Immediately following the call to order, resident Paul Shannon asked Mr. Couturiaux if there has ever been an instance in which the board of supervisors has failed to act on the recommendation of the planning commission, especially in a circumstance where that body voted 6-1 in favor of recommending acceptance as it did with the preliminary subdivision plan at its meeting Monday night.

Mr. Couturiaux said he was unaware of any time during his tenure as supervisor in which the board acted against the recommendation of the planning commission.

Tom Levine, township engineer and owner of Levine Engineering LLC, introduced Eric Brinser of Rettew Associates who was on hand to address a technical comment included on the plan by Mr. Levine.

Mr. Brinser said the current plan has been revised to show that three cabins on the Rush Township side of the subdivision will remain where they are. Initial drafts submitted to ensure consistency with Centre County Comprehensive Plan did not show those cabins so as to satisfy county requirements, but Mr. Brinser  assured  the  board those cabins would not be torn down.

The board next heard from Charlie Suhr, an attorney with Stevens & Lee Lawyers and Consultants, representing Resource Recovery, who attempted to lay to rest the board of supervisors' concerns regarding future use of the subdivision and who would be responsible for making needed improvements to Peale Road should the proposed industrial development project move forward.

Mr. Suhr demonstrated that the current plan shows the approximate location of the proposed landfill, quarry, brine water treatment plant and gas wells. He said those locations are subject to change during the drafting of the land development plan, but that their inclusion on the plan should satisfy the board's concerns regarding future use.

Mr. Suhr then addressed the concerns regarding Peale Road when he said his client has already committed to being solely responsible for those improvements in Note 16 of the plan, which was added March 26.

Note 16 of the plan reads, "the applicant [Resource Recovery] shall be solely responsible for any and all improvements to Peale Road necessary to provide safe and maintainable access to the proposed lots. All improvements shall be done according to the standards set forth in section 602 of the Rush Township Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance and shall be the sole financial obligation of the applicant and not Rush Township."

Mr. Suhr then addressed a general comment contained in Mr. Levine's review letter that stated, "section 602.3 of the SLDO indicates that the board of supervisors may require improvements to an existing road that does not conform to the right-of-way or improvement standards of the SLDO, in this case Peale Road. The board of supervisors should consider if this provision is applicable to this preliminary subdivision plan."

Mr. Suhr said it is his interpretation that section 602.3 is not applicable at this time because the acceptance of the preliminary subdivision plan will not alter the amount of traffic attempting to enter or exit the subdivision lots.

He said improvement of the road itself should not become an issue until the land development planning process begins in earnest and that 602.3 should not be grounds for rejecting the preliminary subdivision plan.

Mr. Couturiaux made his motion to accept the preliminary subdivision plan after Mr. Suhr fielded question from the audience. "They accepted it, and they asked the supervisors to accept it."

Mr. Knowles said he was not willing to make a second to the motion because Supervisor Mike Savage was away on vacation and had not had the opportunity to review the revisions made to the plan.

Mr. Couturiaux said that in his 24 years as supervisor that the board has always acted on its agenda items when a quorum was seated. "What's the difference in acting now?" he asked. "We have a quorum."

"Pat, I think you should respect your fellow supervisor in a public forum," resident David Pryde said following the exchange.

"I have a little respect for my planning commission members, too," replied Mr. Couturiaux. He said the planning commission put a lot of time in researching the matter and voted 6-1 in favor of recommending the board's acceptance. "Do you have respect for your planning commission?" he asked Mr. Knowles, who replied that he did.

Mr. Levine noted the board has until May 5 to act on the plan or it will be deemed approved by default. Mr. Suhr said he believed that deadline was in fact May 4. In either case, Mr. Knowles said the board has the time to allow Mr. Savage to return, review the revisions and call a special meeting in which the board can vote on the matter.

"It's just respect," Mr. Knowles told those in attendance.

Mr. Shannon asked Mr. Knowles if he would make this same decision on other matters on the agenda, and he said that he would.

Mr. Shannon asked if that meant Mr. Knowles intended to table all of the agenda items that the board needed to act on. He later said, "You don't want to vote because you don't approve of this project."

Mr. Knowles made a motion to hold a special meeting May 4 to take action on the plan.

"No second," replied Mr. Couturiaux.