Lancaster Independent Press
RSS icon Home icon

    Posted on December 27th, 2017 Becky 4 comments


          What I know to this point: On December 21st, LNP ran a story by Ad Crable on the front page of the print edition (see below). It ends with the three paragraphs that are also below.
         If Gray signed a consent agreement on November 28th, then why did the U.S. file a suit on December 19th – portions of which are below (click here for the suit on Pacer).
         There will be more on this story as it develops. Crable’s story is online as an “insider” story titled, “Lancaster city fined $135K, will end decades of polluting Conestoga, Chesapeake Bay,” (click here).

    —   A portion of the “Effluent Limitation Table of Violations” attached to the lawsuit as Appendix A is below.

    *** BREAKING NEWS ***    

    Portions of the U.S. lawsuit against the City of Lancaster, filed in Federal Court on December 19 are below.


    *** BREAKING NEWS ***

    *   Well, the commenter mentioned in this morning’s post sent in a comment as I was publishing that they will no longer be reading or commenting here.
         —  We have declared a truce so this post has been edited!



         Becky, we can go back and forth regarding LNP and never come to much common ground. To blame them for all of the perils which have befallen the minority population in Lancaster going back generations is absurd.
    Part of a comment into this site yesterday.
         I absolutely disagree. There will be more on this to come – actually a permanent post that will be coming to this site.
         Also questioned in the comments was my statement that Tom Baldrige broke the state ethics code. The letter from Robert P. Caruso is reprinted below and there will also be more on this (click here for the original post on this site). This is not over!
           And what is LNP’s relationship to MAW Communications? This was the Schmuck (see yesterday’s post) in the LNP Board Room in August (click here for the original). Why is there a huge “ad” behind him saying “Sponsored by LanCity Connect?” What the hell is going on? Who is going to jail?
    Please check back later today.    




    1. I admittedly have only skimmed the consent decree when it was posted, but from my understanding of the issue this does not seem to be an overly harsh mandate from the Federal Govt. The consent decree was likely an inevitable outcome. It is a shame that the city could not come to a reasonable agreement with the EPA and PADEP more quickly, as it appears these agencies were acting in good faith to ensure Lancaster reasonably complied with the requirements of the Clean Water Act. Several hundred thousand to a million dollars could have been saved in fees associated with the lawsuit, engineering documentation, and the fines when it became clear that the city’s small bio-retention project program was not going to satisfy the Fed. I’m sure the city would claim the reasonable consent decree terms only occurred due to the lawsuit, but the justification for legal defense was solely to avoid a consent decree.

      It would be nice to see a public statement from the city department of public works providing more insight into what this consent decree means for the city beyond the $1.8 million project in Groff’s Run.

    2. Considering that the Trump administration is anti EPA and anti clean water and anti regulations,it will probably never be enforced

    3. So….whenever anyone would tell me, “There’s something in the water, there”, they were RIGHT!

    4. I guess this explains why Manor Township Manager Ryan Strohecker spends all his time … and taxpayer overpaid salary… drawing cartoons about “stormwater Runoff”. And it still hasn’t worked, because they have already been fined, have paid a boatload to lawyers, and still aren’t in compliance. How do I know all this? I read it in the ALLENTOWN MORNING CALL!