Pattye Benson

Community Matters

Tredyffrin Township

Candidate Ken Buckwalter Uses Social Media Tool, Watching Phoenixville, to Respond to Kampf’s Recent Campaign Mailer

May 14, 2010
2 Comments

Don’t know if you are aware, but Republican State House candidate Ken Buckwalter is a citizen journalist with a blog, Watching Phoenixville. Buckwalter started the blog several years ago, long before deciding to run for the State House 157. This week his opponent Warren Kampf sent out a campaign mailer that contained several quotes attributed to Buckwalter, and unfortunately for Buckwalter may have been taken out of context, and lead the voter to misunderstanding. With this type of 11th hour campaign strategy, it can be difficult for the targeted person to respond.

I can speak from personal experience about last-minute campaign tactics. Aside from my election, many of you will recall a ‘comparison’ campaign mailer which targeted Eamon Brazunas that was received by voters very close to November’s Election Day; a situation that can make it nearly impossible for a candidate to recover. In Buckwalter’s case, I don’t know he has sufficient time to mail a response mailer to the voters prior to Tuesday’s Primary. However, Buckwalter is using his own social media tool, Watching Phoenixville, to correct Kampf’s misinformation. Further details and explanation can be found on Buckwalter’s campaign website, www.BuckwalterForPA.com (For the record, Buckwalter did not ask nor suggest that I add this post to Community Matters.)

Below is Buckwalter’s current posting on Watching Phoenixville:

Response to a Warren Kampf Attack Mailer

I just received a mailer from my opponent, Warren Kampf, attacking a post I wrote August 4th 2008. I stand by what I wrote in Alcoholic Drink Tax & Maybe a City Charter.

Warren’s mailer took the following from my post: “Maybe it is time for Phoenixville to look into a drink tax what with the many, many taverns, pubs and bars opening up in our downtown.”

Warren then states “Two times – in 2010 and in 2008 – (Ken) supported a new “drink tax” in Phoenixville – a tax that would hurt the revitalization of his community.”

Unfortunately, Warren couldn’t be more deceptive in his attack as he left out the rest of what I wrote.

“This would provide the consistent funding source needed to continue to revitalize and promote the downtown with the possibility of providing some property tax relief for our residents. At least those who enjoy our downtown but don’t live here, would help contribute financially to the added expenses of sustaining our growth.”

Warren also failed to inform that Phoenixville property owners were about to be put on the hook to the tune of $625,000 for 5 years if Council passed funding for the services of the CDC. The amount would equate to almost a 10% tax increase before the budget even got underway for 2009.

It should be noted that the funding did pass that August but was cut in half for the 2010 budget.

Click to read post: Alcoholic Drink Tax & Maybe a City Charter.

Contested Republican Primary for PA State House 157 . . . Does Campaign Finance Report Indicate Kampf & Buckwalter as Fiscally Responsible? You be the judge –

May 13, 2010
27 Comments

We are in the countdown for the Pennsylvania Primary Election, Tuesday, May 18. Locally, there is a contested Republican race for the PA State House 157, currently held by incumbent Democrat Paul Drucker. Ken Buckwalter and Warren Kampf were both recommended by the Chester County Republican Party in March and will appear on Tuesday’s ballot. The outcome of the Primary will determine whether Buckwalter or Kampf is on the General Election ballot in November and opposing Drucker.

There’s been much said and written about small business owner and Phoenixville Borough councilman Buckwalter vs. attorney and Tredyffrin Township supervisor Kampf. Each of the candidates has sent several targeted campaign mailers to registered Republicans in the 157 district. Yesterday, Republican residents received a Kampf campaign mailer which focused on Buckwalter’s voting record on the ‘pour tax’ and also the sewer tax.

Did you know that Pennsylvania is only of only 11 states that do not protect their citizens, elections and government from the destructive impact of unlimited campaign contributions? In fact, in March of this year, Senator Jane Earll (R-49) and Senator Jay Costa (D-43) introduced Senate Bill 1269 which would amend the Pennsylvania Election Code to set campaign contribution limits per election, including in-kind contributions. The finance reform legislation would place limits on campaign contributions and prohibit the use of campaign funds for personal uses. There are important reasons that voters value fiscal responsibility in their elected officials. Managing public money is a matter of public trust, and a charge that should not be taken lightly.

