Two Sides to Every Story

The following is quoted from Council Presidents e-News 17 December 2010:
"New Litigation
Sadly, Council has not been able to find a way to avoid 2 new landowner appeals, so the net in the past month or so is plus one... One of these new issues involves the appeal of a Zoning Officer determination/citation that plumbing fixtures added in a garage makes the garage, in fact, a second residence/dwelling on the property. Council also rejected an out-of-court 'no fault' cash settlement, sending this one to the ZHB, then to court. The second new appeal is against the permitting of a third 4-unit luxury townhome adjacent to the Lakewood Sewage Treatment Plant on Kickapoo Court (Lodge property). This appeal charges that the Borough did not follow its own Zoning Ordinance by allowing the Zoning Officer to issue the permit rather than having Council approve the overall plan, after public hearings, as required (according to the appeal) by the Planned Residential Development requirements (Section 307 and Section 1200) of Ordinance 144. Following vigorous debate, Council ultimately voted to send this to the courts for adjudication also. Ironically, only the lawyers/courts are able to judge the interpretation of the language we ourselves put in our ordinances. I so wish for the day when we are over these battles and can get on enjoying our beautiful Lake together."

As a Member of Council, I found the above to be very misleading and one sided.

Mayor Mike Miscoe summed up my feelings very well in the Mayor's December 2010 Newsletter:
"Litigation:
As you may have heard from the Borough Council President, the Borough was successful in its defense of the validity of Ordinance 144. The Commonwealth Court rejected each argument raised by the Appellants. We anticipate favorable rulings soon on the remaining pieces of litigation appealed to the Commonwealth Court.

It is true that two additional pieces of litigation have been filed recently although the suggestion that the Borough could have avoided this litigation is misleading. The only way to have avoided litigation in one case was to refuse to enforce our Zoning Ordinance. In the second, Council would have been required to violate its own Ordinance and impose a planning provision that does not apply - thus creating the potential for additional litigation, litigation the Borough would have likely lost.
In the first case, Mr. Rohrich violated an express provision on a permit application in constructing living space and installing plumbing in a detached garage. The suggestion that the Borough should close its eyes and ignore such a willful violation of the Zoning Ordinance in order to avoid litigation is not only ridiculous, but contrary to the duty imposed on the Borough and its elected members of Council under the Borough Code.
In the second case, Mr. Lyons through Mrs. Takacs is once again challenging the issuance of a permit requested by St. Clair Development to construct the next Townhome building. It was suggested that if Council forced Mr. St. Clair through the Planned Residential Development provision of the Zoning Ordinance that the appeal might go away. Unfortunately, the PRD provisions of the Zoning Ordinance are not applicable in this case and Council received a well detailed opinion from its solicitor supporting this conclusion.

While unfortunate that the residents of the Borough have to bear the cost of this incessant and fruitless litigation, the Borough must follow and enforce its Ordinances. If doing so results in litigation, then litigation is unavoidable. Rather than cast blame at the Council for doing what it was obligated to do, blame should be leveled at those who continue to file these actions. I am confident that the Borough’s position will be upheld in the Courts. Maybe someday, these individuals will recognize the harm they are doing to all of the residents and cease such activity. It is the Christmas season and therefore the time to believe in miracles."

What is really sad is that this debate is brought forth in a Council Presidents e-News. The Council President is one member of a seven person Council. This Council voted to proceed as it did in the best interest of our community, and upon the advise of the legal council. Rather than accepting the decision of the majority, one member has chosen to cry in public and state just half of the facts. I certainly am not in agreement with every decision made by Council, but I accept these decisions because that is just how a Democracy works.

Newspaper Article on Our Dam

I have been remiss lately in keeping you updated on Dam happenings. On December 16th the Somerset Daily American published an article which you may find of interest. The entire article can be read at: http://www.dailyamerican.com/articles/2010/12/16/news/local/news062.txt
Bruce Siwy, of the Daily American, does a great job with few facts and usually little time. On his third phone call to me he caught me as I was going out the door. So let me elaborate a bit on his article.
The Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Dam Safety, is very much aware of the Borough's financial constraints and are most willing to work with us to lower the cost. However, there are somethings that they will insist upon. Using a concrete lined channel over fill area is one of them. They offered suggestions of their own on how to reduce the cost. They did not dismiss us, but are more than willing to work with us.
There were two other issues on the table during this meeting. One was the need to produce a Dam Operation and Maintenance Manual, they supplied us with a sample that we could follow. Additionally we went over what items need to be inspected in our annual dam inspection. Once again they were very helpful in asking for less as time goes on.
In summary, it was a good meeting, we have more work to do, but we also have a good working relationship.

A Good News Flash

The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania in a ruling today affirmed Zoning Ordinance 144.
This prompt decision thoroughly reviews the challenges to Ordinance 144 and dismisses each one and affirms the Borough's position.
This is the same panel of judges that heard the other appeals. Their decision has come down much sooner than expected.
This is a great Holiday Present for the Borough, hopefully the beginning of the end of these lawsuits.

More on Taxes

I don't rejoice in bring you bad news, but you should know.
Last evening Natalie and I attended the Somerset County Boroughs Association meeting. Among the speakers were two of Somerset County's Commissioners, Pam Tokar-Ickes and John Vatavuk. The county will have a tax increase this budget.
Joining them in speaking was Representative Frank Burns 72nd District, which incorporates part of the county. He joined the Commissioners in painting a bleak picture in Pennsylvania with a $5 Billion hole in the State budget that must be balanced. While the new governor has pledged no new taxes, fee will have to go up and services cut. This will force local municipalities to pick up the slack in providing basic services to residents, such as police and roads, etc.

2011 Budget

Indian Lake Borough Council adopted the 2011 Budget, Wednesday evening November 10th, at their normal Council Meeting. The $1,275,954.00 budget includes a 3 mil tax increase, from 13 to 16 mils, and the first budgeted principle payment of the money borrowed for the Dam Remediation Project.
We are currently financing this project with a $6,500,000.00 line of credit from Somerset Trust Company. We need only pay interest on the amount of money borrowed from this line of credit. We will have to convert this short term financing into long term finance, most likely a 30 year bond issue. However, at present, the bond market is down and selling of these bonds at this time is not prudent.
The borough passed a referendum allowing the borough to incur debt up to $7,500,000.00. To-date we have spent $5,430,000 on this project, from the line of credit and our general fund. Phase II of the project is nearly complete, Phase III, the final phase of the project, is being discussed with the Pennsylvania Department of Environment Protect, Dam Safety. It is anticipated that the engineering will be completed this year or early next, with a Request for Bid going out in early 2011, and construction complete by the end of 2011.

