At its meeting Sept. 8, Allen Township Board of Supervisors reconvened with Solicitor Thomas Dinkelacker on behalf of K&H Development after having been accused of conspiring to reject a development plan in 2018.

After dramatic events of an Aug. 11 meeting, where a seemingly innocent project turned into a complex conspiracy theory, the board seemed eager to put the matter of stormwater deficiencies to rest.

At the Aug. 11 meeting, Jamie Kratz, attorney for Kay Krapf, of K&H Development, “alleged township Manager Ilene Eckhart, former township Engineer Robert Cox, township Solicitor Lincoln Treadwell and former board of supervisors chairman Larry Oberly ‘conspired’ to reject plans for a 40,000-square-foot industrial flex property on Savage Road,” according to reports.

Kratz argued the township engineer drafted a plan review letter in December 2018, which Eckhart allegedly rejected based on stormwater deficiencies. Kratz then went on to accuse Oberly of being the biggest objector to the development because it sat across from his home.

John Mahoney, who is representing the township in this appeal case, argued the plan was never rejected because what was submitted to Cox in 2018 was an application for a land development plan, not the plan itself.

With all of that said, the board had decided to reconvene Sept. 8 to discuss the matter further.

Dinkelacker opened the discussion by explaining whenever an engineer makes a determination relating to stormwater issues, the determination must be appealed to the board of supervisors. In this case, the applicants appealed the matter just in case engineering determinations were made.

According to Dinkelacker, the board of supervisors must determine whether the applicant’s letter is or contains determinations regarding stormwater matters. If it does, a determination is a final action and would make the rejection lawful.

If this were the case and the engineering comments in the letter were accurate, the decision would be in favor of the township. If they were inaccurate, the decision would be in favor of Krapf and K&H Development.

With this information, the board voted to dismiss the appeal.