Board expansion question to appear on Nov. 3 ballot
Jenkins Township Supervisor Robert Linskey speaks during Wednesday’s meeting.
Margaret Roarty | Times Leader
Jenkins Township resident Coreen Milazzo addresses the Jenkins Township Board of Supervisors on Wednesday.
Margaret Roarty | Times Leader
Jenkins Township Supervisor Stanley Rovinski speaks during Wednesday’s meeting.
Margaret Roarty | Times Leader
Jenkins Township Supervisor Joseph Sperrazza speaks during Wednesday’s meeting.
Margaret Roarty | Times Leader
JENKINS TWP. — Jenkins Township Supervisors, during a special meeting on Wednesday, voted to include a referendum question on the Nov. 3 ballot to expand the number of supervisors from three to five.
The resolution was passed with a vote of 2-1. Stanley Rovinski and Joseph Sperrazza voted to approve, while Robert Linskey cast the lone nay vote.
Both Rovinski and Sperrazza, during the meeting, said they thought residents should have the right to decide whether the board is expanded from three to five members.
Linskey, on the other hand, felt there was no need for more members, and adding them would place an unnecessary financial burden on the township.
Six residents spoke during the public comment section, all in favor of passing the resolution.
Coreen Milazzo, who previously served on the board of supervisors, said she believed expanding the board would be in the township’s best interest.
“I think adding two members of the board would help in your workload, would help in subcommittees, would help with communication to the community. Let’s face it, this is a lot of work. I wouldn’t say that if I didn’t know, and 20 years ago it wasn’t anywhere near where it is today,” she said.
Dino Rodeghiero, of Westminster Road, thanked the supervisors for all the work they do, and concurred that adding more would help lighten the workload.
“A little oversight for those in charge of the oversight wouldn’t be a bad idea either,” he said.
In explaining his feelings on the resolution, Rovinski said the decision to expand or not expand should be up to the voters, not the supervisors.
Linskey, however, was not in favor of putting the question on the ballot because he saw “no reason” to add more supervisors.
“I don’t feel like the workload is overwhelming or anything that we shouldn’t be able to do,” he said.
The potential cost of adding two more supervisors was also a concern for Linskey.
Based on his own calculations, Linskey estimated two additions to the board could potentially cost the township upwards of $100,000 annually, when factoring in salaries, healthcare benefits, and other incidentals.
In order to cover the added expenses, Linskey worried tax millage would need to increase.
“It’s gonna be an added expense to the township that we don’t need,” he said.
When asked by residents if a new supervisor could refuse salary and healthcare benefits, the board said they would have the option to do that.
However, the board’s attorney, Girard Mecadon, clarified that while someone could refuse a salary, the township couldn’t make the supervisor position volunteer, as the statute requires the position to be paid.
Local journalism matters, and your support makes it possible. You can help sustain this work by making a donation or choosing one of our subscription options. Subscribers enjoy valuable benefits, including full access to our e-edition, a reduced ad experience on timesleader.com, and more.
Your support helps ensure independent, high-quality local news remains available today and for future generations. Thank you for standing with local journalism.