TESD

Easttown Township School Board Candidates for TE School Board, Kate Murphy and Francis Reardon, respond

TE School Board Candidates for Easttown Township, Region 3
Kate Murphy
Francis Reardon

The TE School Board candidates were asked to answer the following question in 500 words or less.

Although there are many important issues facing the TE School District, what one issue will you focus on should you be elected?  As a school board director, what in your background, experience or education prepares you to help with this specific issue.

The two candidate responses follow below in alphabetical order according to last name.  If your question and/or comment is for a specific candidate, please refer to that individual by name so as not to confuse. Voters will select one of these candidates in November for the school board.

TE School Board Candidate Kate Murphy
Easttown Township – Region 3

The School Board’s central challenge is sustainably delivering a high quality product at a reasonable cost. In addition to benefiting our children, excellent schools keep our community healthy by attracting and keeping families, companies seeking the best employees, and businesses to serve this robust community.

Part of what makes our schools effective in their educational mission as well as being a productive part of our community is their efficiency.  Productive schools, like productive homes or businesses, do not run themselves. Our school board has a long tradition of affordably providing excellent results, and there is no more important work I could hope to do than to help continue that tradition.

An effective school board brings together a variety of perspectives from the community, with the hope that the consensus the board reaches advances the common good. My perspective is primarily a mother of three young children who are (or will soon be) in the district’s schools. My husband and I are both Conestoga graduates; between us, we are alumni of Valley Forge Elementary, Devon Elementary, Valley Forge Middle School, T/E Middle School, and Conestoga. After living in all different parts of the country for twelve years after graduating from Conestoga, we returned to T/E (first daughter in tow) eight years ago to raise our children here, in large part because of the schools. Because the schools here mean so much to my family, we want to give back. Growing up, my parents were constantly active in public service in this community, and they instilled in me a passion for service as well.

There is a strong core of leadership and teachers in the district. I plan to put my full energy and enthusiasm into the job of helping them excel and providing them with guidance from the community. I am committed to learning about the challenges facing the district, and believe it is important not to rush to judgement. There is usually more than meets the eye to any difficult problem.

One “issue” in particular that concerns me is sustainability. Every day, the district leadership is bombarded with new and important demands. Because of my perspective as a parent of young children and a lifelong resident, I would hope to keep an eye on where we will be in five, ten, or twenty years. By planning not only for tomorrow, but also for the long term, we can responsibly provide the next generation with at least as many opportunities as we had.

My professional background – a degree from Cornell University in communications and experience in marketing and public relations for some of the world’s largest law firms – colors my perspective as well. A thorough yet organized flow of information among all the relevant stakeholders – students, parents, residents, administrators, teachers, businesses, and so on – is certainly vital for an effective board.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment, Pattye, and thank you and everyone else who gets involved in our collective mission to keep T/E a wonderful place to live.

TE School Board Candidate Francis Reardon
Easttown Township – Region 3

My name is Francis Reardon, and I live in Easttown Township.  As a candidate for School Board Director the one issue that caught my attention was the plan to privatize and subcontract out the employment of our current teacher aides, substitute teachers, and para-educators.  The stated reason given by the School Board was that the school district could not afford to provide this group of employees, who average about $20,000.00 per year in pay, with health insurance.  We were presented with cost numbers picked from close to the top end of the insurance cost scale which seemed to have no relation to the employees in this group. This process played out over a two year period and the final decisions were worked out in private sessions without knowledge of or input from the taxpaying public of TESD.  During this process it was astounding to see how money is spent and justified by the school board.  They seemed to have forgotten the value of the dollar.

In my personal life, after high school I spent two years in the United States Army Infantry.  Soon after the Service I attended Temple University, receiving a Bachelors of Science Degree in Education.  I was a substitute teacher in the Philadelphia School system and then taught at a high school in Chester County. I soon discovered that I was better suited for a different career.  I started working in construction in 1973 and retired in 2006.  For thirty of those years I had my own construction business and was very fortunate to be doing business in Chester County during that whole time period.  In 1980 my wife and I moved to our present home and raised our six children here where they attended St Norbert School, Archbishop Carroll High School and Conestoga High School. My family has been blessed with the opportunities provided both by our community and Conestoga High School.