More Bad News

The news from the dam continues to be bad.
As you recall, the new sluice gate valve (NSGV), which replaced the new gate valve (that did not work in the underwater environment), which replaced the original sluice gate valve (which was made by the same manufacture as the NSGV, and which lasted 40 years), has been leaking. Now if I have not throughly confused you:
The NSGV has been leaking approximately 60 gallons per minute, this compares to an industry standard for a valve of this type and size of one gallon per minute.
We final succeeded in getting the dive company and the NSGV manufacture's service technician to the dam on October 27th. Things did not start off well, but once they did get going all worked together to attempt to solve the problem. During two dives (the valve sits 50' below the lake surface) various adjustment were made to the valve mounting and the valve itself. After each adjustment the valve was raised and re-seated. At one time we succeeded in getting the leakage up to 3 time (or more) than where we started! We were able to reduce it down to where we started. At that point the valve manufacturer's field service technician said it was time to stop 'chasing our tail' and bring the valve to the surface. So ended a very long day.
Today, October 28th we were able to remove the valve, float it over (with air bags) to the public boat launch, and with a crane hoist the valve into the bed of one of the Borough's trucks.
The plan is for the valve manufacture's rep. to return next week to guide the re-setting of the valve adjustments. A new bolting plate is to be made and bolded and sealed to the valve. This plate in turn will then bolt to the pipe which runs through the dam.
A schedule as to when this can be completed AND the crane/divers/manufacturer's rep. can all be here to re-install the valve is to be developed.
Three final items.
1. Special thanks to our engineering firm, CME, who were here 24/7 and were able to get a crane in such notice.
2. Special thanks the Marc and Indian Lake Marina, who with no noticed supplied us a boat and personnel to tow the valve to the launching ramp. And Marc told me just to let him know when we need them again to transport the valve back to the dam.
3. And lastly but not least- THE LAKE WILL NOT BE DRAINED THIS YEAR.

What Matters to you

Following, reproduced with permission, is one example of what each of us, in our own way, could do for our country.
A man who puts his dollars where him mouth is.
PS: I have been buying their products for years.

What Matters to You?

Today, America needs fresh leadership to lead us as a nation out of this economic crisis. Leadership must come not only from our political leaders but also from the average citizen. The exporting of American jobs is a trend that must be stopped and reversed. When I walk into my local hardware store, I typically find 85% of the goods for sale are manufactured 7,000 miles away. Recognizable American brands have been forced by shortsighted management and buyers at large national chains to build factories overseas just to save a lousy $.50 on a tape measure. To these ruthless buyers, it is all about the money. Rarely are product quality, the political system, human rights, animal rights and environmental costs to the planet considered, not to mention the cost to our society of exporting not only jobs, but an entire factory!

At MacNeil Automotive, we are doing our part for the American economy and for our 300 million fellow citizens and neighbors. My philosophy is that if my neighbor doesn’t have a job, sooner or later I won’t have a job either. For example, we used to have our All-Weather Floor Mats manufactured in England by a company that used antiquated, inefficient equipment. They made a decent floor mat for us, but we thought we could build a better floor mat for our customers using modern American technology, American raw materials and skilled American workers. So in 2007 we transferred all of our floor mat manufacturing back to the United States. Today, we build the best fitting, highest quality automotive floor mats in the world, right here in America.

Our machine shop is equipped with 17 CNC machining centers including four
4 axis mills and one 5 axis mill that produce between 30 to 50 injection and
thermoforming molds per month. We have one shift of highly skilled American Journeymen toolmakers and apprentices, but our machines run 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. There is not a more efficient tool and mold making operation in the world - and guess what, it’s right here in America.

Furthermore, all of our CNC mills are manufactured in Oxnard, CA by Haas. Our 1,000 ton injection molding machines are made in Bolton, Ontario of American and Canadian components. Our thermoforming machinery is made in Carol Stream, IL. The raw steel and aluminum billets which make up our tooling are sourced from American steel and aluminum mills such as Vista Metals in Fontana, CA. The raw materials that make up our All-Weather Floor Mats, FloorLiners, Cargo Liners and Mud Flaps are manufactured in Bellevue OH, Arlington TX, Wichita KS and Jasper TN. Our forklifts are made in Columbus IN and Greene NY. Our warehouse racking is manufactured in Tatamy PA.

At MacNeil Automotive, we are also very aware of sustainability and our responsibility to the environment. We are proactive in controlling waste and recycling all of the unused raw materials from the manufacture of our tooling and products including: aluminum, steel, rubber, TPO, TPE, paper and cardboard.

As you can see, we are as dedicated to designing, developing and manufacturing the finest automotive accessories for our consumer and OEM clients as we are
passionate about supporting the American economy, preserving the American industrial infrastructure, and keeping the “money” in our family, a family of 300 million people from all over America.

Life is simple; be good to your fellow man, be kind to animals and the environment, and place building a quality product, supporting your country and your fellow American worker before profit. And, one last thing - let’s all do our best to balance family time with work time as our children are the future of America.

Sincerely,


David MacNeil, Founder/CEO
WeatherTech.com

The Election, November 2, 2010

Should you vote?- That is easy, YES. It is your right, your privilege. How can you complain about government if you don't participate?
Who to vote for?- That is not so easy. The deluge of attack ads this year have been overwhelming. I recently spent a night in Cincinnati, on local TV I learned that an Ohio politician did all the terrible things that I have be told a Pennsylvania politician did! Are they both guilty of the very same act? Perhaps they are twins? Boy that was a shock.
Sometime I feel its best just not to watch, but where can you hide?
There are several websites where you can check out the 'facts' of various ads, and with the number of ads being run you could spent your entire waking hours doing so. Two such sites are FactCheck.org and Politifact.com
One clue might be - who is paying for the ad. Good luck with that, organizations I never heard of, no possible way to find out where their money comes from. Some of the names sound so patriotic that I want to solute, then I remember some of the junk mail that arrives in may mail box daily. But wait, the US Chamber of Commerce, great organization, I know what a Chamber of Commerce does, a group of business people who band together to promote a community and improve the local business climate, so why are they paying for attack ads?
Wouldn't you just love a candidate to tell you what he/she stands for, how she/he are going to actually do something, why you should vote for them rather than why you should not vote for their challenger.
Can there really be so many evil people running for political office? And what do I really know about Pelosi, Reed, Boehner or McConnell. I'm not voting for them, I am voting for someone to represent me!
There is even one candidate in PA, I'll call him Mr. X, whose attack ads against his opponent, Mr. Y, that I find so offensive that I'm voting for Mr. Y even though I voted to elect Mr. X to his current office.
Just think of what good uses that all the dollars being spent on attack ads could be put to.
One other possible source of help, the AARP. Their website , "It's your source to find out where the candidates stand." Each candidate is asked the same question, ranging from Social Security to long-term care, and the answers appear side-by-side. The problem I found that in my area the candidates declined to respond to the questions, perhaps too busy writing attack ads!!!!
Read the endorsements in your newspapers. However, read why they are endorsing a particular candidate, not just whom they are endorsing. The reasons may be opposite of your thinking.
So who do you vote for? Try doing fact checking on races important to you. Try asking yourself if what you see and hear in an attack ad even makes plausible sense. If its too evil to be true, it probably isn't.

