At the September 9, 2026 Newtown Township Board of Supervisors meeting, Todd McGonigal delivered a pointed critique of the abandoned sewer treatment plant project and the political and professional relationships surrounding it.
McGonigal repeatedly asked “Who benefited?” He argued that Newtown residents did not appear to benefit: sewer customers received a 47% rate increase, roughly $11.5 million was spent pursuing a treatment plant that was never built, and the property acquired for the project is now being considered for sale and possible residential development.
A major focus of his remarks was Kilkenny Law and its relationship with Newtown government. McGonigal questioned whether political contributions, municipal appointments, and taxpayer-funded legal work create at least the appearance of a pay-to-play conflict of interest. He cited controversies involving the firm in other Pennsylvania municipalities and stressed that these facts do not by themselves prove wrongdoing in Newtown, but said they warrant scrutiny.
McGonigal concluded by asking the Board of Supervisors to take two actions: reconsider whether Kilkenny Law should continue representing Newtown Township and refuse to rezone the former sewer-treatment-plant property for residential development.
His central message was that before anything further happens with the property, residents deserve a complete accounting of what happened, why millions were spent, who made the decisions, and who ultimately benefited.
Aside from mentioning qualifications regarding their choices, many respondents also expressed opposition to any restart of the sewer treatment plant as a reason.
At the 11 June 2025 BOS meeting, the Chair and the Township Manager made the argument that "we [the CURRENT BOS] issued a letter to the sewer authority saying that the township vehemently opposes any construction of a sewer plant. For the sewer plant to even happen would would require this board [emphasis added] to authorize the township engineer to amend the act 537 plan to include a sewage treatment plant. So until this board [emphasis added] does that, there's no forward progress with this."
The problem is that "this board" will not be the same after the 2025 election. Two new Supervisors will be elected to replace John Mack and Dennis Fisher whose terms will expire on 31 December 2025. Who's to say that the new BOS will not rescind the aforementioned letter and vote to amend Act 537 [The Pennsylvania Sewer Facilities Act]? You have to ask yourself: Why would the Sewer Authority undertake this if it did not believe Act 537 would be amended? Did the Newtown representatives on the Sewer Authority Board assure them that would be the case?
It is imperative, therefore, that we appoint someone who has expressed opposition to the sewer treatment plant. I agree with the majority of survey respondents; i.e, that person is Marc Bjorkman, who has publicly (and privately to me) expressed his opposition to the sewer treatment plant. I spoke with Craig Deutsch who refused to say that he is outright opposed to such a plant in Newtown.
In addition, Mr. Deutsch already serves on 3 Newtown commissions. While I appreciate his service to the community. naming him for another position while rejecting a new volunteer is just the wrong optic that sends the message: "we appoint only our friends."
Related Content: