This column was submitted to LebTown. Read our submission policy here.
Palmyra Borough has spent years discussing the future of our downtown. Like many small communities, we want a vibrant Main Street that attracts investment, supports locally owned businesses, encourages people to shop and dine locally, and creates a place where residents are proud to spend their time.
That kind of revitalization doesn’t happen overnight, nor does it happen by chance. It requires thoughtful planning and, at times, difficult zoning decisions.
On July 14, Borough Council unanimously approved an amendment to our zoning ordinance regarding amusement arcades in the Central Business District. Since then, there has been considerable discussion in the news and on social media. I appreciate that residents are engaged in local government, but much of the conversation has been based on misunderstandings about what Council actually approved.
So let’s start with the facts.
Palmyra Borough did not ban amusement arcades throughout the Borough.
We did not ban pinball machines, Pac-Man, claw machines, family entertainment centers, carnivals, fairs, or festivals.
We did not pass an ordinance determining whether skill games are legal or illegal under Pennsylvania law. That authority belongs to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, not Borough Council.
What Council approved was a zoning amendment removing amusement arcades as a permitted use in the Central Business District while continuing to allow them in the Highway Commercial District. The amendment also updated the definition of an amusement arcade to include games of skill or chance while clarifying that three or fewer amusement devices used as an accessory to another business are not considered an amusement arcade.
Like every zoning decision Borough Council makes, the question wasn’t whether a business is good or bad. The question was whether that particular land use supports the long-term vision for that zoning district.
Every municipality uses zoning to determine which types of businesses and land uses are appropriate in different areas of the community. This amendment reflects Council’s judgment that large, standalone amusement arcades or skill-game parlors are not the type of principal use that best supports the long-term vision for Palmyra’s downtown.
That does not mean those businesses are prohibited throughout the Borough. Amusement arcades remain a permitted use in the Highway Commercial District.
It is equally important to understand what this ordinance doesn’t do.
Under the amended definition, three or fewer amusement devices used as an accessory to another business are not considered an amusement arcade. That means a restaurant, tavern, or similar business in the Central Business District whose principal use is serving food or beverages, rather than operating amusement devices, is not classified as an amusement arcade simply because it has one, two, or three accessory games.
In other words, this ordinance was written to address businesses whose principal use is operating an amusement arcade. It was not written to prohibit restaurants, taverns, or other businesses from having a small number of accessory amusement devices as permitted under the ordinance.
One concern I saw repeatedly was that this ordinance would somehow affect our local veterans’ organizations.
Before voting on this amendment, Council specifically confirmed that the Palmyra VFW and American Legion are both located in the Highway Commercial District, not the Central Business District. Because of that, this zoning amendment does not affect those organizations.
I’ve also seen claims that this ordinance was created to stop one particular business. That simply isn’t true.
This wasn’t something Borough Council dreamed up overnight. Discussions about updating the amusement arcade provisions began in 2025, months before the recent application for a downtown game room was ever filed. This amendment was the result of an ongoing planning effort focused on the future of our downtown, not a reaction to a single applicant or proposal.
Unfortunately, I’ve also seen comments suggesting that this ordinance bans family entertainment throughout Palmyra Borough or that businesses with a few amusement devices are no longer permitted. Those statements are simply not accurate.
This ordinance does not ban family entertainment. It does not prohibit businesses from having one, two, or three accessory amusement devices as permitted under the amended definition. Nor does it ban amusement arcades throughout the Borough. It is a zoning amendment that determines where a particular principal land use—an amusement arcade—may be located within Palmyra Borough.
There has also been considerable discussion about the recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision regarding skill games. While that decision is certainly important and may ultimately shape how the Commonwealth regulates those machines, it should not be confused with what Borough Council approved.
The Supreme Court addressed questions of state law. Borough Council addressed local zoning. Those are two separate matters.
Reasonable people can disagree with the direction Council chose. That’s part of good government, and I respect those differing opinions. But those discussions should be based on the ordinance that was actually adopted, not on rumors, assumptions, or misinformation circulating online.
As elected officials, we have a responsibility to think beyond today’s headlines and consider what Palmyra should look like ten, twenty, or even thirty years from now. Every zoning decision we make should move us closer to that vision.
I believe Palmyra’s future lies in a thriving downtown filled with businesses that encourage people to walk our streets, visit our shops, dine in our restaurants, invest in our community, and strengthen Main Street as the heart of our town.
This zoning amendment is one step toward achieving that vision.
Whether you supported this decision or opposed it, I encourage you to attend Borough Council meetings, review proposed ordinances, ask questions, and stay engaged. An informed community makes for better local government, and respectful public dialogue will always serve Palmyra better than misinformation or speculation.
Palmyra has tremendous potential. If we are serious about revitalizing our downtown, then every zoning decision should move us toward that goal. I believe this amendment does exactly that, and I look forward to continuing the work of making our downtown a place where businesses want to invest, residents want to spend their time, and future generations will be proud to call the heart of our community.
Marcus Riddell serves on the Palmyra Borough Council.
