Public Hearing - Continued

One of the residents asked if there would be a public role call vote on whether or not this would be approved. He wanted it to be known that the people were watching and accountability would be expected for those votes. This resident and everyone needs to know that in Township Government, the supervisor (Dave Rushing) appoints all members of the Planning Commission and is not an elected position. If a resident has an issue with the members, or how they would ultimately vote, that issue could only be taken up with the supervisor. Tom Miller did point out that not all decisions with Mr. Birkenshaw are made through planning. At this month's Board Meeting there was discussion as to whether a consent agreement should be signed by the Township allowing some "adult material" and thereby avoid the need to follow the steps outlined by our own ordinances or the judgements already rendered by the courts. The idea for a consent agreement did not just magically appear. There must have been some prior discussion regarding this. Perhaps Mr. Rushing would like to explain how this came to the board before any hearing was to be held by the Planning Commission???

Both Mr. Birkenshaw's attorney and the Riley Township Supervisor, Dave Rushing addressed the fact that there had been a discussion to have a consent agreement between the two parties, Bisco's and the Township, which may have made this public hearing unnecessary. It was explained that the attorney for Mr. Birkenshaw wrote the consent agreement and that it could have possibly stopped some of the legal expenses being incurred by our Township.

We know that there are legal expenses building because of the lawsuit concerning all of the blight on this property. We also know that Mr. Rushing stopped the first lawsuit regarding this blight when he was elected four years ago. We know that for the last two years or more Riley Township has been fighting to get this cleaned up through the courts and that we, as a Township, continue to win through the appeals process (and we continue to pay). We don't know why a consent agreement would even be considered when we are winning. We don’t know why Mr. Birkenshaw is not paying our legal expenses, as he is the one that continues to appeal and continues to lose. There is also now a question as to whether or not our ordinance enforcement officer is being allowed to do his job and continue citing the property for the blight that is already there. Continued citations for blight may bring up contempt charges and fines that Mr. Birkenshaw would have to pay. We should at the very least continue to enforce those ordinances we know he is still violating.