When introducing his campaign reform bill, Senator Costa commented that “It is vitally important that Pennsylvania renew the process of reforming our campaign finance laws by placing reasonable restrictions on political contributions and expenditures that are overwhelmingly supported by the public.” An important campaign component for State House 157 Republican candidates Buckwalter and Kampf is their promise of fiscal responsibility and discipline in Harrisburg. With a contested primary, I thought it would be interesting to look at how each of these candidates has fiscally managed their campaigns leading up to Tuesday’s Primary. Campaign finance reporting is public information and I have copies of the latest reports for Buckwalter and Kampf. Each of the candidates filings are ‘as of May 5, 2010′; Buckwalter electronically filed online and Kampf’s paper-filed.

Comparing the campaign finance report indicates that total expenditures, debts and obligations as of May 5 for Kampf ($43,541.18) vs. Buckwalter ($10,458.69). These numbers indicate that Kampf is outspending Buckwalter approximately 4-1. I then looked at how much money each candidate had raised. As of May 5, total campaign contributions for Kampf ($58,448.49) vs. Buckwalter ($13,202.72).

I next compared the candidate’s contributors – did either Kampf or Buckwalter receive $1,000 or more from individuals or companies? Buckwalter – no; actually Buckwalter received no individual contribution greater than $500. Those contributing $1,000 or more to Kampf’s campaign include Paul Olson ($3,500); C.T. Alexander ($1,000); James McErlane, Lamb McErlane Law Firm ($5,000); White & Williams Law Firm ($2,000); Aqua America ($1,000) among others.

How did these 2 candidates spend their money? Statement of expenditures, Schedule III of the Campaign Finance Report indicates the expenses for Kampf and Buckwalter. Excluding campaign mailers, printing and postage, I looked at all individual campaign expenses of over $500 for each candidate. The only individual expenses by Buckwalter over $500 was $1,500 on consulting services on two different dates, total of $3,000. Kampf’s individual expenses exceeding $500 included computer ($630.66); consulting ($3,700); website ($5,550); photocopier ($530); catering ($1,000).

I think that this is an interesting statistical analysis which indicates fundraising and spending patterns of both Republican candidates seeking the PA State Representative position. It is important that our elected officials are fiscally responsible; have these candidates succeeded in that mission during Primary season? If you are a Republican, you be the judge and cast your vote on Tuesday accordingly.

Lamina’s Characterization of Some Residents as ‘Gnats Nipping at His Heels’ is Troubling . . . Some Residents Claim They are ‘Victims of Taxation Without Representation’

May 12, 2010
60 Comments

In last week’s Main Line Suburban newspaper, BOS Chairman Lamina characterized those that disagree with him as ‘gnats nipping at his heels’. Having been the target of his insulting remarks at the supervisors meeting and also in the paper, I was curious if residents would defend Lamina or find his governing style offensive as I had? Guess I didn’t need to worry, as this week’s edition of the Main Line Suburban Life newspaper contained no resident letters of support. Just the contrary, newspaper editor Tom Murray ran an entire section of letters under the heading, ”Some Tredyffrin residents not pleased with board chairman’s comments’. Again, there are no letters in support of Lamina and, in fact one letter from Mr. and Mrs. Diamond of Malvern calls for Lamina to step down as chairman of the board. I suppose such a request would need to be generated from a majority of the other supervisors and, given that one of their own will appear on the ballot next week, such a suggestion would appear highly unlikely.

Stepping back and looking at the situation, . . . where does all this leave those in the community that have questions of our elected officials? Why should we bother risking public humiliation by asking questions? If like me you ask the questions, but are treated dismissively, bullied or called names (and still receive no answers) . . . why bother? There has been a continuous theme among some of these supervisors since December; those that rule this township will remain in power and continue to ‘make the rules and break the rules’ as they see fit. Disrespecting citizens can now be added to the list.

