On his Facebook page this morning, Senator Andy Dinniman continues to speak out against digital billboards — and supports our BAN the Digital Billboard in Paoli campaign! Thank you Senator for standing with the residents of Tredyffrin Township in our opposition; we appreciate your support!
BAN the Digital Billboard
Thank you to the many residents who filled the seats of the township building or stood in the back of Keene Hall last night for the Zoning Hearing Board meeting. Thank you to the many residents who last night (and at the two previous Zoning Hearing Board meetings) eloquently delivered their message of “Just Say No” to a digital billboard at the intersection of Rt. 252 and Lancaster Avenue in Paoli.
As the last resident to speak in opposition to the digital billboard last night my words were simple, “we are not a community divided”! For eleven months, since Catalyst Outdoor Advertising first came to the township with their proposal to demolish the Clockworks building and install two large digital billboards and a reflecting pool, the community has stood in complete solidarity in its opposition. We do not want the digital billboard. Period.
As I said last night, I have lived here for many years and am engaged in community issues. There are always at least two sides to any of these issues, with the ultimate outcome producing winners and losers. Not so on the digital billboard, we are not divided; there is only one side. Since August 2018, I have spoken to many people on this topic and have yet to find a resident who supports the idea of digital billboard in the middle of Paoli or who thinks it’s a good idea.
As Catalyst Outdoor Advertising attorney John Snyder and the township attorney Tony Verwey had both rested their cases at the July 25 meeting of the Zoning Hearing Board, the special 6 PM meeting last night was dedicated to residents’ comments on the proposed digital billboard. And speak they did, a steady stream of residents speaking out against the proposed billboard, just as other residents had done at the two previous Zoning Hearing Board meetings. Many residents spoke at these three meetings and not one voice of support for the proposed billboard. An important community issue, it was however sad to note that not a single township supervisor attended the meeting last night.
So where do we go from here? After much discussion between the Zoning Hearing Board members, its solicitor and attorneys from the township and Catalyst Outdoor Advertising, a timeline for legal responses from both sides was established. Much of this discussion was difficult to follow but at the end, I asked two questions for clarification; (1) when would the residents who sought ‘party status’ know if it was granted and (2) when would the Zoning Hearing Board make their final determination.
There will be a special meeting of the Zoning Hearing Board on Thursday, October 24 (presumably at 7 PM but not announced). At that meeting, the public will learn which residents receive party status and we will know the decision of the Zoning Hearing Board.
As I said last night to the members of the Zoning Hearing Board, the final decision rests with them– the township heard the public and denied the application for the digital billboard and it’s now up to them to uphold and support. The public has spoken … this is not a community divided!
To members of our community – On Thursday, July 25 at 6 PM at the Tredyffrin Township municipal building, we have one last opportunity to make our voices heard regarding the proposed digital billboard at the intersection of Rt. 252 and Lancaster Avenue in Paoli.
Catalyst Outdoor Advertising first appeared at a Tredyffrin Township Board of Supervisors meeting in August 2018 with their proposal to demolish the Clockworks Building and install two large 20 ft. digital billboards with a reflecting pool as a “welcome” to our 300-year old township. For many reasons during the last eleven months, the public has remained committed in their opposition.
The starting point for the digital billboard project was Catalyst’s submission of two applications to the township in December 2018 – (1) a demolition permit application for the Clockworks building and (2) an application to digitize the existing small stationary sign. To the credit of our elected officials and township staff, the public’s opposition was heard and both applications were denied
Undeterred by the denial of their applications, in early 2019, Catalyst appealed the township’s decision on the digital billboard application to the township Zoning Hearing Board. The ZHB heard three hours of testimony on May 30, primarily from the Catalyst attorney. The legal proceeding was continued to July 9 for another lengthy evening of argument from the township attorney in front of the ZHB.
With Catalyst and the township attorneys resting their cases – it’s now up to us, the public! The last Zoning Hearing Board meeting is dedicated to public comment on the digital billboard application. This is it folks, our voices will be the last words heard by the Zoning Hearing Board
Far from dividing, the digital billboard issue has united the community in its opposition. I am proud of our residents — they have put lawn signs up, shared information, done their own digital billboard research, attended and spoken out at meetings. We have one more opportunity to deliver our message of opposition on Thursday, July 25, 6 PM and we need standing-room only!
