stand long if they're not maintained. then you have the consortium that says " No it wasn't, it was fine!"

Now, this move will stick. the building is good, the floor plan only needs some tweeking and there's room to add on maybe a pole building or something of that nature if it were needed. The utilies should be much less, the windows are new as are the heating and cooling systems. Won't be trying to cool a second and third floor so I have great hopes.
Harry C,Person was signed in when posted
08:42 AM ET (US)
So you might say the building downtown was a mistake. Wrong building, not appropriate for our needs, needed repairs, etc. and it was bought just to get out of the community center which was not kept repaired over the years.

Perhaps we should take the airplane sculpture the school wasted $73,000 buying and mount it on the roof of the current borough building as a monument to the really bad decisions by our community recently.
major momPerson was signed in when posted
05:21 PM ET (US)
Citizen, I'll says just this. When the study was done to renovate the old building where the Firehall was, it was over 3.5 million to do it because nothing was ever done and it would have had to come up to code. If you want to keep historic buildings, they have to be consistently maintained. The previous councils made to attempt to do so.
Its my understanding the bank building was a very split decision and it is inefficient, cold, with not enough room for the police dept. When the Historical society went in it made the space even smaller. I inquired as to the price of the bank building and with reno's it was in the range of 700,000.
This building is modern, recently rehabilitated totally and has space to appropriately hold the police dept. It was not a favorite place for the Chief but the full council voted unanimously. We also will have a great deal of equity in this building for the price we are paying.
citizen79Person was signed in when posted
06:05 PM ET (US)
Relocate? When the borough wanted to move their offices from the old firehouse to center square they did so saying the building was more efficient and the present location was too costly to maintain. They bought the old PNC bank (3ooK?) and made costly renovations such as the roof, etc...everyone was happy. Now they, once again, want to move to a more efficient building that is less costly to maintain...pricetag of 210K plus renovations....so these last two moves will have cost the taxpayers over 1 million dollars...just think if they would have put this money into renovating the space they were originally in at the old firehouse? we would still have a piece of L-towns history standing. with this move we will get another empty building downtown..just take a look around how many empty building there are...and don't think someone is going to jump at buying the building on the square after they said how bad the current condition is..stay downtown and don't make another bad decision. This town needs to hold someone accountable for this decision. And why a 60 day study to look into expanding and remodeling? Just what is your budget here? Has not this building been on their radar for months? If this goes through, lets hope the next police chief will not find some excuse to move again and rack up another expensive move all on the taxpayers shoulders....this is getting expensive and wasteful.
Edited 08-03-2018 06:05 PM
Harry C,Person was signed in when posted
02:43 PM ET (US)
ittlestown Borough office, police plan relocation
By Mary Grace Keller Times Staff Writer

RELOCATE — Littlestown Borough bought the former oncology center at 41 South Columbus Avenue to house its borough office and police department.

Mary Grace Keller/Gettysburg Times
Looking to move the Littlestown Borough office and police department into the old oncology center, council unanimously agreed to a $5,000 down payment at a special meeting Monday evening.

“You’re not going to get a better deal,” borough Manager Charles Kellar said.

Kellar offered $210,000 on behalf of the borough July 19 for the 4,554-square-foot building on one acre at 41 S. Columbus Ave. The seller, Theriac Enterprises based in Florida, would not disclose the ask price without the borough making an offer, Kellar said. Kellar made what he thought was a low-ball offer and the seller accepted it. The building is valued at $588,000, according to council President Ronald Baird.

“We were shocked,” Baird said.

With a short timeline hanging over their heads, council had to convene a special meeting to authorize the secretary/treasurer to write a $5,000 check for the down payment. Although council voted to purchase the building Monday, they did so with a condition that allows the municipality to back out within 60 days. The down payment would be refunded in that case, Baird said.

Voting on the purchase now prevents council from losing the building to another buyer and gives borough staff time to explore renovation costs, according to council members.

Council can afford to buy the building without dipping into its reserves, Baird said. The hope would be to sell the current borough office and the borough-owned lot by the quarry to recover the cost. The historical society would have to relocate, he said.

The former 21st Century Oncology radiation therapy building has been on the market for one year, and it’s been no secret council has wanted to move, Baird said. The borough office and police department have been at 10 S. Queen St. about 10 years.

The possibility has been on the past three meeting agendas, Kellar said. Baird encouraged locals to attend council meetings rather than air their grievances on social media.

Council members and borough staff cited efficiency as one of the main reasons for the move.

“If anybody thinks this building is efficient, just sit in the office for an hour,” said Baird.

“It is expensive to maintain. The energy bills here are pretty high,” council member Charlene Westcott said.

The windows rattle, the roof needs work, and having the police station on the second floor is an issue, Baird said.

Kellar, who is also Littlestown’s police chief, said it is “crazy” to have the police upstairs. It can be difficult to get uncooperative suspects upstairs and there is no designated interview room, he said.

The oncology center vacated the building after an accidental flooding, and since then repairs have made the facility like new, Kellar said.

There are dozens of rooms on one floor, 25 parking spaces, an alarm system, new carpet, and a new heating and cooling system, according to Baird. The borough would likely have to knock out a few walls for a meeting room, but the office space may be suitable as is, Baird said.