In reading through this week’s letters in the newspaper, the following letter caught my eye. In the closing of his letter, Mr. Poppel of Devon states, ” When I hear the chairman of the Board of Supervisors and some of his colleagues dismiss the concerns and those of others who may not agree with him or who are members of the opposing party, then I must infer that we, too, are victims of taxation without representation. More to the point, it is clear from both Mr. Lamina’s comments and printed statements that he works not for the benefit of all the citizens of Tredyffrin but just those who support and agree with him. This is not the American way.” As someone who really believes in this community and the importance of everyone’s voice, it truly saddens me that one individual’s [Lamina] words have the capacity to isolate and alienate some of Tredyffrin’s residents.

To the Editor:

In his article in Main Line Suburban Life, Chairman of the Tredyffrin Board of Supervisors Bob Lamina attempts to answer critics and justify his behavior in several recent meetings of the board. His attempt falls flat.

In the most recent example, Pattye Benson, in a calm and well-reasoned presentation, questioned the apparent inconsistency between the treatment given by the supervisors and their legal counsel to an apparently unsolicited offer of services to the Historic Preservation Trust and the actively solicited cash contributions to make up a decrease in fire-company funding. In the former case, it was determined that there was a “pay-to-play” issue due to the presence of a sitting supervisor on the Trust’s board. In the latter it was considered OK, even though the solicitations were made by several of the supervisors using the township logo on some of the associated documents.

Instead of responding to the substance of this question, Mr. Lamina deflected the issue by praising the civic-mindedness of the donors and accusing questioners of not wanting the additional money to come in. He then fell back on one of his most common tactics, questioning the motives of the questioners. In his article he falls back on the common tactic of saying what a wonderful, well-governed place we live in without addressing concerns that could make it better.

Though I have not attended many supervisors’ meetings, I am struck by the fact that at several of those I have attended, Mr. Lamina uses his “bully pulpit” to act as a bully. He insults his questioners and attempts to marginalize their concerns. His claim in some instances that he speaks as an ordinary citizen doesn’t wash when he is making the comments from the dais.

Now, in Main Line Suburban Life, he has informed the citizens of Tredyffrin that if they don’t agree with him or question his and his colleagues’ actions, either at the meetings or in other media such as blogs (which he says he doesn’t read), they are simply “gnats” nipping at his heels.

Well, this particular gnat has been a resident and taxpayer in Tredyffrin for over 30 years. I’m not running for office. When I hear the chairman of the Board of Supervisors and some of his colleagues dismiss the concerns and those of others who may not agree with him or who are members of the opposing party, then I must infer that we, too, are victims of taxation without representation. More to the point, it is clear from both Mr. Lamina’s comments and printed statements that he works not for the benefit of all the citizens of Tredyffrin but just those who support and agree with him. This is not the American way.

Eugene H. Poppel, Devon

Proposed 2010-11 School District Budget . . . Ray Clarke’s Comments on School Board Meeting

May 11, 2010
10 Comments

Last night was TESD School Board meeting with discussion of the proposed 2010-11 district budget as the major agenda item. I was attending a DuPortail House Board meeting and as always, I thank my friend Ray Clarke for attending the School Board meeting and then for sharing his notes with us. For Ray and any other who attended – I am curious what was the resident turnout like last night? Staff, teachers, parents in attendance? Many comments from the audience members?

It looks like the unfunded pension program (PSERS) problem is looming ever closer on the horizon . . . wonder if there is time before the Primary next week to have a statement from the local candidates on their proposed solution to the problem? If not before the Primary Election, I do think that we need to have public dialogue before the November General Election and know where the candidates stand on this important economic issue facing the Commonwealth.

Update from the School Board meeting budget discussion

First, a quick appreciation for District Business Manager Art McDonnell. His presentation tonight was very clear. He always seems to be on top of the details, and the budget process has chewed through a lot of those details.

The proposed budget passed with one change: removal of the $80,000 of revenue estimate for the Activity Fee. The consensus being that there is not enough time to sort through and socialize all the details for the upcoming year, but that such a fee should be considered for 2011/12. The lost $80,000 will come from the fund balance.