PLEASE SHARE THIS POST with Friends, neighbors, family – the end is in sight and we need to deliver our FINAL voice of Opposition!!
At the May 30 special meeting of the Zoning Hearing Board, the audience learned after three hours of testimony that the legal proceeding would be continued to July 9.
Unfortunately, as soon as the July 9 date was announced, I knew that I would be on a plane that night – and with nonrefundable tickets there was nothing I could do. For those that have followed along with the BAN the Digital Billboard campaign for the past eleven months, you will appreciate how difficult it was for me not to be in attendance on Tuesday night.
However, the good news is that many people that I know were able to attend and I have received many text messages, emails, phone calls, etc post-meeting making it easier to write this post. And some more good news … the residents will have one more opportunity to make their voices heard at the final Zoning Hearing Board meeting on this matter, Thursday, July 25, 6 PM. The regular ZHB starts at 7 PM, so that gives us an hour to continue to drive home the point why our community does NOT want a digital billboard!
One of those in attendance at the meeting on Tuesday was my good friend Ray Clark and he kindly provided few written comments from the 3-1/2 hour meeting. (In addition, Ray texted continuous updates throughout the ZHB meeting – so grateful to him!). Here are Ray’s thoughts from the meeting – to others who attended, I welcome your comments:
A few observations from a non-lawyer on Tuesday’s ZHB proceedings hearing the appeal of the denial of a permit for a digital billboard. The applicant worked hard to focus the discussion on the legal intricacies of their challenge to the validity of the township’s zoning ordinance, while the audience was concerned about the safety and visual impact of placing a distracting, flashing device at a busy and iconic intersection.
A couple of process points. Dan McLaughlin did a good job of managing the contentious meeting to be fair to all perspectives. He allowed more residents to apply for standing, since many were prevented from attending round one due to the tornado warning. However, the applicant objected objectionably (!) and arbitrarily to most – at one point saying that he did not believe – with no basis! – one resident who gave a precise distance from his house to the intersection! I imagine that the ZHB will rule on the standing of all the residents from both meetings at the wrap up meeting on July 25th (6pm).
The witnesses were two: continued testimony from the applicant and Matt Baumann for the township. I don’t pretend to have followed this closely enough to give an opinion on the legal issues, but there was a lot of discussion about the meaning and applicability of “lighting”, “changeable copy”, “flashing”, “alteration”, “conditional use”, “vinyl wraps”, “backing blocks”, and so on. Throughout the applicant tried to force the discussion to a word-by-word parsing of the Township denial letter – with some success since Matt acknowledged that the letter had an internal inconsistency. I don’t recall much discussion of why the ordinance is illegal, maybe that was last time.
The audience seemed to come more prepared than the township Baumann/Verwey team. Excellent points were made about the lack of applicant studies of intersection safety issues (they relied entirely on PennDoT regulations), the inaccuracy and limitations of the safety studies they did present, the lack of information given to the township to assess the features of the sign, the availability of studies indicating a definite safety issue, and of course the fundamental fact that the sign is DESIGNED to distract attention.
It seems a great pity that commercial interests have the potential to weasel loopholes in township ordinances written at a different time to attempt to foist upon us something that seems to be universally despised and a very real safety risk.
Far from dividing, the digital billboard issue has united the community in its opposition. I am proud of our residents — they have put lawn signs up, shared information, done their own digital billboard research, attended and spoken out at meetings. Folks, we have one more opportunity to drive home our message of opposition on Thursday, July 25, 6 PM!
Always the optimist, I’m going to believe that our Zoning Hearing Board is going to come down on the side of the community on the digital billboard issue.
Your Voice Counts and the Community Matters!
There was bad and good news from the meeting. The bad news is that we sat through three hours of testimony and only heard from the Catalyst attorney John Snyder from Saul Ewing and his two witnesses. The good news is that the Zoning Hearing Board meeting continues on Tuesday, July 9 and we will hear from the township attorney Tony Verwey from Gawthrop Greenwood and all township residents who wish to comment.