The police department would have its own entrance and a wall separating it from the municipal side, giving them more space for the seven-officer department. Moving would give the borough and police staff about 350 square feet more, while the surrounding grassy area gives them room to expand in the future, Baird said.

“It’s something that the borough should have really looked into years ago, but nothing was available at that time,” Baird said.

Borough officials will have a closer look at the building in the coming weeks to get an estimate on remodeling prices.
major momPerson was signed in when posted
04:52 PM ET (US)
Fire Dept's new building is moving right along!
CapricornPerson was signed in when posted
07:02 AM ET (US)
Ref.1663: Ours is the highest it's ever been. There's only 2 of us, the kids are gone, no appreciable drop.
GrouchoPerson was signed in when posted
04:10 PM ET (US)
Did anybody's water/sewage go up?
Sandy Conrad, Borough SecretaryPerson was signed in when posted
11:58 AM ET (US)
The Borough Council at their June 26, 2018 meeting adopted the following ordinances.

Animal Ordinance

Handicap Ordinance
Edited 06-27-2018 12:03 PM
Harry C,Person was signed in when posted
08:01 AM ET (US)
This article in the Times is interesting. A Board member admits he didn't understand what he was voting for when he voted last time. Then a board member makes a motion and votes against her own motion? Huh?

LASD reverses on drivers' education

After the retired driver's education instructor spoke up at Littlestown's school board meeting, members decided to revisit their decision not to test students for their driver's license.
Sharon Klunk retired from teaching this year, but she will work for the district as the behind-the-wheel instructor. The board accepted her bid last month of $15,000, or $150 per student for six hours. The district covers the majority of the cost, leaving students with a bill of $50 if they choose to take the non-mandatory course.

At Monday's meeting, Klunk said it benefits students to take their license exam with her and voiced concern for the future of the behind-wheel-program. Her speech sparked discussion amongst board members, who then passed a motion that could lead to driver's license testing being offered at Littlestown.

Board members originally decided they did not want the behind-the-wheel instructor to offer the driver's license test to students, preferring they go through the Department of Motor Vehicles. Liability was cited as a major concern. As a result, the district sought bids for someone to serve as a training instructor, but not to test students. Klunk offered the lowest bid and was awarded the contract.

Let them test

"I really feel the liability issue is non-existent," Klunk said.
Before a student takes the license test, Klunk puts the liability on the parents by having them sign a form that signifies their student spent 65 hours behind the wheel and they are ready to get their license, she said.

If she doesn't feel a student is ready, Klunk won't test them. On average, Klunk spends about 600 hours per year with 16-year-old student drivers.
"I have a pretty good gut feeling as to whether they're going to be a safe driver," she said. "I don't have any problem failing them."

If a student makes an error during a test due to nerves, Klunk may pass them if they can tell her how they would correct their mistake and if she knows they are normally a good driver, she said.
"There are students that may pass my test that wouldn't have passed at the DMV, but I still know that those students have the skills to be a good driver," Klunk said.

If students can't test through the district, they'll have to go to the DMV or a third-party testing site. Klunk said these third-parties can charge students whatever they like, while at the DMV they could face long wait periods.
Klunk has known some students to struggle getting $50 for behind-the-wheel training.
If it comes down to having to choose between paying for behind-the-wheel or the license test, Klunk suspects students will pick the test.
"I think they're better drivers after spending six hours" in behind-the-wheel training, Klunk said.
If Klunk does not test anyone for a year she will lose her certification and the district will have to put the program out to bid again, she said.
Klunk expressed concern that fewer students will take behind-the-wheel and the driver's ed program will suffer as a whole.

Board reconsiders

Moved by Klunk's speech, board member Lauren Nace made a motion to revisit license testing in-house. District Solicitor Dan Altland jumped in to say the board cannot change the terms of a contract that has already been advertised and awarded.

Altland said Klunk would have to rescind her contract for the board to bid on a new contract with testing terms included or wait until her contract expires next year. The bid process would be open to everyone, and the district would have to take the lowest responsible bidder's offer, which may not be Klunk's.

"It's a gamble on all ends," Superintendent Christopher Bigger said.
Board member Jim Witt said he's learned a lot since they voted on the matter.

"I certainly would like to be able to change it, but I don't know how to do that," Witt said.
The majority of board members expressed similar feelings.
Just when the board seemed ready to accept its fate and drop the idea, Business Manager Mike Statler chimed in.

"What if I do an RFP (request for proposal) just for the testing piece of it?" Statler said.
The request for proposal process, which is different from a regular bid, does not require the district take the lowest bidder, according to Altland.

Witt made the motion, noting the change would come at no extra cost to the students. The board approved the motion 6-1, with Nace having a change of heart and voting against.

"I don't want to make a knee-jerk decision," Nace said.
Randy Mosebrook and Jennifer McClay were absent.

At this point, the board only authorized writing the RFP, so the hiring of someone to conduct testing would require additional board action.
^     All messages            16601-16630 of 16630  16571-16600 >>

Print | RSS Views: 473413 (Unique: 38643 ) / Subscribers: 30 | What's this?