Who's buying this election?

Who's buying this election?

In Monday's USA Today (9/28/10), there was an editorial on campaign financing by the above title. I am not expecting you to go out and find the old newspaper, nor am I forwarding the entire editorial to you. I am mentioning it because the example used in the editorial is a Pennsylvania election and an ad you probably have seen. I am sure examples abound on both sides of the political fence.
The ad example used is an “ad attacking Senate candidate Joe Sestak for, among other things, gutting Medicare. The ad – which the non-partisan watchdog group FactCheck.org calls “badly misleading” - if funded not by Sestak's opponent but an independent group called Crossroads GPS.”
“The group running the Sestak ad, and several ads like it in other states, is affiliated with Karl Rove........it is structured as a 501(c)(4) organization.........it is not required to reveal its funding sources.”
It is estimated that at least $3.6 billion (yes, with a B) will be spent this year on congressional elections, almost $1 billion more than was spent in 2006!
The bottom line is, we don't know who is paying for the attack ads. And unless we dig a little we have no idea if what is stated is fact or fiction. Because it is on television, or worse, on the internet, does not make it true. Being an informed voter can be a challenge.

Rumors

Rumors are the bane of Indian Lake.

More rumors seem to float around, people believe them and pass them on rather than checking them out. This false information just festers and grows. Some that I have heard lately:

1. Rumor - The level of the lake will be dropped.

Fact- there are no plans to drop the level of the lake this year.

2. Rumor- The Council is going to approve on-lot holding tanks for raw sewerage on lots that do not perk.

Fact- Council is not even considering such a proposal. A proposal has been brought forth to permit Small Flow Treatment Facilities with Holding Tank on lots that do not perk. The effluent held by the holding tank is treated, not raw, sewerage.

3. Rumor- Terry St. Clair built the condos, renovated the Arrowhead Condos, and renovated the Lodge, without proper permits and does not have Occupancy Permits.

Fact- All proper permits were obtained by Mr. St. Clair, these have been reviewed by members of Council and confirmed by Somerset Building Inspectors.

4. Rumor- The Mayor has used his authority to delay a permit issuance to a property owner 'to get even' for an election issue.

Fact- This never happened. The Mayor does not even have the authority to issue or delay a permit.

May I suggest that when you hear of a Rumor you find out if its true before passing it on. If it involves the Borough Council, call one of us, our telephone numbers are all public. Council can be emailed at COUNCIL@indianlakepa.us>.

I would volunteer to check out the Rumor for you if you drop me an email at pcornez@yahoo.com. Please note however that I will address the Rumor on this Blog, so that other who have heard it might find out what is truth and what is fiction. I will do my best not to name you or give out any information as to how I heard the Rumor.

I'll stand in the court of public opinion.

As many of you have heard me say before, I'm not going to engage in a public email debate with anyone.

There was one accusation that Mr. Rohrich leveled at me that did elicit a direct reply to him. That was that I "continue to maintain the blog on the Indian Lake web site". As you all know, this Blog is not in any way affiliated with the Borough and certainly is not utilizing the Borough's web site or any Borough resources.

I will gladly let my statements stand on their merits, against Mr. Rohrich's rewriting of history, facts, and the law.

I do have one request of Mr. Rohrich, just who are the "many residents (who) have donated time and money to a fund that pays for the litigation" against the Borough and St. Clair Development?

Mr. St. Clair has had to pay for the legal defense of St. Clair Development, and the tax payers of Indian Lake have had to pay for litigation against the borough.

Is there a reason that we, the tax payers, can't know who is contributing to this fund? Who are these honest, concerned, anonymous citizens?

In over three years of attending Borough Council meetings, neither they, nor you, have bothered to show up to enter any of your complaints into the record.

Its time YOU knew what has been going on.

Dear Indian Lake Residents

On August 20, 2010 the Mayor published his Quarterly Newsletter. In that letter he asked area residents to send a strong message to Borough Council Members letting them know that enough Borough Tax Dollars have been wasted on defending frivolous law suits against Indian Lake Borough and St.Clair Resort Development. To date, close to $100,000 of Borough money has been spent which represents nearly 2.5 mils of tax revenue.

If you have been following my Blog (http://paulindianlake.blogspot.com), you have been seeing many references to these various actions, and I have published, with the authors' permission, many of the emails sent to the Council to date. Those emails published, plus all others sent to Council, have been 100% in favor of St. Clair Resort Developments and the Lodge, and totally against the deluge of legal actions taken by a few.

So that you might better understand the sheer volume of the complaints and litigation filed by these individuals, I have compiled (to the best of my knowledge) the attached list of complaints to administrative agencies as well as a synopsis of each piece of litigation. You will note that litigation and/or appeals continue to be filed by Mr. Lyons, Mr. Rohric and Mrs. Takacs, the most recent being July of this year.

The Mayor has stated that at the next Borough Council meeting he will ask Borough Council to approve a resolution strongly opposing the litigation efforts of these individuals as contrary to the interests of the Borough. I hope that you will take the time to send an e-mail to the members of Council urging them to strongly support this resolution (council@indianlakepa.us). While it will have no legal effect, maybe with a strong showing of opposition to their efforts, those individuals responsible for all of this litigation will reconsider what they are doing so that the Borough need not waste our limited tax revenue on what is so obviously frivolous litigation.

If you review the attached list you should note two things. First is a singular focus on anything that is related to the St. Clair Developments and to the exclusion of similar issues elsewhere in the Borough. Second, from the results, you will note that not a single challenge has been found to have merit. For those not keeping up with what is going on, I hope this information is an eye opener. If you are tired of these few individuals wasting your tax dollars, I strongly urge you to take the time to e-mail Council at: council@indianlakepa.us. You can also view the Mayors Quarterly Newsletter on the Borough’s website: www.indianlakepa.us.

Thank you very much for your time and your attention. With your help we can send a message to those bringing this litigation that it is time to move on.

Sincerely,

Paul M. Cornez

Indian Lake Council

Complaints to Administrative Agencies

• Challenged the number of Sewer Taps available for Development with DEP. Result, DEP upheld its initial determination.

