WOODWARD — Woodward Township, like many other municipalities and organizations, was forced to cancel many of its summer activities last year due to COVID.

But this year, the supervisors are hoping to make up for what was lost last year, which was to be a celebration of the township’s 25th anniversary, with bands, food and craft venders and or course the always popular fireworks display.

“We are going to do the same thing as we did last year by selling tickets to raise money for fireworks,” supervisor Kyle Coleman said at Tuesday night’s supervisors’ meeting.

The fireworks are scheduled to go off on Saturday, July 10 at 9:30 p.m. on the river. Ticket winners will receive cash prizes said Coleman.

In addition, the Dunnstown Fire Company, was approved by the board to utilize Riverview Park for July 9 and 10 to hold its portion of the annual summer fest.

“We have started booking bands to play including a Journey tribute band for Friday the 9th. There will be food and craft venders as well as a stage for the bands,” said Fetzer.

Next on the agenda was the annual river lot lottery. A lottery system was used to pick who will rent lots #33, #45, and #3 – A. The winner of lot #33 was Keith Roberts along with backup alternates: Heather Bechdal and Carol Shade. The winner of lot #45 was Lee Lock along with backup alternates: Anthony Graham and Parish Monroe. Finally, the winner of lot #3 — A was Kayla Stine along with backup alternates: Troy Nicodemus and Olivia Yost.

As the meeting was drawing to a close, the floor was opened to the audience.

Craig Yarnell, retired Public Works Director for the township, raised questions about his pension. Yarnell was an employee of the township for over 20 years and told the board his entire pension was terminated without him being fully notified.

“Apparently back in February or March, I lost my pension — it was terminated. I just wondered what happened to it?” he asked.

Supervisor Wayne Love asked if he had received any paperwork stating termination. Yarnell said he didn’t know what the township did, but his pension had ended.

“They sent paperwork saying that my pension was terminated as of February 2020. But I kept receiving checks until February or March of this year,” he said.

Love asked secretary Jackie Bartlett if Yarnell would still be under the Pennsylvania Municipal Retirement System (PMRS), the original pension company the township utilized before they switched to Brian George.

She said that with the new company, only current employees are able to get a pension upon retirement. Any retired employees that were originally under PMRS would have to be terminated as they are not accounted for under the new company. She said that his account would have been closed out when they switched.

Coleman questioned why he was not able to be transferred into the new system. She said only new employees would be accepted.

“So when we switched retirement companies, he lost his entire pension because the new company did not take it?” Coleman asked.

Bartlett said that was correct. She asked Yarnell if he had received what was left out of his pension. He said that in April he received $1,100 and then had to pay $270 in income tax on it. Love asked if he was offered a roll-over option. Yarnell responded that he did get an option on the paperwork he received but his pension had already ceased a year before that took place.

“They kept sending me checks for another year. So, whatever happened, something happened here,” he said.

“How did the new company not take him in under our system?” Coleman asked

Bartlett said she was unaware of them not taking him under the new system since they did not get any paperwork from PMRS regarding retirees. She said that it was written in a contract that was presented to the township board.

“There was a retired employee who worked here at one point, Bill Bridgens, and he took a buy out. But I never had the option to take a buy out or anything like he did,” Yarnell explained.

“Craig had worked here for over 20 years and for him to lose his retirement just by switching companies,” Coleman said. “Our current employees were given that option to roll over. I do not know why Craig would not have been notified about that.”

According to Yarnell, he is the only retired employee of the township still alive to be able to claim anything. He brought up his late brother who worked for the township as well and said his brother’s daughter would have been getting the rest of his pension.

“His was a different circumstance, he died. His pension was terminated upon his death,” Bartlett said in response.

Love said that there would have probably been a payout option for that instance.

“Depends on the option he took,” Solicitor Bobby O’Connor said. “He would have had various options. He could get the maximum a month before his death or take lump sums, or take a minimal amount and give some to a spouse. It all depends on the selected plan.”

Coleman suggested that they make some phone calls to clear up the issue. Bartlett said that she already did, “They do not take on retirees.”

“So what happened to the money that was for him?” O’Connor asked.

According to Bartlett, the money was given to Yarnell at some point. Coleman asked Yarnell how much he was getting a month for his pension.

“I was getting like $332 a month. I would have to be an idiot to take $1,100 over $330 for the rest of my life. And I never got the option or anything,” explained Yarnell.

Bartlett said the person would have to be an active employee in order to receive a pension with the company they switched to.

“So again, what happened to the money that was allocated to him?” O’Connor asked again.

“They sent him a payout check and just terminated it. We’re going to have to make some calls and clear this up. He can not just lose over $300 a month for the rest of his life,” Coleman continued.

The solicitor asked to see the paperwork from the original pension company to look over.

“I am not so much concerned with the new company as I am with the old one,” he said.

The entire board appeared puzzled and each one said several times he believes something is wrong and someone screwed something up in the process.

Another guest from the audience, who didn’t identify himself, talked about rumors involving the fire tax and fire truck issue. He asked if the fire tax was to be used to purchase a fire truck or not.

“It is for major purchases. When COVID hit, the statute allowed them to keep going with maintenance and stuff,” said Love.

“Well with that being said, I saw over at the fire company that they replaced the concrete in front of the doors and had the whole thing paved over. I used to work there and it looks like it would have cost over $25,000 and I never seen anything bid out. Do they not have to do that?” the man asked.

Love said that the fire company would not have to do that. The man asked if the fire company came to the township to ask for the money. Love said that he believes that the township paid for it.

“We had gotten more than one price on it,” said supervisor John Barth.

“The reason they replaced it and Doug can verify it, is that the concrete had cracked and when they would bring equipment they were afraid that tires would get slashed from it,” Love explained. “We took the lowest price. I believe there were three bids.”

Despite the comment by Love, Coleman chimed in saying that there was not a public awareness for the bidding.

“There were quotes but never any bids presented at a public meeting,” said Coleman

Doug Fetzer, a member of the fire company, said that they could not answer the question about the bids.

“Well I just did. There were quotes gotten from you guys (fire company) but there was nothing bid out or presented at a public meeting,” Coleman said.