A proposed amusement tax in Lower Towamensing Township remains unsettled.

Township supervisors on Tuesday tabled any action on the amusement tax in the absence of township solicitor Jim Nanovic.

In May, supervisors were asked to delay action on the matter.

At last month’s meeting, Connie and Rich Banko, who have pushed for the township to consider an amusement tax, disputed several of the claims made by Blue Mountain Resort’s attorney, as well as several Blue Mountain employees, at May’s meeting.

Connie Banko said that Blue Mountain General Manager Jim Dailey keeps saying he wants to be a good steward of the township, but that she doesn’t believe Blue Mountain employees understood what the amusement tax would be applied to.

Connie Banko also noted how Dailey made comments that Blue Mountain’s had some bad winters, but that “they aren’t the only ones who have to work around the weather.”

She also questioned why Blue Mountain is fighting so hard not to have to pay the amusement tax.

Rich Banko noted that at May’s meeting, Blue Mountain “brought all kinds of people to help make their case,” and questioned whether they were paid to attend.

Rich Banko then said if Blue Mountain’s employees are worried about their jobs, he suggested they consider bringing in a union.

Dailey told Rich Banko at last month’s meeting that he didn’t pay Blue Mountain employees to attend the meeting.

Dailey added that while Blue Mountain is opposed to the tax because it feels it does not apply to them, it is responsive to its neighbors and the needs of the community.

At that meeting, Dailey once again reaffirmed his commitment, and pledged Blue Mountain’s support to the township.

Angela Farrell, a member of the township planning commission, said she was still questioning what happened to the $50,000 annual contribution the late Ray Tuthill, former owner of Blue Mountain Ski Area, used to make to the township.

Retired Blue Mountain Resort CEO and minority owner Barb Green said throughout its 49-year existence, there have been several years in the past where Blue Mountain had bad years from a revenue standpoint.

But, Farrell said that Tuthill, Green’s father, did pay, and that “you’re the one that fizzled out (on that one).”

Green said that when she took over at Blue Mountain, it was $25,000, and it went toward the township’s recreation area until they told her they no longer needed the money.

Regardless, Farrell told Green there was an agreement that was made, and that everybody has needs.

Green explained the reason why Blue Mountain is so opposed to an amusement tax is because it’s competing for the summer with the Jersey Shore, and people going on their vacations.

Resident Steve Kuhns said he didn’t believe Green understands the way the amusement tax works.

Kuhns said they aren’t going after the ski area, but instead the extra stuff they’re doing because it’s bringing in more traffic and as a result damaging township roads.

At May’s meeting, Blue Mountain Resort’s attorney, Jan Budman of Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney, warned the measure could spark an expensive legal fight and yield “zero dollars” from the ski area.

Budman then asked the board to table the ordinance for at least 90 days.

Budman said Pennsylvania legislation enacted in 2002 prohibits municipalities and school districts from levying amusement taxes on ski facilities.

He said Blue Mountain’s position is that even if the township passes an amusement tax, it would not apply to the resort.