• Numerous frivolous complaints to Somerset County Soil & Conservation District regarding Erosion and Sediment Controls. Result, no violations.

• Anonymous complaint filed with the Pa State Ethics Commission. Result, no finding of any ethical misconduct by Mr. St. Clair or any member of Council.

• 2 anonymous complaints filed with Labor and Industry regarding the Indian Lake Resort. Result, after submission of plans for construction that occurred prior to purchase by St. Clair, occupancy permits issued.

• 2 additional anonymous complaints filed with Labor and Industry regarding the Newly Remodeled Arrowhead Condominium Building. Result, After minor modification, occupancy permits issued.

• 2 anonymous complaints filed with Labor and Industry regarding the new Kickapoo Lakeside Townhouses. Result, Investigation revealed that all inspections were performed and occupancy permits properly issued.

• Another formal complaint filed with Labor and Industry regarding the new Kickapoo Lakeside Townhouses, signed by Jim Lyons. Result. No violations.

• Additional formal complaint filed with Labor and Industry regarding Indian Lake Resort signed by Jim Lyons. Result. No violations.

• Additional formal complaint with Labor and Industry regarding the new Arrowhead Condominium Building signed by Jim Lyons. Result. No violations.

• Filed Formal Complaint with the Governor’s Office regarding Indian Lake Resort. Result, This was handed down to Labor and Industry. As noted above, current occupancy permit issued.

• Filed Formal Complaint with the Governor’s Office regarding Arrowhead Condominiums. Result, This was handed down to Labor and Industry. As noted above, current occupancy permit issued.

• Filed Formal Complaint with the Governor’s Office regarding Kickapoo Lakeside Townhouses. Result, This was handed down to Labor and Industry. As noted above, all inspections performed and occupancy permits properly issued.

• Over 30 phone calls made to Somerset County Building Inspections to complain about perceived Building Code Violations at Indian Lake Lodge, Arrowhead Condominiums and Kickapoo Lakeside Townhouses. Result, as noted above, all inspections were performed and occupancy permits properly issued.

• Filed formal complaint to Labor and Industry about Somerset County Building Inspections. Result, Investigation by Labor and Industry revealed no violations by SCBI.

Law Suits / Legal Challenges

• 5/11/2007 #50442 James Lyons vs Indian Lake Borough – Mandamus Action challenging issuance of permit for Tunica Townhouses. Result, Issuance of permit upheld by Somerset County Court of Common Pleas.

• 5/25/2007 #50859 Jeffrey Griffith vs Indian Lake Borough / Planning Commission – Challenge to dismissal of Mr. Griffith for non-feasance in attempt to secure additional vote against adoption of Ordinance 144. Result, Appeal withdrawn.

• 6/07/2007 #50515 Mary Jo Takacs vs Indian Lake Borough - Appealed Tunica Townhouse Building Permit. Result, Issuance of permit upheld by ZHB and upheld by Somerset Court of Common Pleas.

• 7/26/2007 #50681 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons vs Indian Lake Zoning Hearing Board. Appeal of Zoning Ordinance 144, Petition for contempt, Motion to disqualify Borough Solicitor. Result; Petition for contempt dismissed, Motion to disqualify solicitor denied and Ordinance 144 upheld as valid enactment. Takacs/Lyons’ arguments found to be without merit.

• 9/07/2007 #50860 Jack Butler, James Lyons, Mary Jo Takacs vs. Indian Lake Borough. Appeal of issuance of Boat Dock Easement. Result; Issue remanded to Council for additional vote on grant of easement. Council affirmed prior vote and Court affirmed grant of easement.

• 10/05/2007 Mary Jo Takacs – Appeal of Waccamaw Building Permit to Indian Lake Zoning Hearing Board. Result, ZHB Upheld issuance of permit.

• 11/27/2007 Martincsak, McClatchy, Perl - Petitioned Somerset County Board of Elections to open Ballot Box and Recount Votes in attempt to influence election results. Result, Somerset County Court of Common Pleas denies Petition to open Ballot Box and Recount Votes.

• 12/14/2007 #51202 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons vs Indian Lake Borough. Appeal of Borough Council’s approval of minor revision to Development Plan (Land use Appeal). Result, Somerset County Court of Common Pleas dismissed complaint.

• 12/14/2007 #51203 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons vs Indian Lake Borough. Challenge to Sewer Tap Agreement between Borough and St. Clair Resort Development. Result, Somerset County Court of Common Pleas dismissed complaint.

• 12/27/2007 #51243 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons vs Indian Lake Zoning Hearing Board. Result, Somerset County Court of Common Pleas sustained the decision of the Zoning Officer.

• 3/28/2008 #50294 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons vs Indian Lake Borough Zoning Hearing Board. Motion for Stay Regarding Ordinance 144. Result; Granted pending decision of ZHB. ZHB ultimately upheld the Zoning Ordinance and Stay automatically lifted.

• 5/23/2008 #50481 Mary Jo Takacs vs Indian Lake Boro Zoning Hearing Board / St.Clair Resort Development. Appealed Notice of Land Use Appeal and since appealed Common Pleas Judge’s ruling to Pa. Commonwealth Court. Status: Pending.

6/12/2009 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons - Appealed DEP issuance of boat dock permit. Status: Pending. However Pa. Environmental Law Judge denied Takacs / Lyons Petition for Supersedeas relief.

• 10/09/2009 #51122 Mary Jo Takacs vs Indian Lake Borough. Appealed Boat Dock Easement to Pa. Commonwealth Court. Status: Pending. Today, September 3, 2010 their attorney, Robert Ging, filed a 26 page 'brief' with the court, reading it is enough to make me ill.

• 12/29/2009 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons - Appealed Common Pleas Judge’s ruling on Boat Dock Appeal to Pa. Commonwealth Court. . Status: Pending.

• 12/29/2009 Mary Jo Takacs - Appealed Common Pleas Judge’s ruling on Waccamaw Building Permit Appeal to Pa. Commonwealth Court. Status: Pending. Motion filed by St. Clair for posting of bond to sustain appeal. Common Pleas Judge Ordered Takacs to post a $380,000 Bond to sustain appeal regarding Waccamaw Building Permit. Takacs failed to do so and on 3/15/2010, Common Pleas Judge issued Rule 1925 Order to Takacs (Takacs held in Contempt of Court for failure to post necessary Bond).

• 2/05/2010 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons - Appealed Common Pleas Judge’s Ruling on Ordinance 144 to Pa. Commonwealth Court. Status: Pending.

• 3/11/2010 Mary Jo Takacs - Appealed Common Pleas Judge’s Order to Post Bond onto Pa. Commonwealth Court. Status, Pending.

