The hearing that was supposed to happen tonight is off. At 2:53 this afternoon, the solicitor for the Zoning Hearing Board emailed the parties to say the township hadn’t posted the agenda 24 hours ahead, which the Sunshine Act requires, and he called it an administrative oversight. We’ve got some questions about that.
What got posted, and what didn’t
The 24-hour agenda rule isn’t new. It came in with Act 65 in 2021, and Plymouth Township has been following it in this case all along. MoreThanTheCurve went back and documented that the township posted an agenda for every earlier session, and ran four of them as examples. Then this week, the township updated its Data Center Information page with the YouTube link for tonight’s livestream, more than a day before the hearing. So someone was in the website. They put up the link to watch the meeting and left out the agenda the meeting can’t legally happen without.
Who benefits from a delay
The applicant’s expert, Richard Roseberry of Colliers Engineering and Design, gave his direct testimony on August 6. Tonight would’ve been the first time anyone on our side got to ask him a question, and that’s now pushed to a date nobody has set.
It hasn’t been a great month for the applicant. Upper Merion turned down all five of his data center sites on August 13. Township Council said in public that he walked away from a list of conditions he’d agreed to. The Governor signed an order that puts every state permit this project needs behind local approval. For a developer in that spot, a postponement isn’t nothing. It’s a month of breathing room, and nobody had to vote for it.
We’re not saying anyone meant for this to happen. We are saying that if you wanted to design a postponement that looked like an accident, it’d look a lot like this one, and people who’ve been showing up to these hearings since June deserve to know why.
The other thing that was on tonight’s agenda
On Monday, Montgomery County filed for party status in this case. The county said so on its official page yesterday afternoon, and said it hoped to get that status at the September 17 hearing. Party status is the difference between watching and taking part. A party can cross-examine witnesses, put on its own, and appeal the decision, and the county brings a planning commission, a health department, and a solicitor’s office to that table.
One line in the county’s statement matters more than the rest. The county owns the former Ivy Rock Quarry, which is next door to the site. Back on August 6, the board turned down Norristown because its concerns were general rather than specific. A next-door landowner is about as specific as it gets. Under the state planning code, an adjoining property owner is the strongest case for party status there is, and the applicant would’ve had to argue against it tonight, in front of the same board that set the Norristown standard.
We’ll have more on the county’s filing in its own piece. For now, two things were supposed to happen tonight, the first cross-examination of the applicant’s expert and the arrival of a next-door neighbor with a county solicitor, and neither one was good news for him.
What we’re asking for
A written explanation from the Township Manager, posted on the township website, that answers three things: who was responsible for posting the agenda, when the livestream link went up, and why one made it onto the site and the other didn’t.
The posting record. The township’s website keeps a log of when pages are created and edited. Publish the entries for this hearing, with timestamps.
A review by Township Council, in open session, of how the Zoning Hearing Board’s notices get prepared and who can publish them. If Council isn’t satisfied with what it hears, the Sunshine Act puts enforcement with the District Attorney, and Council should say that out loud.
For three months, residents have been told this process is careful and by the book. This week the book stayed on the shelf, and the only party who came out ahead is the one whose witness was about to be questioned. That needs an explanation, and a shrug isn’t one.
What the cancellation does to the calendar
The state planning code sets a timeline for zoning hearings. Each session is supposed to follow the last one within 45 days unless the applicant agrees to a longer gap, in writing or on the record. The hearing has since been rescheduled for October 15, and we’d expect the board and the parties’ lawyers to make sure the paperwork behind that date is in order.
The applicant is also expected to finish presenting his own case within 100 days of the first hearing, which was June 25. His first witness hasn’t finished direct. If he needs more hearings than that, the same law gives the people opposing him an equal number of additional hearings.
The applicant’s separate challenge to the zoning ordinance was deemed complete on July 27. A hearing on it has to open within 60 days, which is September 25. If it doesn’t, the challenge is treated as denied, and the applicant can take it to the Court of Common Pleas within 30 days. That would move the constitutional question out of Plymouth Township altogether.
What to do
The hearing is back on for Thursday, October 15 at 7:00 p.m., in the same Karen B. Weiss Meeting Room at 700 Belvoir Road. Come early, because the parties get seated first. The weekly community call on Sundays at 3:30 is the place to plan for it, and we’ll keep the banner on every page and the update list current.