Board members Brake and Bookstaber proposed amendments that would slightly lower the non-contract compensation increase (to 2%) and the property tax increase (to 2.5%), but received no other votes. I’m not sure that I buy the arguments against the former, but I can see how the $7 million deficit for 2011/12 would weigh on the decision to tax at the Act 1 index. That shows how important it was for the Board to vote not to apply for exceptions back in January, forcing the expense reductions.

The good news is that Moodys affirmed the district’s AAA rating, even considering the dire financial outlook for 2011/12 and especially beyond. Now seems to be a good time to borrow what we can to assure funding to keep the facilities going, while the District tries to figure out how to offset the remaining contracted salary increases and benefits entitlements. Beyond that, hopefully new contracts will reflect the community’s own compensation experience and ability to pay. The notion of above-inflation compounded annual salary level and tenure increases is – to use a word popularized at the meeting – unsustainable.

Those actions will not address the retirement plan problem, though – a net $6 million contribution increase in 2012/13 and another $3 million on top of that in 2013/14 – by which time the fund balance would be wiped out, even with inflation-linked tax increases.

This leads to one of the most critical questions for our prospective state representatives: what – specifically – would you propose to address the unfunded pension liability? What changes in benefits? What changes in contributions, employer and employee? What aid to school districts, and from what source? Let’s hear from them.

Public Invited . . . Tredyffrin Township Police Department’s Annual Memorial Service on Wednesday

May 10, 2010
1 Comment

The public is invited to attend the Tredyffrin Township Police Department’s annual memorial service for fallen officers on Wednesday, May 12 at 12 Noon. The ceremony will take place in Keene Hall in the township building. This year’s keynote speaker will is Walt Hunter, a reporter for CBS3 and a volunteer firefighter.

The program will include a “roll call” of officers killed in Chester County while attempting to protect their communities as well as the announcement of Tredyffrin’s Officer of the Year. For more information, call 610-644-1400.

Remembering Tredyffrin’s Segregation Battle of the 1930’s

May 9, 2010
4 Comments

I was invited to a special commemoration yesterday at the Mt. Zion AME Church in Devon, but due to a conflict I was unable to attend. When I was working on the township’s Tredyffrin 300 historic documentary I was particularly moved by the township’s segregation struggles that existed in the 1930’s and which we choose to include in the documentary.

On the eve of the T/E School Board Meeting tomorrow night, and the difficult budget decisions facing the School Board, I thought maybe you would also find this of interest. The Philadelphia Inquirer ran an article in the newspaper yesterday which highlighted this special part of Tredyffrin’s history. An in-depth article by Roger Thorne can be found in the Tredyffrin Easttown Historical Society Quarterly, Vol 42. Segregation on the Main Line, The “School Fight” of 1932-34.

Remembering a Chesco school segregation fight

By Kristin E. Holmes

Twenty years before the 1954 landmark Supreme Court case Brown v. Board of Education forced the policy of separate but unequal onto the national agenda, the families of 212 black children in Tredyffrin and Easttown Townships boycotted their own segregated schools.

The two-year battle in Chester County was not covered by television cameras broadcasting the kind of imagery that later galvanized a national movement. These families, whose children were ordered into dilapidated school buildings for black students, fought what became known as the “school fight” on the small-town streets and farms outside Philadelphia – and won.

And that victory – achieved when parents kept their children out of schools between 1932 and 1934 – will be commemorated at 1 p.m. Saturday at Mount Zion A.M.E. Church in Devon, which was the site of many organizational meetings. “Our parents stuck together,” said Estelle King Burton, 88, of Wayne, who was in the fifth grade when her parents pulled her out of school. “They had a big fight on their hands.”

The case stands as one of dozens of civil rights fights in Northern states that have been overlooked, said Thomas J. Sugrue, author of Sweet Land of Liberty: The Forgotten Struggle for Civil Rights in the North. Between the late 1800s and the 1950s, civil rights battles in the North usually occurred in small towns and the suburbs, said Sugrue, a professor of history and sociology at the University of Pennsylvania.

The cases went unnoticed because no national media publicized them and white Northerners treated the cases as if they were typical of Southern life but not their own, Sugrue said. In 1932, officials of the two school boards involved ordered black children in the townships’ elementary schools to transfer from their integrated neighborhood schools to two schools – one in each township – for black students, said Roger Thorne, president of the Tredyffrin Easttown Historical Society. Classes were to be taught by black teachers. The order prevented black children from attending a new elementary school set to open in the fall of 1932.