Unfortunately Snyder set a bad tone early in the proceedings by objecting to all but one resident who asked for party standing in the case (including myself), claiming that we would not be personally impacted by the proposed digital sign.
My argument to receive standing was that ‘ALL’ the township residents (and beyond) would be impacted (due to safety concerns in that intersection) and therefore should have standing. Needless to say that argument went nowhere with Snyder. To the credit of Zoning Hearing Board chair Dan McLaughlin (and much to the chagrin of Snyder) we were told that a determination of “standing” would be decided at the meeting on July 9. All residents who wish to comment may do so at the next meeting (and you do not need standing to do so!).
Linda Stein from Main Line Media News attended the meeting and gave a review of the proposed billboard and update. (Thank you Linda for braving the tornado warnings to attend!) To read the full article, click here. Below are excerpts from the article:
Snyder called on Jesse White, an engineer for Watchfire Signs, a Danville, Ill. company that sells digital billboards to Catalyst, to testify. White explained how the proposed LED billboard would work. Questioned by Snyder, White said LED billboards are “almost like a TV.”
Residents who requested to be a party to the case were permitted to ask questions. Paul Drucker asked White if he thought that 10 images a minute would be a distraction for drivers. Snyder objected to the question and Daniel McLaughlin, the zoning board chairman, asked if Snyder planned to call a witness regarding drivers being distracted.
“No, I don’t think it’s relevant,” said Snyder. His response drew laughter and gasps from the audience, many of whom object to the billboard on the basis that it would distract drivers and make the busy intersection less safe.
Yes, remarkably there will be no safety expert called by Catalyst because they don’t think there is a safety issue for a digital billboard at the intersection Rt. 252 and Lancaster Ave! In my opinion (and in the opinion of many others) much of the widespread opposition to the digital sign is focused on safety! Also, it also did not escape many in the audience that the ‘expert’ witness Jesse White is a vendor employee of Catalyst! Certainly does not make that expert unbiased – he even admitted that his company Watchfire Signs would probably have the contract for this digital billboard, if approved!
The other crazy remarks came from Catalyst witness and employee Tim Earle who compared the proposed digital billboard with its constantly changing face to the gas price sign across the street at the 7-Eleven and to the sign at Conestoga High School! We can only hope that the so-called expert testimony of Earle will be thoroughly examined by the township attorney at the next meeting!
Although I was hoping that the Zoning Hearing Board meeting would resolve itself in one night – the good news is that the public will have a chance to be heard on July 9 and hopefully without the threat of a tornado keeping some home!
Susan Stein closed her article with a quote from me – it accurately sums up my feelings on this proposed digital billboard. Onward and upward to Tuesday, July 9!
After the hearing, Benson said, “The intersection of Routes 252 and 30 in Paoli is no place for a digital billboard. The bright, constantly-changing digital billboard is designed expressly to attract and hold the attention of drivers. I do not support a digital billboard at this location as it will promote distracted driving and affect public safety, especially given the extremely congested intersection.”
Some residents may think that the digital billboard problem has gone away — The BAN the Digital Billboard campaign may have lost over 100 yard signs to theft but the battle is far from over! Now is the time for your voice to be heard — the future of Paoli depends on it!
You may recall that Catalyst Outdoor Advertising filed two applications in December with Tredyffrin Township – (1) a demolition permit application for the Clockworks building and (2) an application to switch the face of the small billboard (located next to the Clockworks building) to a digital one. Tredyffrin Township denied both of these applications. The demolition permit was denied citing an “incomplete application” – the application was missing the signature of Dale Nelson, the property owner.
The other application submitted by Catalyst was for an “electric lamp changeable copy face” for the existing small free standing advertising sign next to the Clockworks building. There is an existing 30-year lease on the small sign between Catalyst and Dale Nelson.
In January, Matt Baumann, Tredyffrin’s Zoning Officer sent Thaddeus Bartkowski a letter denying Catalyst’s application to digitize the current sign on the Clockworks site. On February 22, Bartkowski filed an appeal to appear in front of the Tredyffrin Township Zoning Hearing Board. Catalyst paid $2,000 to appeal the decision of the Zoning Officer and $10,000 to challenge the validity of the township’s zoning ordinance.
