Local governments across Pennsylvania are losing the ability to make basic decisions about what happens in their own communities. That’s not a Penn Forest problem. It’s a statewide problem. And it’s one only Harrisburg can fix.

Over the years, vague state laws and court interpretations have steadily stripped townships of clear zoning authority. We’re still expected to plan responsibly and protect our residents, but the legal tools we’re given are unclear, inconsistent, and increasingly unenforceable.

When we try to base decisions on real infrastructure limits like roads, water systems, and emergency services, we face expensive lawsuits paid for with taxpayer dollars.

This isn’t about being anti-development.

Local governments support responsible growth and property rights.

But there’s a fundamental difference between reasonable development and projects that exceed what existing infrastructure can actually handle. The problem is that Pennsylvania law increasingly prevents us from making that distinction in a way that holds up in court.

The real issue is the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, the law that governs zoning statewide. It needs to be modernized so local governments can make decisions based on facts and the local realities different municipalities face, not just hope and a prayer that the Commonwealth Court will uphold local decisions.

What needs to change

First, the Municipalities Planning Code should explicitly allow communities to regulate growth based on real infrastructure capacity. Right now, townships can identify that a proposed development would overwhelm local roads, exceed water system capacity, or strain emergency services beyond safe response times, but we lack clear legal authority to deny projects on those grounds. We need the MPC to clarify that documented infrastructure limitations are valid grounds for zoning decisions.

Second, courts should be required to respect the documented findings of elected local officials who actually know their communities. Township supervisors and planning commissions spend months analyzing projects, holding public hearings, and gathering expert testimony.

Yet courts often substitute their own judgment for local findings without meaningful deference to the legislative process. The MPC should establish that when local governments document their decisions with substantial evidence, those findings deserve weight.

Third, the MPC should strengthen performance-based zoning standards that focus on what a project actually does rather than just what it’s called.

A development’s impact on traffic, noise, water usage, and infrastructure demand matters more than its categorical label.

Performance standards allow communities to evaluate projects based on measurable impacts rather than getting trapped in disputes over use definitions.

Fourth, the MPC should explicitly permit phased growth tied to infrastructure readiness. Many municipalities want to allow development but only as fast as roads can be improved, water systems expanded, or emergency services scaled up. Current law makes this difficult to implement and defend. Phased growth provisions would let communities say yes to development while ensuring it happens responsibly.

Why this matters

When local zoning authority is unclear and unenforceable, accountability breaks down. Residents rightfully expect their elected officials to make responsible decisions about community growth. But when state law strips away the tools to implement those decisions, or when courts overturn them despite documented evidence, local government becomes a scapegoat for a system that no longer functions.

The result is lawfare: zoning disputes resolved through expensive litigation rather than the legislative process. Municipalities face a difficult choice when challenged in court. Defending a decision can cost tens of thousands in legal fees, even when the township is right on the merits.

Many municipalities simply cannot afford prolonged court battles, and developers know it. Local decisions increasingly happen in courtrooms where only attorneys speak, not in meeting halls where residents have a voice. Taxpayers fund the defense while accountability disappears into the legal system.

This affects every municipality in Pennsylvania. Rural townships face pressure from large-scale projects their infrastructure was never designed to support.

Suburban communities struggle to manage growth that outpaces roads and schools. Even urban areas find themselves unable to implement comprehensive plans when individual projects can challenge and overturn local decisions.

What this means

People ask, “Why can’t the township just ban data centers?”

It starts with facing a basic legal reality. Townships in Pennsylvania do not have unlimited authority, nor inherent sovereignty. Under the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, local governments only have the powers granted to them by the General Assembly. Zoning is one of those powers, but it comes with strict limits.

One of those limits: a municipality may not completely exclude a lawful land use.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has made this clear for decades. In National Land and Investment Co. v. Easttown Township (1965), the court held that zoning cannot be used to prohibit a legitimate use throughout an entire municipality. That principle was reaffirmed in Girsh Appeal (1970), where the court ruled that total exclusion of a lawful use is unconstitutional.

A data center is a lawful land use. Because of that, the zoning ordinance must provide for it somewhere within the township.

That does not mean it is allowed everywhere. It does not mean anyone wants one. And it does not mean any specific project is approved.

It simply means the ordinance must include at least one practical place, or district, where the use is permitted in principle.

There is no data center project formally proposed. No application has been submitted, no plan is under review, and no approval is being considered.

Adding a use to the zoning ordinance is not the same thing as approving a project. Zoning defines what uses may be considered. Separate processes govern whether a specific proposal is actually allowed to move forward. Without defining the use in the ordinance, the township cannot hold a public hearing, apply standards, or impose enforceable conditions when a proposal comes forward.

If/when a proposal were submitted, it would still have to comply with all zoning requirements, land development approval, stormwater management, traffic and noise studies, all applicable state and federal requirements, and public input as part of the process.

The township retains the authority to decide where data centers may be located and under what conditions. What it cannot do is write zoning rules that exclude a lawful use entirely. Courts have consistently struck down ordinances that try to do so, leaving municipalities and taxpayers to foot the bill for expensive legal battles.

This issue is not about whether the township wants a data center. It is about complying with Pennsylvania law and maintaining a zoning ordinance that is legally valid and defensible.

What you can do

Showing up at township and borough meetings matters, but this problem cannot be solved locally. It must be fixed in Harrisburg.

Contact your state representative and state senator.

Ask them directly: “What are you doing to modernize the MPC so municipalities can make zoning decisions based on infrastructure capacity and defend those decisions in court?”

For Carbon County residents, that means reaching out to state Representative Doyle Heffley and state Senator Dave Argall.

Local elected officials across Pennsylvania are asking the same question. We need residents to join us in demanding that state legislators take action.

Until the state updates the rules, local governments across Pennsylvania will keep taking the blame for decisions they’re no longer fully empowered to make. The people of Pennsylvania deserve better. Our communities deserve local control that actually means something.

_____

Christian Bartulovich is vice chairman of the Penn Forest Board of Supervisors.

The Penn Forest Township Board of Supervisors will hold a special meeting on Monday, beginning at 6 p.m., at Penn’s Peak, 325 Maury Road, in Penn Forest Township. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss and obtain public comment regarding proposed amendments to the Penn Forest Township Zoning Ordinance, including the zoning map to address data centers, data center accessory uses, and related provisions of the zoning ordinance.