• 6/14/2010 #099-L James Lyons, Mary Jo Takacs vs Commonwealth of Pa & St.Clair Resort Development. Petition for Supersedeas on DEP’s issuance of Boat Dock Permit to compel removal of docks. Result; After a three day hearing pertaining to underlying issue of whether DEP properly issued the boat dock permit, Pa. Environmental Law Judge denied Takacs / Lyon’s Petition for Supersedeas relief.

• 7/13/2010 David Rohrich - Presented Formal Complaint to DEP regarding St.Clair Resort Development’s NPDES Permit. Result; No violations issued and based on testimony in DEP boat dock matter, no violations have ever occurred and St. Clair is in full compliance.

• 7/13/2010 David Rohrich - Presented Formal Complaint to Somerset County Soil and Conservation District regarding St.Clair Resort Development’s NPDES Permit. Result; No violations issued and based on testimony in DEP boat dock matter, no violations have ever occurred and St. Clair is in full compliance.

• 7/15/2010 #648 Mary Jo Takacs vs. Somerset County Planning Commission. Appealed Planning Commission Approval of Phase 2 of Subdivision Plan for Kickapoo Townhouse Development. Status; Pending.

More Excellent Memos Sent to Borough Council

The following memos sent to Borough Council are being distributed with the authors' permission:

We purchased one of first units in the Arrowhead Condos and are very satisfied with the construction and services provided by the St Clair organization. Prior to revamping the former Hotel, the building was not being maintained, the windows were broken out, and the general condition was deplorable. I can't understand how any property owner of Indian Lake could be anything but pleased that the building has been rehabilitated and is now generating additional tax revenue to the Borough. Although I don't have all the facts of the litigation, it appears that there only a few people that are opposed to the St Clair developments and refurbished Lodge .

It is perfectly acceptable for anyone to question Governmental processes, but when the Courts have clearly overruled all the objections, isn't it time to accept the rulings and cease causing all property owners at Indian Lake to expend tax dollars?

Change is always hard to accept, but change will always happen. As long as the majority accepts changes, everyone should abide by the effects of the change.

J Ted Hollern
Unit Owner Arrowhead Condominiums
Indian Lake Borough

I support the course taken by Mayor Miscoe and wish to indicate my frustration over the continuation of litigation which serves no purpose other than to force the borough to waste taxpayer money to respond. I also support the development of new property as planned by Mr. St. Clair.

Neil Lehman

123 Syracuse Lane

Every comment sent to Council following the Mayor's request, the five that I have published, and several others that I have not received permission to publish, express the same sentiment.

Support of the St. Clair's and their developments.

Distain for the law suits.

Since the two are interwoven, the question of the hour is what can be done to stop the existing law suits and prevent new ones. In today's Council President's Newsletter, Mr. Hanson states that "Stopping the lawsuits, on the other hand, might not be hard at all. It could be very easy." I for one hope he is correct and have volunteered to work with him on any ideas that he has to accomplish this.

How Many Law Suits?

In previous Postings I have mentioned the large number of Law Suits and Legal Challenges filed against the Borough and St. Clair Developments. The following list is actions which necessitated a legal defense by either of these two parties, and in most cases both. In addition many of these 21 actions morphed into another 4 or 5 sub-actions.

Actions involving the Borough cost YOU tax money to defend.

Actions involving St. Clair Developments hurt YOU by preventing the St. Clair's from continuing to improve the Lodge and it's public facilities. Most of us enjoy and are proud of this facility. Many of us have lived here when it was closed or not worthy of going to. Whether you use the Lodge or not, it brings people and money into our community. It would be terrible if we lost it.

21 Law Suits / Legal Challenges

• 5/11/2007 2007-50442 James Lyons vs Indian Lake Borough

• 5/25/2007 Jeffery Griffith vs Indian Lake Borough / Planning Commission

• 6/07/2007 2007-50515 Mary Jo Takacs vs Indian Lake Borough et al

• 7/26/2007 2007-50681 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons vs Indian Lake Zoning Hearing Board

• 9/07/2007 2007-50860 Jack Butler, James Lyons, Mary Jo Takacs vs Indian Lake Borough

• 11/27/2007 Martincsak, McClatchy, Perl - Petitioned Somerset County Board of Elections to open Ballot Box and Recount Votes

• 12/14/2007 2007-51202 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons vs Indian Lake Borough

• 12/14/2007 2007-51203 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons vs Indian Lake Borough

• 12/27/2007 2007-51243 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons vs Indian Lake Zoning Hearing Board

• 1/02/2008 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons - Motion requesting the Disqualification of Borough Solicitor

• 3/28/2008 2008-50294 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons vs Indian Lake Borough Zoning Hearing Board

• 5/23/2008 2008-50481 Mary Jo Takacs vs Indian Lake Boro Zoning Hearing Board / St.Clair Resort Development

• 6/12/2009 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons - Appealed Commonwealth of Pa, DEP Boat Dock Permit to St.Clair Resort Development

• 10/09/2009 2009-51122 Mary Jo Takacs vs Indian Lake Borough

• 12/29/2009 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons - Appealed Judge’s ruling on Boat Dock Appeal to Commonwealth Court

• 12/29/2009 Mary Jo Takacs - Appealed Judge’s ruling on Waccamaw Building Permit Appeal to Commonwealth Court

• 2/05/2010 Mary Jo Takacs, James Lyons - Appealed Judge’s Ruling on Ordinance 144 to Commonwealth Court

• 3/11/2010 Mary Jo Takacs - Appealed Judge’s Order to Post Bond to Commonwealth Court

• 7/13/2010 David Rohrich - Presented Formal Complaint to DEP regarding St.Clair Resort Development’s NPDES Permit

• 7/13/2010 David Rohrich - Presented Formal Complaint to Somerset County Soil and Conservation District regarding St.Clair Resort Development’s NPDES Permit

• 7/15/2010 Mary Jo Takacs vs Somerset County Planning Commission

Excellent Memos Sent to Borough Council

The following three memos, which were sent to Indian Lake Borough Council, are being distributed with the authors' permission:

Dear Council,

I am responding to August issue of the Mayor’s Newsletter. My wife and I came to Indian Lake in December of 2007 when we purchased a townhome at 204 Kickapoo Ct. from St. Clair Resort Development. We knew a little bit about the actions of the Lyons, Rohrich, Takacs groupat the time but were undeterred because it “wasn’t our fight” and felt things would sort themselves out in time. Since buying our home I have dealt with Terry St. Clair on a regular basis and have developed a trust and admiration in his commitment to Indian Lake and his desire to provide a first-class resort home product. We use our home to enjoy the lake activities with our teenage daughter and son along with the many guests we have entertained during all seasons of the year. Having the commercial docks available has been not just a convenience but a luxury. I personally couldn’t be more pleased with my investment. Many of our guests have expressed different levels of interest in investing in Indian Lake Resort property but are understandably hesitant not only due to current economic instability but due to the constant litigation against St. Clair Resort Development. What I thought “wasn’t our fight” is now better defined as “the Borough’s fight” to make sure Indian Lake propertyvalue is stable and that development is healthy. If there are true legal issues motivating the efforts of the Lyons, Rohrich, Takacs group then so be it. Let the legal process take its course. If they are motivated by personal issues and self-satisfaction I hope that there are consequences and that the Borough will pursue them. In either case, I hope this issue is resolved soon so that a stable foundation can be formed for the future prosperity of Indian Lake and the mutual benefit of its citizens.