Our school employees should have the same opportunities.  Together with common sense decisions we need to show common decency in how we treat our school district employees.  I think we have failed our teacher aides, substitute teachers and para-educators. All groups of school district employees should be treated the same and the school board can correct this situation.

In the future the school district will have to continue to make many important decisions in the area of personnel.  Beside salaries, the pension and benefits have to be structured to work long term.  We cannot promise everyone long term benefits and fail to fund it short term. We have created a situation where one group of employees works to protect their interests to the detriment of other groups of employees in the school district.  I believe my past experiences have given me the background and common sense decision making skills to continue the excellence of the TE school district.  If given the opportunity I hope to serve the community and everyone involved with the school district as a director of the Tredyffrin Easttown School Board.

Tredyffrin, Region 2 Candidates for TE School Board respond

TE School Board Candidates for Tredyffrin, Region 2
Michele Burger
Kris Graham
Ed Sweeney
Alan Yockey

The TE School Board candidates were asked to answer the following question in 500 words or less.

Although there are many important issues facing the TE School District, what one issue will you focus on should you be elected?  As a school board director, what in your background, experience or education prepares you to help with this specific issue.

The four candidate responses follow below in alphabetical order according to last name.  If your question and/or comment is for a specific candidate, please refer to that individual by name so as not to confuse. Voters will select two of these candidates in November for the school board.

TE School Board Candidate Michele Burger
Tredyffrin, East – Region 2

Thank you for the opportunity to introduce myself. I’m Michele Burger, School Board candidate for Region 2. My family and I moved to the Glenhardie neighborhood in Wayne 17 years ago. As parents of three young children, we considered a number of communities but chose Tredyffrin because of its nationally ranked schools. We are very pleased that we did. All of our children have received excellent preparation for college and beyond.

Over the past 15 years, I have volunteered Mat every level of my children’s schooling including serving as PTO president at Valley Forge elementary. I have actively participated in monthly School Board meetings as well as finance and facilities subcommittee meetings. I have been a community activist and liaison regarding School Board decisions that impact residents of Region 2.

These experiences have afforded me the opportunity to work with many different committees, levels of school district personnel, township personnel, and community members. In every instance, I strove to maintain open communication, to look for creative solutions when needed, and to consider our tax burden and District spending priorities. With my degree in Business and my professional career as a manager of a large sales force, I have experience with negotiating employment contracts, setting measurable goals, and managing budget expenditures.

If I were to only focus on one issue that is important to me, it would not be a true picture of how I would approach my responsibilities on the School Board. There are a number of key standards that I will uphold, if elected.

1) I will work to maintain the highest quality education for all students at an affordable price to taxpayers.

2) I will establish better avenues for open communication and transparency. This would include but is not limited to posting community questions and school board responses online.

3) I will gather community, student, teacher, and administrators’ input as well as the views of fellow school board members prior to making fiscal and educational decisions.

4) I will fight to eliminate Keystone exams as a graduation requirement.

With these standards in mind, the one “issue” that I will give extra focus to is the District’s spending priorities. Over the past several years, I have a track record of questioning the District’s spending – especially the $4 million maintenance building that was recently approved.  I have questioned the need for security fencing that provides no real security and has an impact on homeowners whose properties are adjacent to our schools. With the help of others, I was able to stop the destruction of the VFE tennis courts, a valuable community resource, which in fact saved money and allows the PTO and School District to generate revenue through usage fees to outside organizations.

If elected, I will utilize my business background, my track record of questioning the District’s spending priorities, and my key standards as guiding principles to serve students, employees, and taxpayers of the Tredyffrin-Easttown School district.

For additional questions, please contact me at burger4sb@gmail.com or 484-254-6515.

