This special meeting of the Board of Supervisors, held in the Township Building, was called to order at 1:03 p.m. by Chairman Kenneth Miller; others in attandance were Supervisors Zoe Perkins and Karl Brachwitz, Manager Allen Heist, and Planning Counsel Fronefield Crawford.

Mr. Miller noted that this meeting had been duly advertised as required by the Municipalities Planning Code and the Sunshine Law. The purpose of the meeting was to render a decision regarding the application of Michael S. Polay and Janet S. Polay for a curative amendment to the Township Zoning Ordinance concerning the collection and removal of spring water for commercial purposes.

Mr. Crawford reported that a draft Decision and Order had been reviewed by Board members and their options at this meeting were:

1. accept the Decision and Order as drafted
2. make revisions and adopt the Decision and Order as revised
3. reject the draft Decision and adopt an Order sustaining the validy challenge

The date of this meeting to render the decision of the Board of Supervisors was within the required 45 days from the close of hearings regarding the above. Briefs from David Malman on behalf of the applicant, Robert Sugarman on behalf of the Concerned Citizens of West Vincent Township, and Edward Foley on behalf of the West Vincent Township administration had been received and circulated for review, with full opportunity for those involved to share their viewpoint.

Mrs. Perkins read the following motion into the record: I move that the challenge to the validity of the West Vincent Township Zoning Ordinance brought by Michael S. Polay and Janet S. Polay on the grounds that the Zoning Ordinance is exclusionary with respect to the collection and removal of spring water for commercial purposes be hereby dismissed. I further move that the validity of the West Vincent Township Zoning Ordinance in the face of this challenge be hereby sustained, that the Board elect not to adopt either the proposed curative amendment submitted by the applicants to their validity challenge, nor any other amendment to the Township Zoning Ordinance at this time, and that the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the Decision be adopted. The motion was seconded by Mr. Brachwitz and was voted on as follows: Mr. Miller - yes; Mrs. Perkins - yes; Mr. Brachwitz - yes.

Following the vote, Mr. Miller asked for comments from the Board. Mrs. Perkins stated that she had found the Township's legal counsel Edward Foley's arguments compelling. Mr. Brachwitz stated that during the hearings he had heard nothing conslusive that convinced him of the need to change our Ordinance. There were no comments from the audience.

Mr. Malman asked that a copy of Mr. Sugarman's brief be sent to him as he had not received one. He also stated that neither he nor his client had received a personal notice of today's meeting. Mr. Crawford apologized for that oversight.

After signing and dating several copies of the the Decision of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 1:12 with a motion from Mr. Brachwitz and a second from Mrs. Perkins.

Respectfully submitted,