On Thursday, April 25, 7 PM at the Tredyffrin Township building, Catalyst will appear in front of the township’s Zoning Hearing Board.
For months, residents have asked me what they can do about the proposed digital billboard – now is the time to help! Keene Hall at the township building must be standing room only on April 25. Folks, if Catalyst wins this appeal, it will forever change the intersection of Lancaster Ave and Rt. 252.
Important: Digitizing the current sign on the Clockworks property is a precursor to Catalyst’s next step, which is to demolish the Clockworks building and erect two large 20-ft. digital billboards with a reflecting pool in the middle of Paoli.
Important: If Catalyst wins their appeal on April 25, the other two billboards in Tredyffrin Township (Rt. 252/Bear Hill Road and Lancaster Ave across from the BMW dealership) are at imminent risk for digitizing.
Please put Thursday, April 25, 7 PM on your calendar and plan to attend this critical meeting! Tell Your Friends, Tell Your Neighbors!
Just when I thought that the community was home free and that our township would remain free from digital billboards, I find out otherwise!
You may recall that Catalyst Outdoor Advertising (dba “Tredyffrin Outdoor, LLC”) filed two applications in December with Tredyffrin Township – (1) a demolition permit application for the Clockworks building and (2) an application to switch the face of the small billboard (located next to the Clockworks building) to a digital one. Tredyffrin Township denied both of these applications. The demolition permit was denied citing an “incomplete application” – the application was missing the signature of Dale Nelson, the property owner.
The other application submitted by Catalyst was for an “electric lamp changeable copy face” for the existing small free standing advertising sign next to the Clockworks building. There is an existing 30-year lease on the small sign between Catalyst and Dale Nelson.
Last month Matt Baumann, the Zoning Officer for Tredyffrin Township sent Thaddeus Bartkowski a letter denying the application by Catalyst to digitize the current sign on the Clockworks site. The letter included the information about Catalyst’s right to appeal the decision to the township’s Zoning Hearing Board – with a 30-day window to file the appeal.
I learned yesterday that Bartkowski did indeed file an appeal — on the last possible day, Friday, February 22. Yes, just when you thought that the problem was going away, it’s not! With their deep pockets, Catalyst apparently paid $10,000 to go in front of the Zoning Hearing Board and make their case. The next Zoning Hearing Board meeting is Thursday, March 28 and we will have to wait and see if the Catalyst appeal is on the agenda.
In my opinion, digitizing the current sign on the Clockworks property is a precursor to Catalyst going after the two large 20-ft. digital billboards with the reflecting pool. I believe that should Catalyst win their appeal, the other two billboards (Rt. 252/Bear Hill Road and Lancaster Ave across from the BMW dealership) are at imminent risk for digitizing.
It is my understanding that a 6-month agreement of sale was signed between Dale Nelson (owner of Clockworks property) and Bartkowski on December 3, with an expiration date of June 3. No doubt one of the contingencies contained in the sales agreement is the needed digital billboard approval from the township.
Another point in the story is relates to Dale Nelson’s “available” sign located on the Clockworks property. Nelson is trying to rent the second floor of the building (who knew there was a second floor?). At this time, the Clockworks store remains open and its’ business as usual. As the only tenants in the building, their current lease is for the entire building. The owners have not moved and the “clocks sale” does not necessarily mean that the store will relocate.
The battle is not over! And it looks like the remaining BAN the Digital Billboard lawn signs in my garage will be going out for distribution.
Tonight was the last meeting of the Tredyffrin Township Board of Supervisors for 2018 and the public was met with a pronouncement by solicitor Vince Donahue. He announced that at 4:45 PM TODAY, Catalyst Outdoor Advertising filed two applications with the township – the first application to make the current small billboard at the intersection of Lancaster Ave and Rt. 252 a digital billboard and the second application to DEMOLISH the Clockworks building!
No amount of upset and personal appeal to the supervisors on my part was going to save the Clockworks building! There is NO historic preservation ordinance of protection in Tredyffrin Township. Although the Clockworks building is included in the township’s 2003 historic preservation survey, it is meaningless – we do NOT protect our historic buildings in Tredyffrin Township.