TE School Board Candidate Kris Graham
Tredyffrin, East – Region 2

I, Kris Graham, have the privilege to currently serve as president of the Tredyffrin Easttown School District. I spent forty years as a classroom teacher. I am a wife and a mother of two adult sons – both Conestoga graduates. I treasure two grandchildren and my husband and I nurtured eleven foster children over a dozen years. They too benefitted from the TE schools.  I have served for three and a half years on the T/E School Board chairing the Legislative and Education Committees, two years as vice-president, and led the Negotiation Team and the Superintendent Search Committee. My advanced degrees in education and teaching certificates in multiple areas enables me to work three mornings a week at a local school that serves at risk adolescents and maintain a private tutorial practice.

Ms. Benson invited me to submit an essay on one topic that I will concentrate on as an incumbent school board candidate. My campaign pledge comes directly from the TE School District mission statement crafted by TE stakeholders:

“To inspire a passion for learning, personal integrity, the pursuit of excellence and social responsibility in each student.”

I also commit to maintaining Conestoga among the elite high schools in the United States as recently recognized by BestColleges.com.

“Conestoga ranked number two overall (nationally) — trailing only Horace Greeley of Chappaqua, NY — (number one in Pennsylvania), 59th best in facilities (11th in the state), 19th in teaching faculty (third in the state) and the 54th safest high school in America (fourth safest in Pennsylvania).”

The survey compared 21,000 schools in the United States. I invite you to read the entire article, as well as all of the other achievements of our students and faculty, on Tredyffrin Easttown School District’s acclaimed website: www.TESD.org

I enjoy meeting you as I knock on doors, attend school functions and civic engagements. I look forward to working with this supportive community, sharing our TE pride, and continuing the TE legacy of academic excellence!

You can contact me via –  krismgraham6@icloud.com

Thank you!

Kris Graham

TE School Board Candidate Ed Sweeney
Tredyffrin, East – Region 2

Dear Neighbor:

Pattye Benson has laid down a real challenge: state what is the one most pressing issue facing the school board and what are my qualifications to address it.  Check out my Facebook EdSweeney4TE to review specific reform issues I am proposing in various areas, such as restoring applied technology and languages in elementary school, combating drug use, and using a more “user friendly” model for public comment.

Let me introduce myself.  My name is Ed Sweeney and I am a local attorney who fights on the side of people like yourself.  I will fight, effectively, for Tredyffrin’s interests and Region 2’s interests. My wife, Franny, and I have an 8 year old at VFES, Katie, and Franny volunteers regularly as a “library mom” and records the children singing.  For 20 years, I have tried to develop my volunteer leadership skill sets to effectively and efficiently obtain results in areas including government, church (Saint Isaac’s), charitable, and political venues.  This includes 15 years on volunteer Boards in Tredyffrin’s government, including Planning Commission and Zoning Hearing Board.  I have fought vigorously as a political leader to keep Tredyffrin affordable and competitive, and against budget busting school taxes and the PIT and EIT.

Our focus needs to be keeping Tredyffrin affordable for middle class families while improving the already fine academic quality in the School District.  We are not high priced Radnor.  The mistake Radnor and other school districts have made is placing scarce resources in building schools or on administrative costs.  We are drifting down a risky path of borrowing $24 million of capital without specific publicly articulated goals, installing expensive fences that bring little safety value, and a $4.8 million maintenance facility that is twice its forecast costs.  I agree with the comment: “no one likes to see money spent on facilities and not the students.”  The ability to make our total local tax obligations affordable makes Tredyffrin attractive to businesses which pay crucially important transfer taxes.  Affordability also is a magnet for families that chose to settle here based on value.

Our philosophy should focus expenditures on students and teachers.  We should treat our employees fairly.  Transparency and effective public contribution help keep our system working well and is an important check on government.

Tredyffrin residents should also speak with one bipartisan voice on Pension Reform for new employees.  The Pennsylvania School Board Association (PSBA’s) has urgently declared that “the system is unsustainable and must be fixed now.”  I am in favor of a mixed system compromise as recently proposed.

Given the current dynamics of the Board, we need Directors who fight skillfully for Tredyffrin’s priorities both in public and “behind the scenes.”  As a PC member, I opposed with success proposals harmful to homeowners such as trying to make residents put in sidewalks and expanding the definition of “historic building” to apply to even post war homes.  Experience matters in a Board setting.  I am dedicated to earning your support.  Learn more about me on Facebook: EdSweeney4TE.

