[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6165078,"mediaKeyId","5426086-5309342214d4afc16fc753e0803318d1","parentId",5426086,"title","Council considers model beekeeper ordinance, pollinator education and possible community hives","audioSeconds",373,"startMs",2607000,"endMs",2980000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5426086-5309342214d4afc16fc753e0803318d1&start=2607&end=2980","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5426086-5309342214d4afc16fc753e0803318d1/thumbnail_2607000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6165078/Narberth/Montgomery-County/Pennsylvania/Council-considers-model-beekeeper-ordinance-pollinator-education-and-possible-community-hives","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6165078-0fde28d3050f3fb47f32a9d14717a9d0/orig.mp4?Expires=1776150223&Signature=o3tIwnBxz5DXK2ZleQ4OUZyE62p4Kq86xc2CMQB3npY605~9RP94ilqQHUyU9GCcmYSigqL~kTSx9lb11lVjHYCCM7tGciiDeyw3sKFFd1UQ8EszhPGCoqfNK7ss4RpFZMVARu36vKgJ6wGhOo0mDLbTFEWG4jyKAK8-V6NcSe6VH1yIpJ109SkqwpK-mNBLuhazNaGfJWl1-SKrlRDOrjwyiHcasnc-utm0bWkIBZyxLKmBp9oCT4yH5mScVGE9UUvmyXFTUabjx82TpZO64s9OorCq6KOS1vqJ46YLuCiC6olokq0ZmbkDA5Repu5USnhs9zlEx0-Gckuqwko5kA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Narberth Borough, PA","date","2025-07-17T13:50:28Z","article","Council members on July 10 heard a request from a local beekeeper, identified as Chris, to consider adopting a beekeeper‑friendly ordinance or guidelines for the borough and to provide clearer municipal guidance on siting, liability and pollinator‑friendly landscaping.

Why it matters: members said clearer local rules could reduce neighbor disputes, ensure appropriate siting on small lots, and support pollinator habitat and community gardening efforts. The member presenting the request said the state of Pennsylvania has established beekeeper guidelines that the borough could adopt or adapt as a starting point.

Council members asked to invite Chris to the next CAC meeting for a short presentation on practical siting, hive management and neighbor‑notification practices. Members discussed sample property‑use agreements the beekeeper already uses to address liability and neighbor allergy concerns, and said parks and recreation could be a potential site for community hives if logistics and public‑education needs are resolved.

The discussion also linked beekeeping to pesticide and herbicide use: members suggested that pollinator‑friendly landscaping guidance and public education about spraying could be coordinated with parks and rec and school outreach. One member offered to seek infographic support from a colleague to help produce simple public‑education materials on bees and pollinator‑friendly yards.

No ordinance was adopted; the council directed staff to invite Chris to present at an upcoming meeting, to share the model ordinance provided in the meeting packet with council members, and to ask parks staff about interest in hosting a community hive or pilot site.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Environmental Advisory, July 10, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","A resident beekeeper asked the council to recommend beekeeper‑friendly guidelines or adopt the state’s model ordinance. Members supported inviting the beekeeper to present, discussed liability and siting concerns for small lots and community garden sites, and linked the topic to pesticide‑use education and parks coordination.","taxTitle","Narberth, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania","taxId",74693,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6165083,"Council discusses opt‑in Community Choice Aggregation pilot while PUC review remains pending",501,1195000,1696000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5426086-5309342214d4afc16fc753e0803318d1&start=1195&end=1696","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5426086-5309342214d4afc16fc753e0803318d1/thumbnail_1195000.jpg","/articles/6165083/Narberth/Montgomery-County/Pennsylvania/Council-discusses-optin-Community-Choice-Aggregation-pilot-while-PUC-review-remains-pending","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6165083-8711370022e4a03c2afb0ba0850017a9/orig.mp4?Expires=1776150223&Signature=har98nvpXbk89cEASAMPZJnC8nEahRa-5ZUPLObvzT5Ga1ptsfvaXLcRsG2AE~xNsYxsiajxql0xZ3fGSj6-llPCj66TndV8mfuLPIdMn6wrq8euAq7AREqyQD5JqThJwE8U7NAMiWiXym6asTwuk0RqbpECC4NcJ8~dfwsLxQ2inqjs3Aj6c2yrAi70fYdd0uoXf7t-6DXQHtwkXPd6eYw~ojJlksuW5Vk1AaWdhfGDTqN-hWAVj1CejGsYLUT-cRqOvAQf4v7xoeu~E7aTRx0fcxOTZsdv7qo-awYPZKk7un~bbQqHPjzP6jt7CGAtqddrzzt1QV7YEs0uMzRrRA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Members of the Departmental Advisory Council discussed July 10 a stalled Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) petition currently before the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) and considered a local opt‑in pilot and a multi‑borough renewable-energy task force while the PUC review remains unresolved.

An EAC member summarized recent correspondence: an administrative law judge and the Public Utility Law Project had advised the PUC against approving the petition, while the petition’s lawyer submitted a rebuttal. “The PUC doesn’t have — there’s no legally binding deadline for them to respond,” the member said, characterizing the matter as effectively paused.

Why it matters: council members said the PUC’s decision will determine whether a broad opt‑out CCA can proceed. While that review is pending, members argued a local opt‑in pilot could demonstrate consumer interest and operational feasibility.

The member reported that Dennis Rowan and others are proposing a “multi‑borough” task force — variously framed as an energy‑cost or renewable‑energy task force — to recruit initial participants and lead public education. The proposal discussed recruiting roughly 50 households per borough as an initial outreach goal (the member noted that 5% of households in their jurisdiction would equate to about 97 households). The member said the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) expressed support for community‑level pilots and indicated it would look for funding to hire part‑time staff to help guide local task forces.

