Columbia Borough Police are investigating a burglary of SPARROW Websites located in the 500 Blk. of Cherry Street in Columbia Borough, Lancaster County, PA between January 11, 2019 12:00 pm and January 12, 2019 4:25 pm. Unknown person(s) forced entry into the office and stole numerous items. The company is a website design company. Electronics, expensive photography and computer equipment were taken at the time of the burglary and the estimated loss is approximately $4,500.00. The perpetrators took the surveillance camera, however the camera automatically uploads to a cloud based storage online. Police are in the process of obtaining the footage and checking the area for local residential and commercial surveillance. Anyone with information in the investigation of this burglary please contact the Columbia Borough Police Department at (717)684-7735 or text LANCS to 847411 for tips.
Sunday, January 13, 2019
Commercial Burglary | Columbia Borough Police Department
Date:
Saturday, January 12, 2019
ANNOUNCEMENT: CITIZENS MEETING SUNDAY, JAN 13, 3 PM, 500 CHESTNUT
If you are interested in becoming a candidate to run for a council seat, please attend a citizen's meeting this coming Sunday for information about running.
The meeting is scheduled for Sunday, January 13, at 3 p.m. at 500 Chestnut Street.
All Columbia citizens are welcome to attend.
LNP Editorial: $8-9 million River Park Project
"A caveat, and it’s a significant one: Borough officials are going to need to do everything they can to minimize the impact on taxpayers.
As LNP reported Friday, more than 200 residents and business owners packed a Columbia Borough Council meeting to express their dismay over the borough’s recently enacted 21.2 percent tax increase.
The tax rate was hiked from 6.6 mills to 8.0 mills, which would cost the owner of a $137,500 home an additional $192.
That’s a whopper of a tax increase. So we’re guessing Columbia residents aren’t going to be in the mood for new borough spending. Borough officials will need to make a strong case for the benefits of the riverfront project, and explain how it’s going to be funded."
MORE:
https://lancasteronline.com/opinion/editorials/tapping-columbia-s-riverfront-potential-editorial/article_881e276e-15be-11e9-bbfc-c70aa3695bb1.html
Saturday, January 12, 2019
Columbia couple erased debt by moving into a tiny house
Claudia and Garrett Pennington
Downsizing their home in Columbia, Pa., was a surefire way to knock out a good chunk of debt by reducing their mortgage payments. They had talked about living in a tiny house for years, and "realized it would fast-track our ability," Claudia says. "When we sold our big house, we saved $156,000."
MORE:
Councilman berates Facebook commenters in bizarre late night rant
Cleon Berntheizel at Tuesday's Columbia Borough Council meeting
Berntheizel made the comments early Friday morning on the Columbia Spy Facebook page under an article titled "Council president addresses tax hike and petition drive in prepared statement." He has since removed most of his comments - and in a few cases offered meek apologies to individual commenters - but as of this posting, some remain on the Spy page. Most commenters are Columbia Borough taxpayers.
Berntheizel made the comments from his personal Facebook page, and in some remarks appeared to be speaking for Council. It is unclear at this point whether or not his comments were sanctioned by Council since our emails to council members and the borough manager have not elicited any response.
Friday, January 11, 2019
District Attorney's Office warns Columbia Borough about possible Sunshine Act violation
Shown below is a letter from the Lancaster County District Attorney's Office to the Columbia Borough manager addressing an alleged violation of the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act by the Borough of Columbia. Columbia Spy obtained the letter through a right-to-know request submitted to Columbia Borough's Open Records Officer. The alleged violation occurred sometime between two budget meetings held November 1 and November 7 of last year in which a vote to fund a newly created full-time Property Inspector position was taken privately. A candidate was approved for the position at the October 8, 2018 borough council meeting by unanimous vote. At the November 1 budget meeting, however, council found it might not able to pay the employee's salary. Subsequently, funding was approved in a 6-1 vote at the aforementioned private meeting - a possible Sunshine Act violation.
Resident Sharon Lintner questioned the vote at the November 12, 2018 regular Columbia Borough Council meeting. A transcript is shown below:
Council President Kelly Murphy: "Citizen comments, agenda items only. We have two sign-ups. The first one is Sharon Lintner."
Sharon Lintner: "I want to talk to agenda item 10b: Advertising the 2019 budget. November 1st the last budget meeting that wasn’t the last, because then you put an extra one in November 7th. So when we arrived at the November 7th budget meeting, council president Murphy, you did say that there had been a 6-1 vote taken and you had already somehow found the money between the first, November 1 meeting, and the next meeting Nov 7 to fund the position for property inspector. Can you tell me who the no vote was on that? That was a private vote so we don’t..."
Murphy: “Umm, it was a personnel decision, does it matter?"
Lintner: "I don’t see how that can be personnel if...what exactly was the vote for again?"
Murphy: “Whether or not we wanted to continue, whether we wanted to move forward with hiring the person."
Lintner: "With hiring the person or funding the position?"
Murphy: “Funding."
Lintner: "So how - if they were - I still don’t understand how that's personnel if the candidate hasn’t been hired or the position hasn’t been funded. It can’t be a personnel issue until after the voting, right? If you can’t fund it, how can you hire them? So should that vote have been taken in private?"
Murphy : “Yes."
Lintner: "Ok, all right, so you're not going to say who it was. It differs from the vote for him October 8th at the council meeting. At the public meeting, it was unanimous and then it was 6-1, so in four weeks someone changed their mind about either funding it or hiring him, but you’re not going to say why or how."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)