×

Burn ban decision sparks anger

Duncansville resident questions why council decided to drop issue

DUNCANSVILLE — Borough Council recently dropped the idea of tightening its restrictions on open burning, touching off a heated discussion Wednes­day about how the decision was made.

The idea of tightening the restrictions originated at a meeting in late August, when residents Ed Blontz and Lou Tarczy complained about bothersome smoke, especially from burning garbage and plastics — with both men indicating they’d prefer a comprehensive prohibition on open burning, except for recreational fires in cookouts, yard rings and braziers.

At the next council meeting in early September, Councilman Dave Smith, who’d been assigned to review the ordinance, said it was OK as it was, except that it needed to be enforced.

“We feel that it’s OK,” Smith said, according to Blontz, who was present at that early September meeting.

On Wednesday, Blontz brought the matter up again.

He asked council members: Who is the “we” that Smith referred to?

The question raised the emotional temperature in the room.

“Oh brother,” Council President Jeff Wolfe said.

“I assigned the councilman (Smith) to go over the burning ordinance to see if it was adequate,” Wolfe said. “It is adequate.”

The ordinance allows open burning of trash, but not plastics or yard waste, between 8 a.m. and 7 p.m. Tuesday through Saturday, April through October — with the cutoff time at 5 p.m. during the other months, according to the borough website and Blontz.

Wolfe then remarked on Blontz having raised his voice and on Blontz’s hope for an almost comprehensive burn ban.

Blontz spoke of recent news about deaths from air pollution and his displeasure at the smell of burning garbage.

He needs to call police if he detects a violation, Wolfe said.

“Half the time no one is on,” Blontz replied, referring to the borough’s police officers.

Actually, police coverage in the borough has in­creased to 18 hours a day, Mayor Lloyd Forshey said.

After the meeting, Blontz said his wife, Council­woman Cindy Blontz, was not consulted by Smith about the adequacy of the burning ordinance before Smith said the existing ordinance was OK at the early September meeting.

And yet Smith’s use of “we” indicated there had been some sort of discussion among members outside of a council meeting, Ed Blontz suggested.

Smith was not present Wednesday.

Forshey indicated that the rest of council simply relied on Smith’s analysis in dropping the issue.

Mirror Staff Writer William Kibler is at 949-7038.

NEWSLETTER

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *
   

COMMENTS

[vivafbcomment]

Starting at $4.39/week.

Subscribe Today