Respectfully,

Chris Coleman

It has become apparent to myself as well as my friends at Indian Lake that there is a feud of sorts that is effecting us all. I do not pretend to know all the details of what is happening. I do know that some times egos get in the way of good common sense. I have an A-frame on the driving range and when I bought it I knew I might find a golf ball or two in my yard ( window ) When you own a home on a developed lake you need to expect development!! I'm sorry if you happened to buy a home near possible change but you should have thought of that all along. As Americans we enjoy the right to own land and earn an income. Why does the guy who builds a house next to a farmers field for the beautiful view expect that the farmer will never sell it to a developer? That is just wishful thinking and poor common-sense. Stop wasting our tax dollars, put away your egos and start doing what is best for Indian lake.

Curtis Morgese

Borough Council:

I agree all these law suits and appeals are frivolous and ridiculous! I welcome further PLANNED development of our resort community. Without development and progress, our resort community will surely fall into a state of failure somewhat like several of the surrounding Boroughs in Somerset County. Without vision, planning, development and progress we will seal our fate as a failed Borough.

I commend Terry St Clair on his efforts in improve the Borough – his developments have all been “first class” and are to be viewed as an asset to our community. The Lodge facility is also a great asset to our community – can you image the Borough of Indian Lake without the Lodge? I hope we NEVER see that day!

I sincerely hope that the Council will approve the development at the Indian Lake Golf Course (interior front nine) – it surely will be a great asset for us as well. We cannot turn our back on the increased revenues this development will mean to the Borough! Jim Dewar and his partners have spent countless dollars and time on this development – let’s get it done!

I also commend those members of Borough Council on their tireless efforts to improve our resort community. I am certainly proud to be part of it! I am somewhat embarrassed when outsiders ask me about all the litigation and the “feuding” between our residents. I wish it would stop!

Thanks for a great job!

Jon Clapper

I applaud each of these individual for speaking up. Please, if you have an opinion send your comments to - Council@indianlakepa.us

Thank you

Is there a reason?

In the Council President's e-News of June 16th he listed several new developments at Indian Lake and the benefits they would bring to the community. Those being: Pine Cove, Musser Cove, Perigo plan, and the ILGCD. In a follow up Posting on this Blog of June 19th I added to this list all that St. Clair Developments had brought to this community.

In various other Postings I appraised you of the numerous legal suits and actions that have been brought against Indian Lake Borough and St. Clair Developments. One might ask how many actions have be filed against Pine Cove, Musser Cove, Perigo, or ILGCD? The answer is simple, NONE.

Yet the filings involving the Borough and St. Clair Developments continue to pile up. Following is a list of many of the Formal Complaints filed against the Borough and St. Clair Developments:

• Challenged the number of Sewer Taps available for Development.

• Numerous frivolous complaints to Somerset County Soil & Conservation District.

• Anonymous complaint filed with the Pa State Ethics Commission.

• Filed 2 anonymous complaints with Labor and Industry regarding the Indian Lake Resort.

• Filed 2 additional anonymous complaints with Labor and Industry regarding the Newly Remodeled Arrowhead Condominium Building.

• Filed 2 anonymous complaints with Labor and Industry regarding the new Kickapoo Lakeside Townhouses.

• Filed another formal complaint with Labor and Industry regarding the new Kickapoo Lakeside Townhouses, signed by ________.

• Filed another formal complaint with Labor and Industry regarding Indian Lake Resort signed by ________.

• Filed another formal complaint with Labor and Industry regarding the new Arrowhead Condominium Building signed by ________.

• Filed Formal Complaint with the Governor’s Office regarding Indian Lake Resort.

• Filed Formal Complaint with the Governor’s Office regarding Arrowhead Condominiums.

• Filed Formal Complaint with the Governor’s Office regarding Kickapoo Lakeside Townhouses.

• Made over 50 phone calls to Somerset County Building Inspections to complain about perceived Building Code Violations at Indian Lake Lodge, Arrowhead Condominiums and Kickapoo Lakeside Townhouses.

• Filed formal complaint to Labor and Industry about Somerset County Building Inspections.

• Filed anonymous frivolous complaint with Fire Marshall.

Is there a reason that anything done by St. Clair Developments, or the Borough which effects St. Clair Developments, is the subject Formal Complaint or law suit?

A question for you.

I would welcome your opinion.

If you request a building permit and your request is denied, or if you are issue a violation notice by the Borough's Zoning Officer, your first line of recourse is to request a Zoning Hearing Board review.

The Borough has charged a fee of $750 for said hearing, this fee has been in this amount for as long as anyone can recall.

There are those individuals who feel that the fee is too high. Similar fees of surrounding communities and the County are substantially lower (some in the $100 to $200 range).

The borough's actually cost, excluding Borough employees salaries, for a very recent, very short, very simple, hearing was $945.

Do you feel that our fee should be reduced to be in line with other communities or should it remain at its present level?

Thank you

Another Law Suit

In my Posting of June 30^th I announced that the court has turned down the appeal against Zoning Ordinance 144. In his ruling the judge used some rather strong language against the ones filing the law suits. It was also obvious by reading his opinion that he had researched the situation throughly.

I had hoped this was the end, or at least the beginning of the end, of these frivolous law suits.

I had hoped that this signaled the end of the need for the Borough, and St. Clair Resort Development, LLC, to spend money defending frivolous claims. A good bit of this money is your tax money.

I had even asked that if you knew the Appellants (Mary Jo Takacs and James L. Lyons), or their financial backers, that you tell them enough is enough. Its time to go forward as a community.

It did not take long for us to get a slap in the face. On July 15^th, attorney Vincent A. Tucceri, representing Mary Jo Takacs, filed a civil suit against the Somerset County Planning Commission for their positive ruling on behalf of St. Clair Resort Development, LLC, also stating the the Borough's Zoning Officer had supplied “erroneous statements”.

