What a difference 8 years can make or does it?
Many of us continue to be disturbed by the fact that St. Davids Golf Club was not on the January 25 Board of Supervisors Agenda yet that did not stop Supervisor Olson from making a motion, Chairman Lamina seconding the motion and with the additional votes of Supervisors Kampf and Richter, approving the motion 4-3 to return the escrow to St. Davids.
‘Roger’, a Community Matters reader has also been troubled by the backdoor approach that Olson, Lamina, Kampf and Richter took to get the St. Davids Golf Club matter just pushed through without public notification. Roger did some background research yesterday, reading Board of Supervisors Meeting Minutes all the way back to 2002. His discovery led him to June 16, 2002 BOS Minutes: take a look at what he found:
Under Miscellaneous, Page 3, Paragraph 1: Mr. Olson said he had planned to make a motion tonight to keep the Strafford Library open, but he was informed that it must be placed on a public agenda for everyone to see. He said he will introduce a motion to keep Strafford Library open at the Board’s next meeting.
Interesting to note that in 2002, Board of Supervisors Chairman was John Bravaco and Vice Chairman was Bob Lamina. Supervisors Lamina and Olson understood (and followed) the rules of Tredyffrin’s Home Rule Charter in 2002 but 8 years later in 2010 the requirement to follow the rules is no longer necessary. How is that Olson knew he could not make a motion without public notification in 2002 but neither he nor Chairman Lamina viewed that as a stumbling block in 2010? I guess we are to assume that the policy and procedures which existed in 2002 are no longer valid. (Or maybe the difference is that Lamina is Chairman in 2010 whereas he was Vice Chair in 2002).
Here is the link for the June 16, 2002 BOS Meeting Minutes
The Board of Supervisors Meeting Minutes are now available from the January 25, 2010 meeting. Please take the time to read these recent meeting minutes. You will see that Supervisors DiBuonaventuro and Kichline understand the need for public notification of motions (and just think, these 2 supervisors were not even serving in 2002!). Note in the minutes that several audience members attempted to point out that the rules of the Home Rule Charter were not being followed. Rules, policy, procedures . . . not required by Olson, Lamina, Kampf and Richter in 2010.
Isn’t it interesting what the Board of Supervisors could do in 2010 they could not do in 2002!
__________________________________________________
The execution of the laws is more important than the making of them.
– Thomas Jefferson
I was talking to friends in Easttown and Radnor townships — Lamina, Olson, Kampf and Richter have really set Tredyffrin Twp up as a joke. Their actions as elected officials are embarrasing to those who live here. If our elected officials can not be forced to follow the rules, why should any of the rest of us? Really disgusting!
One interesting point which has not been noted is that escrow release request notices (for partial or full) have always been iisted on the BOS agendas. At that time, the township engineer states whether or not the work has been completed to his satisfaction. Then the BOS votes on the motion to approve or not approve. It also allows the P.C. and/or community members to provide input if they so desire. I know for a fact that many of the P.C. members periodically check the progress of various projects to make sure that what was agreed upon by the developer is what’s been built.
MG — thanks. I think that was mentioned the night of the motion — I think it was Ms. Kichline that said this was contrary to the way escrows are released. Pattye that night said that this was against the process of having the engineer sign off on it. It’s a wreck. But once it goes to court, it’s going to be worse because the ultimate result is to punish taxpayers….we need to find some method of recalling supervisors — other communities have recall in their HRC — google recall township and you’ll see it in the PA Code.
Outstanding work by Roger!
Two stunning conclusions:
1. Township rules do indeed require voting matters to “be placed on a public agenda for everyone to see”.
2. There is a pattern of anti-democratic behavior from one of our Supervisors. He should resign immediately.