The sadness over the loss of this Brognard Okie building and its memories for many of the residents, is beyond words for me. To live in an area seeped in history, and calling a 300+ year old house my home, yet we do nothing to save our old buildings. My outburst at the meeting over the news was met only with stares from the supervisors – no comment from Chair Heather Greenberg (her last meeting tonight as chair) or from any of the others.
Back when the 18th century original Pugh Road farmhouse application to demolish was approved within 24 hours (and subsequently demolished), I asked the township for a waiting period for all historic properties contained in the historic resource survey. I guess the clock will start to tick on the Clockworks demolition application starting tomorrow.
Apparently, the application to turn the small static billboard digital will take some legal review according to the township solicitor. To be really clear here — anyone who doesn’t think that that demolishing the Clockworks building isn’t a precursor to two large digital billboards at this site needs to reconsider their position!
As I said to the supervisors tonight, this is no Merry Christmas news for Pattye Benson and the many other people in this township who care about our local history. Nearly 4,000 people signed the Change.org petition to BAN the Digital Billboard and Save the Clockworks Building in Paoli. None of it mattered — what a tremendous waste of time and effort! I’m just so sad.
At the suggestion of the Tredyffrin Township Police Chief Mike Beaty, I am releasing the video of stolen BAN the Digital Billboard lawn signs from private property. To date there were 93 lawn signs stolen from private property and without any other leads, I have decided to release the video from Dec. 3 at 9:34 AM. It would be great if we could find the person responsible for the thefts and maybe that road will help us fight back against the digital billboard and (I know that it’s a long shot!) maybe help save the Clockworks building if we can find a connection.
Please click on the link below — the police have sent the video out for enhancement but they were not able to find anything further than is on the video. But we’ve got many tech savvy people in the area, so maybe you will be able to help with the video clip.
For example, run the video full screen and take some screen shots at the key moments, zoom in, look at the car (hoping for an ID on make/color) and the person and if you can help identify, immediately call the police and let me know.
The BAN the Digital Billboard in Paoli campaign is in a holding pattern – the community has gone several days without a stolen lawn sign. The stolen BAN sign count currently stands at 93 (value of $700!) At the last supervisors meeting during the citizen comment period, several homeowners spoke out about the stolen signs and the proposed digital billboard. A stalemate ensued and we were told it was a legal matter and/or there was no movement.
All of this is very interesting, given that the public was told in October that there was a ‘draft agreement’ regarding the digital billboard. I’m confident that the battle is far from over — there are 3,500+ signatures on the anti-digital billboard petition and additional BAN signs waiting to go up. In January, the majority on the Board of Supervisors shifts for the first time in township history from the Republicans to Democrats and Republican Heather Greenberg will no longer be chair. In the words of Bob Dylan, “The times they are a changin’” …
During the last few days, I have received a couple of emails regarding the T/E School District that are of interest. The first is about the color of the Conestoga High School graduation gowns. Historically, the graduation gowns at CHS have been white and maroon but it looks like a break with tradition is afoot – the Class of 2019 will all wear black. The transgender graduates were cited as the reason to eliminate the 2 colors but oddly, the senior photos were already taken in the white and maroon gowns.
I received an email from resident Ray Clarke with the first line, “Time to pay attention to the deliberations on West Valley Road at the TESD offices …” which got my attention. Ray writes,
There are two important TESD Committee meetings next week. Not final decisions, but windows into early thinking and opportunities to influence the evolution of the education program and the spending of millions of dollars of taxpayer money.
On Monday at 7pm, the Finance Committee will agree parameters for the borrowing of $30 million to spend on capital items such as air conditioning the elementary schools and (in part) expanding the high school (see below). They will also take a look at the preliminary budget which calls for: a spending increase of $9 million (6.25%), a total tax increase of 6.1%, including a special education tax increase of 3.6% ($4.1 million). Special education expenses in 2017/18 increased by $4.6 million over 2016/17, but it’s not clear how that can translate to such a large tax increase above the 2.3% inflation index. It’s noteworthy that this is proposed in an environment where inflation, social security increases, etc. are about 2.5%. History has shown that a motivated School Board can work to ameliorate the impact on taxpayers, but this absolutely requires community vigilance. (Click here for agenda).
