By Rob Scott
SUNBURY -- City residents may be given a chance this fall to collectively say "no" to opening the flood wall for the long-awaited riverfront project.
Local architect and Sunbury native Stan Seiple recently circulated a petition asking residents: "Should openings be cut in the flood wall to access the river side of the wall for recreation purposes even though access could be achieved without cutting openings in the wall?"
To date, Seiple said he -- and other members of the group Sunbury Citizens for a Better Government -- has collected more than 600 signatures, 400 more than he needed to get the question on the November ballot, according to Mary Thew, director of elections in Northumberland County.
Thew said in order to get the question on the ballot, Seiple had to get 20 percent of the total number of votes cast for Mayor Jesse Woodring in the 2005 election. Woodring rang up 1,003 votes, meaning Seiple only needed about 200 signatures.
But Thew hesitated to say for certain whether the question would go on the ballot.
"I'm still checking to make sure this even can go in," she said. "This is the first I've run into this kind (of referendum). Most referendums are self-explanatory."
Neither Thew nor Janel Miller, a spokesperson for the state Department of Community and Economic Development, could say with any certainty whether this type of question is allowed on the ballot.
Miller said she would investigate, but could not provide an answer by the end of the day Thursday.
Even if the question can go on the ballot, chances are it will be non-binding, which means the city can do whatever it wants, regardless of what voters say.
That's OK with Seiple, who said, "I want people to have an opportunity to have their voices heard, and I don't think that's happened to this point."
He said past meetings pertaining to the riverfront project "tend to be structured so people don't have an opportunity to talk. ... They (city officials) choose not to listen."
"I don't think that's true," said Woodring, though he acknowledged the city's communication with the public on the project could be better.
Nonetheless, he said, "People have the right to do whatever. Their concerns are unfounded. ... We've used engineers. These things are done all over the country and all over the world."
If the majority of city residents voted against opening the flood wall, would the city alter its plans?
"It's a good question. I don't know," the mayor said. "I would assume that's a question for City Council. I'm not the king."
But the city has spent a considerable amount of time, effort and money working with designers and engineers on the project and to change it at this point, he said, "would be terribly expensive, because you'd have to redesign the thing."
Not to mention the fact that the deadline could run out on the various grants the city has received, he said.
"I don't want the city to have to spend any more money," Seiple said, "but whatever decisions are made right now are going to affect the city for 100 years. ... I think it was unfair that nobody listened (to the residents' concerns) along the line."
Seiple, a Northumberland resident, made it clear he supports riverfront development -- "I see just good with that" -- but strongly opposes opening the wall.
"This isn't a selfish effort," he said. "I was born and raised in this town. I lived through some floods."
Asked how the city could provide access to the riverfront without opening the flood wall, Seiple responded, "That's up to the designers. (The city is) paying them $1.5 million to do this. I'm trying to be fair about this thing. I just want them to think this out."
n E-mail comments to rscott@dailyitem.com.