TE School Board Candidate Alan Yockey
Tredyffrin, East – Region 2

Hello. My name is Alan Yockey and I am a candidate for TESD School Board Director. I have spent 40 years in Information Technology as a programmer/analyst, business consultant, and IT Director. Before that I was a mathematics teacher. I know firsthand the rewards and frustrations of education. Now I am retired and have the time and experience to use serving our community on the school board. We moved to Tredyffrin in 1994 when our son was starting kindergarten at Hillside. He graduated from Conestoga in 2007.  I know the schools are excellent, and I would like to serve our community to maintain that excellent quality.

The first priority of any school board director should be to maintain the high level of excellence in our district. I will approach this on several fronts.

  1. Insure our teachers get the training and support to make them excellent in the classroom. Monitor class size. Reduce constraints imposed on teachers from standardized testing. The number one objective for teachers should be opening minds and developing critical thinking. Not having high scores on multiple choice tests.
  2. Involvement of the Community-Whether in academics, finances, art and cultural, or sports the school board needs to lead the way in providing opportunities for parents and community members to be involved. Put more material on the web. Require committees to schedule meetings both during the day and in the evening. Have more workshops like the budget workshops which both provide information and allow for citizen input. Put questions, responses and supporting material for citizen questions on the web. Agendas items should be sufficiently clear so that interested parties can be easily identified.
  3. Students-Prepare students to be well rounded adults. Make sure all students are exposed to academics, music, art, manual skills, etc. The goal is to allow every student to find their area of interest and excellence. We cannot measure the success of the schools by counting the number of students who are National Merit Scholars.
  4. Finances-Work with the administration to balance our resources among the complex mandates and demands levied on the schools by government, by the community, by the students, and by the teachers. Use my 40 years of analytical experience to evaluate needs and costs. Think long term. Do not make decisions today which will hurt the quality of our schools in the future.

Producing “Well rounded adults or citizens” is a goal for our education system and for parents and for the community. For our education system to succeed at this goal we need school board members who take a holistic approach to the school system. As an IT Director I balanced end user demands, budget, IT and end user resources, training requirements, government regulations, safety concerns, and corporate goals to achieve an optimum solution. I will do the same on the school board.

Voters to select 5 T/E School Board Directors in November – All 10 Candidates provide responses

Your vote mattersIn November, voters in the TE School District will go to the polls to select five school board directors. People bring different backgrounds and qualifications to the job of school board director and as voters; we need to make the right choices on Election Day.

To assist voters in the decision-making process, it is important for the public to know the candidates. In early July, the following question was emailed to the ten T/E School Board candidates:

Although there are many important issues facing the TE School District, what one issue will you focus on should you be elected?  As a school board director, what in your background, experience or education prepares you to help with this specific issue.

I asked that the candidate’s response “not to be a political campaign plug or a laundry list of school district issues”. Their personal response was to “(1) focus on ‘one’ issue that is important to you and (2) to explain how your background/experience qualifies you to tackle this issue. All TE School Board candidates were invited to send a response not to exceed 500 words by August 1.

After reading the responses from the candidates, you be the judge whether or not the candidates successfully answered the question. Since many of the candidates spoke of transparency and communication with the public, it will be interesting to see if they respond to questions or comments.  I would ask you to remember, that these candidates are our neighbors — they are one of us – and I ask that all comments/questions be respectful and not personal attacks.

In the Tredyffrin, District 1 school board race, Dr. George Anderson withdrew from the race; therefore, his statement will not be included. On July 30, Neill Kling announced his candidacy to replace Anderson in a Tredyffrin, Region 1 candidate. With the receipt of Kling’s response today, I can now say that all ten candidates have provided a response for Community Matters.

The school board candidate responses will appear on Community Matters in alphabetical order (by last name) according to the region race. The schedule is as follows:  Tredyffrin, Region 1 on Wednesday, August 5, Tredyffrin, Region 2 on Friday, August 7 and Easttown, Region 3 on Monday, August 10.  Below is the list of candidates by region:

Candidates for Tredyffrin, Region 1:
Neal Colligan
Roberta Hotinski
Todd Kantorczyk
Neill Kling

Note: There are 2 seats available in Tredyffrin, Region 1. The two candidates receiving the highest number of votes in November win. Colligan and Kling endorsed by Tredyffrin Township Republican Committee; Hotinski and Kantorczyk endorsed by Tredyffrin Township Democrats.