Council members discussed concrete next steps: Dennis Rowan was expected to draft a short outreach paragraph and potentially model ordinance language; the council asked for a brief paragraph to present to elected officials and for sample ordinance text. Members suggested a 60‑day education period coupled with monthly or bimonthly coordination among borough representatives if the pilot proceeds. Jewel (referenced in the meeting) was suggested as a likely manager for collecting interested households’ contact information.

No formal ordinance was proposed or adopted at the meeting. The council agreed to compile a list of potential local leaders and to circulate outreach text once Rowan or the CCA advocates provide draft language. Members also asked staff to consolidate previously compiled contact lists for recruitment and to return with recommended model ordinance language and outreach materials.

The discussion included brief comments about broader market uncertainty: members referenced PJM rate volatility and the Inflation Reduction Act’s administrative rollout as factors that affect near‑term price guarantees. The member said those wholesale and administrative uncertainties make precise rate forecasts difficult, and that the pilot would be used to test whether a CCA can secure lower retail rates for participants over a defined period.

The meeting produced no votes on the CCA topic; actions were limited to requests for draft materials and staff follow‑up.","EAC members heard an update that the statewide CCA petition is awaiting Public Utility Commission review, and discussed forming a multi‑borough opt‑in pilot and a renewable-energy task force to recruit households and pursue DEP support and funding for staff assistance.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6165088,"Advisory council hears mixed reviews after electric landscaping-equipment workshop",700,43000,743000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5426086-5309342214d4afc16fc753e0803318d1&start=43&end=743","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5426086-5309342214d4afc16fc753e0803318d1/thumbnail_43000.jpg","/articles/6165088/Narberth/Montgomery-County/Pennsylvania/Advisory-council-hears-mixed-reviews-after-electric-landscaping-equipment-workshop","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6165088-9a4eaff11ac4d1a8e9eb3cf1fde36f20/orig.mp4?Expires=1776150223&Signature=ECxKlkNIMW3Ywa1NICWDmIQbQH1a4rFPW9prtrVA2XjCKja5NijbvUxHQ~LdepZ3ChxfiWHFcH1gXlOU69CkFjhusc1Zjy3KfWrr3BMnPCCKTy2RoNhS5MNeWFGY2dSu-1T4O8nD~DFozzGwtVMGpxbN6-wEHDqeRnLVgXoyeA3QoLjqmeYcL2xmOTHSKplnZBqFfuwWjXuEJ6a245y0~7K-M1f75YOKQwdcUnRyzZlZEOwCOk~W2FAo144JA~KAxk90fgXIvAB90l94tqQMeE7cKqZJUidntMxjnB8vuo4mMHCY7~HPFxd~LZkLi1i6lM99TvdwEoW4UfXw9cs6aw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A member of the Departmental Advisory Council reported July 10 that a recent AgX workshop demonstrating battery-powered landscaping equipment drew interest from institutional purchasers but substantial skepticism from frontline landscaping crews. The attendee said representatives from several equipment dealers displayed models from Husqvarna, Makita, Kubota and STIHL, and that AgX presented health and return-on-investment information while allowing hands-on trials outside the Ludington Library.

The council member said the crowd included several township grounds employees who described shorter run times and slower work pace with electric blowers. “They don’t work as well. I keep having to recharge them,” the member said, summarizing comments from township employees. The member added that a bilingual interpreter at the event told attendees that “this equipment is way too expensive for any immigrant landscaper” without substantial incentives.

Why it matters: township maintenance crews and private landscapers are responsible for daily operations that could be slowed by equipment that requires battery swaps and charging. Council members said adoption decisions will hinge on hard data — uptime, maintenance costs, life of batteries and any available rebates — rather than outreach alone.

Council discussion and next steps emphasized testing and targeted outreach rather than an immediate policy change. Members said dealers at the event indicated they will let landscapers try equipment on loan, and that some jurisdictions such as Montgomery County, Maryland, offer rebates for handheld electric equipment. The member also reported that West Noridan Township runs a homeowner rebate for residential electric devices that pays $100 per unit and is limited to homeowners.

Council members urged staff to collect concrete data from AgX and from municipal operations that have already adopted electric equipment. They recommended identifying local or regional contractors who are personally interested in testing equipment — the attendee reported one landscaper from Frio who sought further contact — and suggested convening peers from municipalities or large property owners to capture operational experience, charging practices, and total cost of ownership.

No ordinance or procurement change was proposed or voted on at the meeting. The council agreed to check in with staff member Chad for existing outreach efforts and to gather the AgX presentation materials and any return-on-investment analyses for consideration at a future meeting.

Members also raised practical points for any future pilot: distinguishing industrial dealer-supplied equipment from consumer-grade models bought at retail; planning battery-management workflows (charge one battery while using another); and creating trial periods or tradeback provisions so contractors on thin margins do not face long-term risk if equipment underperforms.

The member recommended that the council prioritize conversations with landscaping crews who already express interest, and that the council pursue data on maintenance and productivity before supporting a broader procurement or rebate program.","At the July 10 EAC meeting, a member who attended an AgX workshop described skepticism from township landscaping crews about battery-powered blowers and other electric equipment, and council members discussed targeted trials, outreach to interested landscapers and the need for rebate data before recommending broader adoption.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council considers model beekeeper ordinance, pollinator education and possible community hives

Council discusses opt‑in Community Choice Aggregation pilot while PUC review remains pending

Advisory council hears mixed reviews after electric landscaping-equipment workshop