On Tuesday at 7pm, the Facilities Committee will take a first look at possible designs for the Conestoga High School expansion. Options being reviewed are “Courtyard” and “Atrium” designs for an expansion of the school to the east along Old State Road, and two options for expansion of parking to the woodland to the north. No information on costs until decisions among the options are made and costed, but it is maybe noteworthy that $4.6 million of otherwise needed projects are to be included in the overall project – likely to total in the tens of millions of dollars. Construction to occur from March 2020 to August 2021. (Click here for agenda).
An important time for our school district and hopefully the community will be accordingly engaged.
A preliminary budget with a tax increase of 6.1% to the homeowners! What!? I understand that this is in the preliminary discussion stages but still, that is staggering. Ray is absolutely correct, the community needs to get engaged. This will be the fifteenth year in a row of school tax increases and will likely mark the largest tax increase in that same period!
As I updated my chart of T/E School District yearly tax increases (2004-05 was the last zero tax increase year!), what would school officials give for the perennial increase? Increased enrollment (?) rising pension, contractual and special-education costs – state and federal mandates? Instead of being told each year that the average tax increase is some number like $123 (and frankly, I’ve never been able to find the person with the ‘average’ tax increase), how about looking at how much this yearly tax increase has cost the taxpayers for the last fifteen years!
Clearly, the handwriting is on the wall and school taxes are set to rise … again! Guess the question is, can the school district officials bring down the preliminary budget increase of 6.1%? And with the high school expansion plans on the horizon, how does the school board plan to pay for the capital spending project? New bond initiatives?
- 2019-20: Preliminary budget indicates 6.1%
- 2018-19: 2.42%
- 2017-18: 3.2%
- 2016-17: 3.6%
- 2015-16: 3.81%
- 2014-15: 3.4%
- 2013-14: 1.7%
- 2012-13: 3.3%
- 2011-12: 3.77%
- 2010-11: 2.9%
- 2009-10: 2.95%
- 2008-09: 4.37%
- 2007-08: 3.37%
- 2006-07: 3.90%
- 2005-06: 1.40%
- 2004-05: Zero Tax Increase
This is the post I didn’t want to write …
I have lived here for many years and I have never seen a community and its residents so united on any single issue as they are in their opposition to the proposed digital billboard in Paoli! The strong anti-digital billboard sentiment was the reason that the social media campaign was mounted – Change.org petition (over 3,300 signatures), dedicated Facebook page and a GoFundMe account to help offset the price of BAN the Digital Billboard print materials and lawn signs. Through generous donations of residents two hundred and fifty signs were ordered and delivered in early November.
Not wanting to risk people accidentally picking up the BAN lawn signs with the political campaign signs post-election, I waited until after November 6 before distributing. After notifying residents that I had the signs, the decision was made to initially only place on private properties. I hand delivered the signs to make certain that they were safely in place. Since Election Day, approximately 100 signs were put on private property throughout Tredyffrin Township – Paoli, Malvern, Devon, Berwyn and some went to Easttown.
A few days after posting BAN lawn signs, I was notified by residents that a few had disappeared. I didn’t think much about it and quickly replaced the signs. However, by the time we got to the second week in November, it was becoming obvious that many signs were gone. The phone calls and emails were picking up from residents upset that their signs were taken – and then two signs were stolen from my own property.
As the numbers in missing BAN signs grew throughout the township, it was clear that this was not a teenage prank but rather trespassing, vandalism and theft of private property. I filed a police report as did at least two others. I did a drive around and put together a list of stolen signs, street by street. (Remember I knew the locations because I had placed the signs myself).
The initial list of stolen BAN signs was forwarded to Tredyffrin Police Chief Beaty on Friday, Nov. 16, about ten days since the first signs went up. The list of stolen BAN signs has continued to grow; to date at least 60 signs stolen (and in less than three weeks!) The value of the stolen signs is over $500.
That’s right – In less than three weeks the BAN the Digital Billboard signs have all but disappeared — trespassing, vandalism and theft of personal property. This is not a joke – 60 signs have been stolen!