A local businessman, Primus Crosby, who was born in Alabama, called a community meeting hours after an announcement of the school boards’ order appeared in a local newspaper. “He kept saying, ‘It’s never going to happen. There’s never going to be a [segregated] school here,’ ” Crosby’s 95-year-old daughter, Bessie M. Whitney, said of her father’s resolve to have the order rescinded. Led by Crosby and the Bryn Mawr NAACP, the families persuaded the renowned Philadelphia lawyer Raymond Pace Alexander, an African American, to take their case. He worked pro bono.

While Alexander battled in the courts, parents were fined and jailed when they refused to send their children to class.Esther Long, 85, of Berwyn, was pulled out of school along with her brother and sister. Their father, Henry, a chauffeur, was jailed for five days. “We just lived through it,” said Esther Long, a retired nurse. “We were assured we would come out with a victory. We had the best lawyer in Philadelphia.”

Alexander worked with a team that included his wife, Sadie Tanner Mossell Alexander, also an accomplished, Ivy League-educated attorney. He fought off national interference from the NAACP, and employed a strategy of lawsuits, protests and boycotts, all the while keeping the fight local, said David Canton, an associate professor at Connecticut College and author of The Origins of a New Negro Lawyer: Raymond Pace Alexander, 1898-1923. Alexander filed lawsuits in Chester County, but they were deemed invalid by a judge who ruled that only the county district attorney or the state attorney general had such legal standing. Alexander then moved the fight to Harrisburg in an effort to enlist Attorney General William A. Schnader to join the case. “This was the singular most important case that came about in [Alexander’s] young career and laid the foundation for the rest of his life,” said Rae Alexander-Minter, the Alexanders’ daughter and one of the speakers at the Saturday event.

As students remained out of school, some were sent to nearby districts to live with friends and family and continue their education.Elsie Holley Fuller of Bryn Mawr was a student at Tredyffrin/Easttown High School (now Conestoga), which was unaffected by the boycott. But her younger brothers, Jerry and Spencer Holley Jr., were pulled out of elementary school and sent to live with a friend in South Philadelphia.

“My job was to wash, iron, and then pack their clothes when they came home for the weekend,” said Fuller, 92, a retired housekeeper.

In March 1934, Schnader intervened. By then, he was seeking the black vote for a planned run for governor, and he wrote to school officials urging them to rescind the order. Forty-four days later, they did.

Bessie Cunningham, a sixth grader when she was pulled out of school, returned to class with other black students that spring. She stayed for only a year. “I couldn’t keep up,” said Cunningham, 88, of Thorndale. “I quit. “When I look back, it makes me mad. I didn’t finish school,” said Cunningham, who worked as a housekeeper and in computer disk manufacturing. “But overall, it was a good thing. They found out that we were not going to stand back and let foolish things take place.” At the Saturday event, she will be honored as one of those who refused to stand back.

“If the case had not been won, Tredyffrin and Easttown would have been segregated,” Long said. “We won the case, but we weren’t necessarily free. There was still a long way to go.”

Happy Mother’s Day . . . Did you know the celebration has roots in Philadelphia?

May 9, 2010
Comments

Happy Mother’s Day!

Did you know that the celebration of Mother’s Day in the US has roots tied to Philadelphia? A little history behind today’s special Mother’s Day. Early on, “Mother’s Day” in the United States was mostly marked by women’s peace groups. A common early activity was the meeting of groups of mothers whose sons had fought or died on opposite sides of the American Civil War. There were several local celebrations in the 1870s and the 1880s, but none achieved resonance beyond the local level.

In 1886 Ann Jarvis created a committee to establish a “Mother’s Friendship Day” whose purpose was “to unite families that had been divided during the Civil War”, and she wanted to expand it into annual memorial for mothers, but she died in 1905 before the celebration became popular. Her daughter Anna Jarvis would continue her mother’s effort shortly later.

