Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Historical Commission topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents and preservationists press Westtown supervisors after motion to remove entire Historical Commission

Westtown Township Board of Supervisors · July 21, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a July 20 Westtown Township supervisors meeting, the board moved to remove the entire Historical Commission, prompting dozens of residents, preservationists and a state representative to demand a public explanation and urge the board to halt the action until specific charges are disclosed.

The Westtown Township Board of Supervisors faced sustained public outcry on July 20 after a motion to remove every member of the township’s Historical Commission was introduced and seconded.

Chair (role) told the meeting that recent media reports suggesting appointments were tied to the potential sale of the Darlington Inn were "incorrect" and said the board would not discuss individual appointment decisions in public. A supervisor then moved to remove all named members of the Historical Commission pursuant to township code section 170‑204‑4(c); the motion was seconded but no roll‑call vote was recorded in the public transcript at the time the meeting shifted to extended public comment.

The motion and the lack of a public explanation drew lengthy, emotional comments from residents and preservation advocates. Megan Bronze, who identified herself as a Westtown resident and former commission chair, said, "Removing an entire historical commission is not routine… residents deserve a clear explanation." Sarah Riley, a six‑year commission member, asked, "What did they do? That's all I need to know," and urged the board to be transparent.

State Representative Craig Williams, who attended the meeting, urged the supervisors to provide a fuller explanation to the community: "You owe us an explanation. All of us." Multiple speakers warned that a blanket dismissal would damage volunteer recruitment and institutional knowledge that commission members have provided through preservation projects, public programs and documentation efforts.

Commission supporters offered examples of recent work: coordinating history lectures and student contests, pursuing laser scans and documentation for landmark properties, and advising on preservation approaches for sites such as the Darlington Inn and Crowley Farm. Several commenters noted both properties have been identified as nationally register‑eligible in prior discussions and urged the supervisors to consult the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission before taking steps that might affect those resources.

The board chair said the township will review the commission's responsibilities under the code and begin accepting letters of interest for any openings, including from former members. The transcript records motions to accept one commission resignation and other personnel items; however, the public exchange made clear strong community demand that the board either (a) present specific charges and evidence in public or (b) table any wholesale replacements until a transparent process is completed.

The supervisors did not provide a detailed list of alleged conduct against individual commission members during the open meeting. Next steps announced in the meeting record include an internal review of the commission's responsibilities and a public call for letters of interest to fill commission vacancies; no final action on wholesale removal is recorded in the public minutes included in the transcript.