They ignore the law

To the editor: In an April 13 newspaper account, the following comments were attributed to a representative of the Milford Borough Council: “…Milford Architectural Review Board (ARB) complied with state law, which does not have the residency requirement and that the members are all substantially in compliance to the local ARB ordinance”. With all due respect, it seems odd that we are expected to accept “substantial” compliance with the law by our elected government. For a borough council who insists on tearing up our neighbors historic fences because they claim they are inches over some claimed “right of way”, or challenging the existing/historic signs of the borough’s merchants, it seems only appropriate that the council should also be held to such a level of compliance. Article IV of the ordinance which established the Milford Historic Architectural Review Board clearly states that the board must be made up of three professionals (architect, real estate broker and the borough’s building officer) and 2 property owners who “ either reside in or carry on a business in the historic district”. The ordinance was signed into law on December 6, 1999, by the same borough council president who now suggests there is no such requirement. It is unclear why the borough council president has made such statements. The borough council should confirm that all members comply with the law. If the borough council cannot confirm this, they should explain why they “ignore the borough’s laws or don’t want those laws to apply to them”. Instead of criticizing citizens who defend their rights, the borough council should respect and obey the law. Michael Buchanan Milford