In its present form, Mother’s Day was established by Anna Marie Jarvis, following the death of her mother Ann Jarvis on May 9, 1905, with the help of a Philadelphia merchant called John Wanamaker. Legend has it, Anna Jarvis, who was named after her mother, knelt before her mother’s gravesite in 1905 and pledged to her mother she would continue to honor mothers everywhere and would help establish an official Mother’s Day to honor both living and deceased mothers.

A small service was held in May 12, 1907 in the Andrew’s Methodist Episcopal Church in Grafton, West Virginia where Anna’s mother had been teaching Sunday school. Anna Jarvis passed out 500 white carnations at her mother’s church – one flower for each mother in the congregation — as they celebrated the second anniversary of her mother’s death. The white carnations were her mother’s favorite flower. But the first “official” service was in May 10, 1908 in the same church, accompanied by a larger ceremony in the Wanamaker Auditorium in the Wanamaker’s store on Philadelphia. She then campaigned to establish Mother’s Day as a U.S. national holiday, and later as an international holiday.

In discussing the importance of Mother’s Day, Anna Jarvis said, “I wanted it to be a day of sentiment, not profit. A printed card means nothing except that you are too lazy to write to the woman who has done more for you than anyone in the world. And candy! You take a box to Mother, and then eat most of it yourself. A pretty sentiment.”

The holiday was declared officially by the state of West Virginia in 1910, and the rest of states followed quickly. On May 9, 1914, President Woodrow Wilson issued a proclamation, declaring the first national Mother’s Day; a day for American citizens to show the flag in honor of those mothers whose sons had died in war.

Reminder: School Board to Vote on 2010-11 Proposed Final Budget on Monday, May 10

May 8, 2010
7 Comments

This is a reminder that the T/E School Board will be voting on the 2010-11 proposed final budget at its regular meeting this Monday, May 10 at 7:30 PM, Conestoga HS; here is the agenda. The T/E School Board Finance Committee met on May 3 to discuss the 2010-11 budget. After discussing the tax rate and selected budget strategies, the Committee recommended a preliminary budget that included a tax increase of 2.9%, which results in $2.5 million in revenue, $5.3 million in expense reductions and $1.3 million in fund balance contribution to address the $9.25 million gap between revenues and expenditures. This meeting is one of the few remaining opportunities for the public to weigh in on the mix of program cuts, tax increase, expense increases and reductions, user fee increases and fund balance use that are being proposed to balance the 2010-11 budget. The proposed tax increase is 0.5 mills, and cost the homeowner an average of $128. The final adoption of the budget will be on June 14.

I hate to be repetitive, but much like Tredyffrin Township’s 2010 budget, the 2010-11 TESD budget will squeak by, with minimal effect to the taxpayer. The greater, more significant problem will occur with the township’s 2011 budget and the school district’s 2011-12 budget. During the next 6 months, it is doubtful that the economic climate in the country will dramatically improve, so hard decisions await.

Lamina Can Play in his Sandbox by Himself

May 8, 2010
7 Comments

Since Lamina’s letter was published in this week’s paper I have received many phone calls and emails from residents, and also some from neighboring townships. I think Lamina might be surprised to learn that many in this community do not share his ‘bully tactics from his bully pulpit’ partisan style of governing. (And to think that I initially offered excuses for Lamina’s behavior and missteps.)

Friends and family members have come to my defense against Lamina’s personal attacks and have wondered why I have not been more outraged. Simply put, Lamina isn’t worth it! I have always been a big believer in the mantra, what goes around, comes around, and I think eventually Lamina will get his due. In my world, everyone eventually pays a price for their bad deeds. If an elected official is determined to be a bully, misrepresent the facts and cover-up their actions . . . there’s no point in getting upset.

Lamina might be sadly mistaken if he thinks his words at the Board of Supervisors meeting or his outrageous diatribe in the paper have somehow improved his standing in the community. No, I would suggest just the opposite. An elected official who degrades its residents and refers to those who disagree as ‘gnats’ cannot be respected. A wise friend once told me (when I was upset about something a stranger said about me) – – – isn’t it more important what those closest to you think about you than a complete stranger? I think this friend was right, . . . Lamina can play in his sandbox by himself.

