So — go to Harrisburg. That’s the only fix.

It might have saved the District $24K in demolition costs but isn’t the cost $14K to the vendor for breaking the contract. Guess that is still a $10K savings plus the tennis players get to keep their courts.

The cost of upkeep has been nothing in the last 17 years due to the effort of Don Detwiler who has sewn the nets, replaced boards on the benches and patched any cracks.

If the courts were demolished the lawn in their place would be minimally better for stormwater retention according to experts in the field – gardens, shrubs and trees are better.

The stormwater ordinance did not include the preexisting tennis and basketball courts. They were grandfathered in.

All neighbors should be encouraged to put in a rain garden. Doesn’t have to be big. A raingarden at the bottom of any slope will slow down water drainage. The GlenHardie garden club at the library recently sponsored a Power Point lecture on rain gardens It was overflowing with attendees. (no pun intended) So folks are interested, just have to keep pushing that issue.

Would love to see some of the asphalt replaced with pervious pavers, too. Rain barrels are a must; why use pure drinking water for plants?

These my be small steps, but cumulatively they matter.

You are the one who twists words, meanings, and facts in order to further your own agenda.

As the vice chair of the TTDEM’s, I take your comment to mean that you don’t support your own candidate Kevin Buraks. Some 4-5 months ago, I told you to sever ties with him over the Andy Chambers decision. It’s time that you formally rebuke what Buraks has done and rescind his endorsement.

To this statement:

**
The Commonwealth created pension “crisis” will be addressed to no one’s complete satisfaction within the next few years.
**

That’s a bit of a cop out. You all like to blame Harrisburg for the problem. Harrisburg is just made up of people WE put there. No Murph, WE CREATED THE CRISIS. That’s the problem with most politicos – you don’t want to take personal responsibility for your actions. As voters, this mess is COLLECTIVELY OUR FAULT. Carole Rubley was in Harrisburg for 18 years (9 terms) and did nothing about this problem. In fact, she helped create it. Warren Kampf is in his second term. His plan, while interesting in theory, does nothing to address what is already owed.

Here’s something you are not going to like Murph – but it’s the truth. In general, Democrats have a big appetite for union $. Those political contributions ON BOTH SIDES are killing the system. Your guy – Paul Drucker – accepted a tone of $ from the teacher’s union. There is no way he would have ever cast a vote to change the status quo.

I just bring that up to keep you honest on the facts.

These aides and para-educators HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PSERS and PENSION ISSUE. I bring it up because the board and you cite that as this looming problem that has relevance to these folks. It’s a total red herring. The aides and para-educators actually do something that neither the board or the administration do – add value and positively contribute to the educational process. They don’t deserve to be caught up in this mess.

And finally, why wait until AFTER THE PRIMARY to share your words Murph?

Here’s what I see… You helped put Cruickshank and Buraks on the board – and they are a big part of the problem. But so too are the other folks.

You ask if we can trust the numbers? I question whether we in the voting public an trust any of you that are running for office. The only guy I think I can trust is Scott Dorsey – because he’s had the courage to take a visible public stance BEFORE THE PRIMARY – possibly at the expense of his own party’s support.

Sorry Murph…but your words ring a bit hollow here because you neglected to do the right thing 5 months ago. In other words, too little…too late.

Unless and until you can fully sever ties from Buraks – I can’t put stock in what you say.

- Ask TESD’s counsel what the definition and degree of de minimus was.

There would not have been a good answer to that.

I did make sure the ZHB confronted the competing public policy issues here:

Storm Water vs Public Accommodations

I also brought up the problems with our current zoning and how there should be exceptions for school districts and similarly situated applicants.

If I really wanted to see the Tennis Courts get whacked, I would have pressed other issues much further.

In this case, politics had a lot to do with it. I intentionally steered clear of that mine field.

So…folks get the keep the tennis courts. Did the storm water ordinance suffer? Time will tell.

Indeed, one ZHB decision is not binding on another per se. BUT – rationale is. I opted not to seek party status last night. Had I done that, I’m not sure a decision would have been made because on appeal, this would have been reversed. Really wasn’t worth the fight to me. More important to air out the issues.

Now…there is the continual expense of these courts – at a time of tight budgets. It’s interesting how choices get made around here. The folks that advocated to keep the courts – they can NEVER complain about storm water again. That was the choice they made last night.

Right result? Probably – but in the wrong way.