Yes you read that correctly, they are suing the County Planning Commission, naming St. Clair Resort Development, LLC, and the Borough. Two of these will be using your tax money to defend their position, and once again St. Clair Resort Development, LLC is attacked causing them to spend money that could be used to improve life in this community, such as repairing and open the swimming pool at the Lodge.

Oh, this may be the first time you have heard of attorney Vincent A. Tucceri. However, those of you who have followed developments over the past several years in the Borough, know the name well. He is best know here as the attorney for Mr. Rohrich, owner of the very large log home on South Peninsula Drive. Mr. Tucceri represents Mr. Rohrich and his automobile dealerships.

Now am I suggesting the Mr. Rohrich is part of the financial backing of these suits?

Now am I suggesting that these suits are aimed at bankrupting St. Clair Resort Development, LLC?

No I am not saying that, I am leaving all conclusions up to you.

Jet Skis (PWC)

A few can ruin it for all.

A few can endanger many.

Our new patrol boat will do approximately 38 miles per hour. On the water that is pretty quick.

Already a couple of jet skis have run away from it, lights, siren and all. Sure we all know that it is possible, some jet skis will do 70 MPH out of the box, I'm told.

A high speed chase can endanger many, our police have more sense than those who flee, and will not engage in high speed chases.

While a few might think this is fun, it endangers other, and themselves. Please if you witness someone running from the law, or just engaging in reckless acts, please try to get a name or registration number and call the police or the Borough office.

Let's all enjoy a safe boating season.

Zoning Ruling

On August 29, 2007, Indian Lake Borough Council enacted Zoning Ordinance 144.

On September 26, 2007 Mary Jo Takacs and James L. Lyons, the Appellants, appealed this ordinance to the Zoning Hearing Board. After very lengthy hearings, which I attended, the Zoning Hearing Board ruled in favor of the ordinance.

The Appellants subsequently filed suit against Indian Lake Borough, the Zoning Hearing Board, and St. Clair Resort Development, LLC.

Each time the judge ruled in favor of the Borough, et al, the Appellants filed appeals.

Finally this week the court issued its ruling against the Appellants' appeals in a 14 page strongly worded ruling. One quote that I love "The Court does not accept Appellant's argument ----one that certainly is a slippery slope argument".

The entire ruling is of course Public Record available for you to read if you so desire.

The bottom line is, that due to these well financed Appellants, Indian Lake Borough and Sr. Clair Development have had to delay projects and spent excessive amount of private and tax money to defend themselves and the ordinance.

This tax money if your money.

Please if you know the Appellants or their financial backers, tell them enough is enough. Let's work together in harmony as a community to go forward.

Development

In the e-News of 16 June 2010 the Council President enumerated several exciting new developments at the Lake. This is great news, even if some of it may be a bit premature.

One thing that I think was overlooked was what St. Clair Development has already done.

They took an old building that needed to be torn down, at borough expense, and converted it in the Arrowhead Condominiums, tax generating residential units.

They took the Lodge and spent millions remodeling it into a very respectful restaurant and banquet facility. In all the years I have owned property here at the Lake never has the facility been better. It is now a pleasure to take guests to the Indian Lake Lodge for a meal, rather than running to Somerset, Windber, Richland, or Johnstown.

They took an overgrown hillside, the old ski slops, and have thus far built 2 condominiums, one private home, and a docking facility for the condo residents and others (as space is available).

If you haven't try the Lodge, look around, sample the food (the service is terrific). Take a look at the docks and the hillside from the Lake, what an improvement.

This is development in action, development that brings people and money into our community. The St. Clair's are to be commended, they are a true asset to our community.

Leaking Valve

If you do not follow the Somerset Daily American you may want to read this story:

http://www.dailyamerican.com/articles/2010/06/10/news/local/news095.txt

The story is basically factual, in fact I am impressed by the writer's ability to report happenings accurately.

One area where I feel amplification would help is on the history of "the valve".

The original valve was a sluice gate type and served the borough well for 40+ years.

Phase I of the Dam Remediation project included replacing this sluice gate with a new valve and adding a downstream valve to the other end of the pipe through the dam. The engineering firm chose to use duplicate gate valves for both applications. The upstream valve, normally under 50 feet of water, was a problem from day one. The downstream valve, which is not under water, has worked almost flawlessly from day one. One could conclude that either the upstream valve was a misapplication or that the valve itself has some kind of a flaw.

CME of Somerset was hired to review the situation, and has subsequently been hired to replace the original engineering firm. They recommended that the upstream valve be replaced with a new sluice gate valve. Extra precautions and money was spent to insure that the Borough got the best available. Representatives of the manufacture were here to inspect the sluice gate and supervise the installation of same. It was not until the lake returned to normal pool level that the final adjustments could be made on the sluice gate. That is when we observed, that even with the correct adjustments, the sluice gate leaked more than it should. Again, representatives of the manufacturer where here and supervised the entire operation.

It is the nature of a sluice gate to leak some, in this case, with this size sluice gate under 50 feet of water, it should leak less than a gallon per minute. The pressure of the water acting on the sluice gate helps seal it. Ours is leaking at the rate of 60 GPM.

Video of the actual situation shot on June 2nd is being sent to all parties this week. A teleconference is scheduled for next week. 60 GPM will not drain the lake, plenty of water is flowing over the spillway. The downstream valve is capable of containing the full flow, as it has done for many months. But we bought a sluice gate that should only leak about 1 GPM and all parties are working towards that result.

As Paul Harvey would say, now you know the rest of the story.

This morning I received our first telephone call from the Borough's new reverse 911 system. We all got a mailing about it asking for a preferred contact number, and it has been described in the Newsletters. But it caught me by surprise, and I almost did not accept the call. My caller ID read:

"UNKNOWN NAME

754-8161"

Glad I answered it, now I will know for the future. The message was simple and should not effect me at all. The peninsula water tank is being painted, hopefully there will be minimum water interruption for any of the Borough residents. If you do experience a problem please notify the office.

This painting was scheduled to start after the Memorial Day weekend and will be completed prion to the Forth of July Holiday.

Indian Lake Service Corp. Meeting

For those of you who could not make Saturday's meeting. My thoughts from the meeting:

The meeting was not very well attended.

We did not lose as many fish during the drawdown as some had predicted.

Already a 28" Walleye has been caught, and released at Indian Lake.

Fireworks are scheduled for July 3rd with July 10th as the rain date.

People are asked to pick up trash along the Borough's roadways. (Better yet, let's not liter and remind others also to be kind to nature.)

