When Wehr's Dam was inspected by the state in 2012, it was rated "overall in good condition." We are now being told that it needs a $million dollars worth of repairs. What happen to the dam in the last few years? Nothing structural happened, but it has been submitted to much deception.
In 2014 the Wildlands Conservancy approached the township commissioners with a proposal to demolish the dam at the Wildlands expense. Demolishing dams is one of their general goals, and they make an administrative fee from grants they find for such projects. Because the dam is so historical and unique, a grass roots effort began to defend the iconic structure. Nowhere else can you see water flow over a bridge and under a covered bridge in the same spot. The Wildlands is very connected to the township. At that time a son of one of Wildlands directors was park director of South Whitehall, and the Wildlands helped create the township park master plan, which called for the dam's removal. Because of the public outcry, the commissioners placed a referendum on the ballot in 2016 concerning the dam's future. Because they linked keeping the dam with a $600,000 loan and tax increase, they felt the voters would condemn the dam for them, with no political consequence. To their surprise, the beloved dam survived the referendum. With this unexpected obstacle, the Wildlands then presented the state DEP with a report claiming that the dam has much bigger structural defects than observed by state inspectors. By now the former park director, a son of a Wildlands director, had been promoted to head of the township public works. He and the township made no effort to defend the dam, and have accepted the Wildlands engineering recommendations without appeal or protest. Because of these shenanigans, the current price tag to repair the dam is now a $million, exceeding the amount approved by the voters in 2016.
It is apparently necessary for residents of South Whitehall to once again defend their history. When the referendum passed in 2016, they thought that the cherished dam was saved. They underestimated the arrogance in that township building, and perhaps overestimated the integrity there.
The Wildands Conservancy is a local sacred cow which is protected by the local press. The Morning Call has been refusing to print my letters to the editor. The reporters have been declining to return my calls. I have been pressing this issue for the last two weeks because I know how the Wildlands operates. As soon as they get the green light from the commissioners, their hired excavator will breach the dam the next day. Our history and that magic spot will be a pile of rubble within hours.
You document the underhanded tactics of the Wildlands Conservancy very well. I'm sure they're counting on people being too pre-occupied with the holidays to realize what's happening until it's too late.
ReplyDeleteI would suggest that another public relations campaign needs to be started, including:
An on-line petition
Letters to the Editor
Attendance at SWT commissioner meetings
The people and politicians need to be re-awakened on this issue. The Wildlands is counting on people forgetting about it. The politicians need to know that many people from outside the township visit that park particularly for the area near the dam, and those visitors will be lost if the dam is removed and the area converted to something that can be found anywhere.
Between the zoning issues and the dam issue, I don't think I've ever seen SWT government so far out of line with the will of the people.
They need to see that they will pay a price.
Unknown, they previously received over 7,600 signatures actually signed at the dam. Would you please start another one?
ReplyDeleteThe Morning Call declines my letters on the topic, would you please write one?
I've attended every meeting for two years(2014-2016), BTW, their courtesy of the floor is at the end of meeting, long nights, long wait to address them. Would you please attend the next meeting?
three of the five commissioners will be new in January, the remaining two are firmly in the bag for the Wildlands Conservancy.
If any commission or council anywhere was ever concerned about "paying a price", our municipalities would be much better run.
I often wonder if the current event posts on this blog are to rally people to action to stop the destruction in our parks, or merely to document the destruction and provide some proof that you foresaw what was going to happen.
ReplyDeleteSo I appreciate the clarification to that question, which is clearly evident in your response above.
Unknown, I acknowledge that my previous reply displayed some irritation. I was pretty much responsible for saving the dam back between 2014-2016. Although the Morning Call concentrated on the novelty of Wehr's grandson being involved, I tutored him of the threat, and also wrote the op ed before the vote, which I believe influenced enough people to pass the referendum. In addition to attending endless meetings, I fought with the paper for a month to get the letter published. Your comment of Nov 15, 4:28 recommended that I do it all again. I'm still exerting my efforts on behalf of the dam and other park issues in Allentown...However, I am hoping to encourage other people to likewise exert themselves.
ReplyDeleteWhy does the Wildlands want to demolish the dam in the first place. What is their reasoning? What do they get out of it that they want it done so bad?
ReplyDeleteBrendan, the Wildlands is against all dams. They use woke generalized science...i.e, they want riparian buffers in the Allentown parks, even though the storm sewer system is piped UNDER the buffers directly into the creeks. In Pennsylvania, the DEP also has an agenda against dams. A director's son drowned years ago by a dam. The Wildlands does get grants to demolish the dams, and can keep 15% for administrative fees.
ReplyDelete