Here is a new response to Lamina’s letter, which appears in the Main Line Suburban Life, which I found interesting:

diamondgrl wrote on May 6, 2010 5:38 PM:

” In MR. Lamina’s world, black is white and citizens’ questions about the appearance of pay-to-play politics have only ONE motivation – partisan mudslinging.

Also Mr Lamina seems to adhere to the same thinking as a former president who insisted, “You’re either with us or you’re against us.” According to Lamina, those of us who don’t accept his storybook version of unprecedented generosity from township businesses and individuals – including $5000 from a single supervisor, are a danger to the community and had better “put politics aside for the good of the community” – that is, keep our mouths shut.

But there are many in Tredyffrin who believe adequate dedicated funding for fire/EMT services is essential going forward and should be paid for by all who benefit – that is, all residents and businesses located in the township. Funding should never again be dependent on “holiday firefighter fund drives” solicited by public/private officials, or the whims of tax-averse supervisors, one of whom is running for election on a platform of no new taxes.

As for Mr. Lamina’s laughable attempts to politic on behalf of his friend Warren Kampf and throw darts at individuals and groups who have opposed their votes and conduct – even suggesting we are “gnats” nipping at their heels -well, he is nothing more than a buffoon and a bully. He has lost the respect of many former supporters, and should seriously consider taking his own advice : put politics aside “for the sake of the community” and stop putting in jeopardy one of our township’s… ACTUAL cherished qualities… -our strong sense of community – REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL AFFILIATION. “

East Goshen Township’s Handling of Canada Geese Problem

May 6, 2010
7 Comments

Have you heard about some of the local companies hiring trained dogs and their handlers to chase Canada Geese from their properties? I don’t know how often the dogs are on the properties and whether it is successful. My husband’s employer Unisys routinely hires a company, ‘Geese Police’ but, according to Jeff, these policing dogs have not proven to be entirely successful. From the Geese Police website, “. . . “Policing” geese takes time, patience, and the help of some very talented canine assistants: our working Border Collies. This breed of dog is both hardworking and extremely intelligent, and exhibits a natural instinct to herd. While other breeds need the gratification of catching their prey, working Border Collies are satisfied by the mere opportunity to stalk. . . “

I know that Canada Geese are a problem in Tredyffrin; in fact, it is amazing how many times I see them stop traffic on Rt. 252 as they slowly walk across the 4 lane road. Also I see the geese quite often by the township building, on Chesterbrook Boulevard and in Wilson Farm Park. Apparently, the geese gravitate to areas with ponds or standing water.

I found it interesting that East Goshen Township this week decided on their own action plan to deal with the Canada Geese problem. East Goshen has signed an agreement with the US Department of Agriculture. The federal government will come in to the township and remove 50% of the geese, or up to 300 birds from the open space. The birds will be killed and the meat donated to charity. Unclear how the killing will take place, ugh . . . perhaps it is better that I not know.

East Goshen is enrolled in the government’s Resident Canada Geese Program which requires that the local authorities take steps to discourage the birds for at least three years. The USDA recommendations to East Goshen included addling the birds eggs — coating the eggs with oil to kill the embryo — installing temporary fencing around ponds, and using balloons and wood dog silhouettes to keep the geese from nesting. The township has been enrolled in the program for 4 years and may now legally ask for the removal of the birds.

East Goshen Township will be charged $6,111 for the Canada Geese removal and the wildlife agents will arrive in June. The geese are rounded up in June because geese molt in June and lose their ability to fly.

I didn’t understand why it took the federal government’s involvement to help with the Canada Geese problem so I did a bit of research. I discovered that Canada Geese are federally protected and can only be killed during duck hunting season. Canada Geese are protected under the Federal Migratory Bird Act of 1918. This Act makes it illegal to harm or injure a goose and damage or move its eggs and nest, without a Federal permit. Not complying with the Federal Act can result in fines ranging from $5,000 to $10,000 and this also applies to an untrained dog’s actions. This explains why the federal agency, USDA will be handling East Goshen’s Canada Geese problem.

Probably more information than you ever needed, but I was fascinated with the Canada Geese background . . . who knew that these geese have been protected since 1918 by Federal law? Amazing!

Community Matters © 2024 Frontier Theme