Residents who have had their BAN signs stolen are extremely upset. There are very few ways that the public can make their opposition to the proposed digital billboard known – many have called or written supervisors and township officials, signed and shared the Change.org petition and then in the last few weeks put up the lawn signs on their private property to show their opposition
If you look around the township, you will see left over political campaign signs, real estate signs for new developments that are not in the township, signs looking for Kraft bus drivers, firewood and painting advertising signs – you name it – you will see these signs are all over in public areas of the township. Those signs are not placed on private township resident’s property and yet they remain untouched, some standing for months on end.
And here we have at least 60 signs on private property of township tax payers – and they are all stolen.
One resident on Conestoga Road who filed a police report for theft of their Ban the Digital Billboard lawn sign asked me for a replacement sign which I delivered. Fearing the same outcome as the old BAN sign, those homeowners actually went to the hardware store and bought wooden stakes to secure their replacement sign – to see if that would dissuade the trespasser from coming on their property again.
Many of the folks who have had signs stolen are older and some live alone. One resident, who lives alone, said that it scared her that someone had come onto her private property just 10 feet from her front door and stole her two BAN signs. But again – because this township resident so strongly opposes the proposed digital billboard she too requested (and I delivered) two replacement yard signs.
To be clear, most of these 60 stolen signs were located on private property – removed from the front yards of homes throughout Tredyffrin Township.
My home telephone number is on the BAN the Digital Billboard signs. As result, I have answered countless phone calls and emails from residents all seeking information and update on this important issue. The public was kept in the dark about the proposed digital billboard for well over a year and now that that the issue has surfaced residents want and expect updates.
Last Monday I went to Tredyffrin’s Board of Supervisors meeting seeking answers, updates, something, anything! During the citizen comment section, I read a prepared 3 page statement – about the township-wide theft of the BAN signs and asking for an update on the digital billboard.
Residents have no idea where our township supervisors actually stand on the proposed digital billboard with the exception of newly elected supervisor Mark Freed. Mark (who was in the audience) and his opponent Judy DiFilippo answered questions before the election. I posted the answers on Community Matters – and both candidates responded opposing the proposed digital billboard.
At the meeting, the supervisors remained silent with no response to the stolen signs or to my request for an update on the proposed digital billboard. To his credit, supervisor Paul Olson did ask me “who did I think was taking the signs” – I sidestepped the question with a response of “who” had the most to lose from the BAN the Digital Billboard campaign. Several times I commented that the theft of private property is not a joke – one supervisor (who will remain nameless) had a smirk on his face the entire time suggesting that he found the issue amusing.
Sadly, I can report that my statement and questions to the supervisors regarding the proposed digital billboard elicited no response.The township solicitor once again stated that the public would be given advance notice when the digital billboard was back on the agenda.
Let’s not forget that it was the solicitor who announced that there was a draft agreement between the township and Catalyst Outdoor Advertising regarding the digital billboard. As I stated at the meeting, there are over 100 BAN yard signs remaining in my garage – when I feel that it’s safe they will begin to reappear.
The Tredyffrin Township Police Department is now actively involved in the investigation. If you have had a sign stolen, Police Chief Beaty suggested folks call the police number (610-647-1440) and an officer will respond to take the report.
The BAN the Digital Billboard campaign and the theft of yard signs may seem like a joke to some or at least to one supervisor — but I assure you that the anti-digital billboard sentiment of this community is not going away! Although frustrated and disappointed, we will continue to fight back!
For those that are interested, here’s the list by street of signs stolen. Please let me know if you know of others and I will add to the list.
- Swedesford Road – 4 signs (including 2 on my personal property)
- Biddle Road – 1 sign
- Valley Road – 3 signs
- Valley Road – 2 signs
- Central Avenue – 8 signs
- Maple Avenue – 4 signs
- Russell Road – 4 signs
- Old Lancaster Ave – 2 signs
- Glen Ave – 1 sign
- Old Eagle School Road – 2 signs
- Conestoga Road – 2 signs
- Bear Hill Road – 5 signs
- Lancaster Avenue – 6 signs
- Valley Forge Road – 1 sign
- Valley Forge Road – 1 sign
- Upper Gulph Road – 4 signs
- 50 BAN Signs stolen in Tredyffrin Township + 10 Signs stolen in Easttown Township
- TOTAL of 60 BAN Signs Stolen in 3 weeks