Dick Stern was re-elected to the Board of the Service Corp.

Paul Balint was elected to the Board.

Lake Full

I just received an email, which says in part-

"For your information; a small stream of water started running down the spillway about mid-afternoon today, May 10th, so we can officially say the lake is finally completely "full" for the summer boating season."

You probably have noted the signs popping up warning of SUBMERGED DEBRIS, and read the e-Newsletters about debris in our lake. Last week I was out on the lake on a friends boat, let me assure you, no one is crying wolf. There is still much floating, partially floating, and submerged debris in Indian Lake. Be careful, if we all do our part, the situation will improve and we can all have a safe boating season.

Was it successful?

I received this question from "jerry" on the blog about the dam remediation project. In case there are others with questions I thought perhaps a recap might be helpful.

The dam remediation project is a three phase project. Except for some re-landscaping and adjustment to the new valve, Phases I and II are complete, and yes they were successful.

Phase I was the installation of a 30" pipe through the dam with two new valves. The new downstream valve has given us only very minor problems, however the upstream valve failed and was replaced with a sluice gate valve which has work well. Now that the lake is nearly at normal pool level this valve requires minor adjustment by divers, this will be done shortly. All this was necessitated because the original 40+ year old valve through the dam just wore out, and today one is required to have two valves rather than one.

Phase II was broken into two parts. The first was the re-sloping of the dam, the dam was made fatter and therefore stronger. The second part was the installation of grout into the dam and its bed rock to reduce the amount of leakage through the dam itself. Leakage through an earthen dam is a fact of life. However beyond certain limits it can wash away material and weaken the dam, the grout will reduce the flows.

As stated above, one can state that Phases I & II were successful.

The engineering on Phase III has begun with actual work completion projected for the end of next year, 2011. This final phase of the project includes increased spillway capacity and slight heightening of the dam to handle worse case flood conditions as dictated by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency).

I trust that this answers the question.

Council Actions of 4/28/10

A busy night at Council.

Council reconsidered it's decision to have police patrols on the lake this summer. A bid specification is being prepared for a new/used boat.

The Indian Lake Ski Club will have a Slalom Ski Course this year. It will be located towards the stump area.

The Peninsula Water Tank will be painted this Summer. This project will not occur during, nor interfere with, the Fourth of July Holiday period.

As always, the official minutes of this meeting will be posted on the Borough's website once they are approved by Council.

Got Geese?

If you have a goose problem on your land, you will be pleased to learn that thanks to the Service Corporation it may improve. The Service Corp. is contracting with Crespo's Wildlife Solutions, of Johnstown, to improve your situation. This firm is fully licensed, bonded, and insured. The will be performing a 'nest and egg treatment' as the first step. This involves locating the nests and spraying the eggs with corn oil, which is biodegradable. After this treatment the eggs will not hatch. This is done every ten days during the nesting season. According to Crespo this procedure must be done three years in a row, which is the maturity cycle for the birds.
This treatment, plus scaring the birds away, which you probably do daily, should convince the Canadian Geese to move elsewhere. At least that is the theory.
Only after three years of the above can other things (read that as 'lethal') be attempted.
There are some of us who don't mind the geese, but we must accept that their droppings (a pound a day per bird) is not good for the lake, just the lake weeds.

Lake safety

I strongly encourage you to read the Mayor's Quarterly Report, as issued by email today. The borough crew is doing the best they can, but there is an awful lot of debris out there.

One editorial comment, the decision to not patrol the lake this summer was a very agonizing decision for the Council to reach. The bottom line is that the borough does not have the money to either repair or replace our patrol boat. The repair on this 1991 boat would cost about $5000, and members of Council felt that this was a poor investment. To purchase a new boat suited for the job would cost $15,000 or more. We are also facing the need to replace our police cruiser shortly, it is laid up today for the second time this month.

Take it easy and be safe out there.

Final on the drawdown

The valve is closed and will remain so.

The lake is refilling towards normal pool level.

The only anticipated opening of the valve will happen once the lake is refilled, the divers will return to set the wedges on this new valve, at the same time the hydraulic system will be modified. This can only be done with the lake full and therefore normal water pressure against the valve. This will be for a very short duration with no noticeable drop in lake elevation.

Valve closed

Our lake is down the requested three feet. The valve was closed yesterday morning. This valve cannot be used to throttle, it is either opened or closed. Therefore the level of the lake will fluctuate (it rose 4" in the past 24 hours) as the valve is opened and closed to maintain a level of approximately -3' for a week. Following that the lake will be allowed to return to normal pool level.

Lake level

Yesterday Indian Lake's pool elevation was approximately 2278.90 feet, and today the lake elevation is approximately 2278.50. Normal pool level is 2281.

Lake update

Looks like we might have feed you some slightly optimistic information. Indian Lake has lowered approximately 9” which brings the pool elevation to roughly 2279.25.

I will keep you posted.

Brief report on lake.

As of this morning the lake is down 13".

The valve has been opened since Friday, however we have had rain. I was just down lakeside on my property and water is flowing across my land into the lake like I have never seen it before. I am sure this is normal around the lake at present.

Lake drawdown

For your information, following is a copy of an email received this AM. Despite a few hiccups, we are proceeding with the 3 foot drawdown as previously advised. This should give you a better idea of timing.

"FYI commencing this Friday, March 26, Indian Lake will open their valve to drop the lake 3 feet. This is being done as requested by DEP so we can measure discharges from the lake at a lower water level. Please note, this is not a safety problem. Frankly, with the snow melt and rainfall that occurred on the weekend of March 13, the lake filled much faster than we wanted. The plan was to bring the lake back up slowly so we could monitor the flows/water levels in the flumes and piezometers as the lake filled.

Depending on the weather, it may take up two weeks to drop Indian Lake the 3 feet DEP is requesting. The lake will then be held at that level for 1 week, after which the lake will be refilled.

The discharge from Indian lake will create a raise in the pool level of Lake Stonycreek – (note: in the fall when Indian Lake lowered, the raise in Lake Stonycreek was about 1 foot). CME will be monitoring both the drop in Indian Lake and the level in Lake Stonycreek. If anyone sees a problem, please notify me. Thanks."

The above from Sean Isgan, President of CME, the Borough's Engineering Consultants. A big thanks to Sean and Theresa, our Borough Manager, for all they did to facilitate this.

Safety

There is a lot of floating and semi-submerged debris in our lake due to the drawdown.

Already there are reports of a kayak, a paddle boat, and a jet ski on the lake!

My personal recommendation would be to stay off the lake with any powered craft at this time. Hitting some submerged , or semi-submerged debris could be very dangerous, even fatal.

So a word to the wise, Be Careful out there.