Public meetings in small boroughs are often sleepy affairs, so it isn’t often one is canceled because of too much public interest.
Nevertheless, that’s what happened in Macungie on Monday night: So many people turned out for the discussion of a proposed zoning change that the crowd far exceeded the legal capacity of the meeting space at the Macungie Institute.
Council decided to reschedule the hearing so it could be held at a larger venue, assuming most people would leave so it could dispense with the two other items on the agenda.
“Council’s not going to proceed with a meeting in a room beyond occupancy capacity,” borough Solicitor Patrick Armstrong said.
The crowd, however, wouldn’t budge, with some attendees saying they didn’t trust council not to proceed with the zoning matter after they left.
“This is our version of the filibuster,” one man shouted.
That outburst summed up the considerable tension between borough residents and their representatives that has played out in recent years, much of it centered on disputes about the borough’s volunteer fire company and, more recently, the police department.
The zoning proposal would change an area in the southern part of the borough from town center or medium-density residential to low-density residential use. Several property owners who spoke after the meeting but preferred not to give their names said they are concerned about the effect the change would have on property values and uses.
Council tried something similar last year, though in that case it limited the rezoning to the property of the Macungie Volunteer Fire Department and to a privately owned park.
The department contended that the rezoning would have prevented it from using its building for social and recreational events, limiting its fundraising ability.
Mayor Ron Conrad vetoed the 2024 rezoning effort, saying it departed from traditional rezoning measures and was an unacceptable example of government restricting property rights. He said the council’s stated aim of preventing apartment buildings in the area was insufficient to warrant the change.
Targeting two properties for rezoning also could have been challenged as illegal spot zoning, whereas the new proposal would include around 90 properties in all, including the department and park.
When Armstrong said council would reschedule Monday’s hearing, an audience member asked if it would be held “on Christmas Eve morning.”
The question, which prompted laughter, referred to a hastily called special meeting held at 9 a.m. the day before Thanksgiving, when council approved a measure giving itself authority over internal police investigations and requiring officers to cooperate with a current investigation of the department being conducted by outside counsel. The nature of that investigation hasn’t been disclosed because it is a personnel matter.
Council decided to push other business to the next regular meeting on Dec. 15 and reschedule the zoning hearing at a time to be determined.
Asked after the gathering whether the matter should have been scheduled for a larger venue because of the potential for high attendance, council President Ron Karboski said attendance always varies.
“We sometimes get five people,” he said.