Candidates for Tredyffrin, Region 2:
Michele Burger
Kris Graham*
Ed Sweeney
Alan Yockey
  *Incumbent

Note: There are 2 seats available in Tredyffrin, Region 2. The two candidates receiving the highest number of votes in November win. Burger and Yockey endorsed by Tredyffrin Township Democrats; Graham and Sweeney endorsed by Tredyffrin Township Republican Committee.

Easttown, Region 3:
Kate Murphy
Francis Reardon

Note: There is 1 seat available in Easttown, Region 1.  The candidate receiving the highest number of votes in November wins. Murphy endorsed by Easttown Township Republican Committee and Reardon endorsed by Easttown Township Democrats.

Head of Tredyffrin Republicans is now in the T/E School Board race!

The twist and turns of local politics … Replacing Dr. George Anderson (who withdrew from the TE School Board race last week) is the current Chair of the Tredyffrin Township Republican Committee, Neill Kling.  Neill sent the following note this morning regarding his candidacy for the TE School Board:

Pattye:
Just a quick note to inform your readers that I have been chosen by our Committeepeople in Region 1 to replace George Anderson as one of the Republican School Board candidates from that region.   The decision to run is my own; I have been thinking about doing this for some time now.  I run because I believe that I (along with my now running mates Neal Colligan and Ed Sweeney), will complement the excellent stewardship of sitting Board President Kris Graham, while at the same time offering a fresh perspective on the educational and fiscal choices that are vital to keeping the Tredyffrin/Easttown School District both outstanding and affordable.  Two of my children are graduates of private high schools, and two are and will be attending Conestoga High School, so I have experience as a parent with public and private education.  We should be proud that, at least in our district, public education keeps pace with the many first-class private schools at a fraction of the cost, and that is a testament not only to our wonderful public educators but also to the great parents of our school community.  Nevertheless, in the public sphere, we must be mindful that our operating expenses come from all of our taxpayers, whether they use the schools or not, and that our schools are an integral part of our neighborhoods and must be responsive to their needs as well.  


Commitment to the best education possible combined with a concern for our taxpayers has been the hallmark of the T/E School District for many years.  It is why so many of us have chosen to live and raise our families here.  If elected, I will be honored to help continue and, where necessary, improve upon that wonderful legacy.  


Best,

Neill Kling  

Tredyffrin Township Democrats attack Republican School Board Candidate George Anderson for extremist views on Facebook

Republicans-vs-DemocratsWith Election Day 2015 still four months in the future, the Tredyffrin Township Democrats are not letting the “dog days of summer” keep them from going after one of the Republican TE School Board candidates, Dr. George Anderson. With a headline reading “Extremist Views Espoused by TE School Board Candidate”, an email blast was sent to the TTDEMS mailing list and the article posted on their website. The use of graphics and commentary from Dr. Anderson’s personal Facebook page provide the proof of the TTDEMS accusations (see below).

The individual responsible for the TTDEMS email and the website entry is TE School Board candidate, Democrat Alan Yockey, but I am told that the other three Democratic school board candidates support his actions.

Yockey (D) is a candidate for Tredyffrin Region 2 whereas Anderson (R) is a candidate for Tredyffrin Region 1. Although Yockey and Anderson are not seeking the same TE School Board seat, it was interesting to note that Yockey used a entry from Anderson’s Facebook page, which also included a photo of Republican Ed Sweeney. Sweeney is a school board candidate for Tredyffrin Region 2, the same seat for which Yockey seeks office. It’s unclear whether Yockey’s inclusion of Sweeney’s photo from Anderson’s Facebook page was an oversight or calculated to discredit this school board candidate by association.

Politicians and political parties are in the era of Internet campaigning. Creating a social media strategy for use during political campaigns has quickly become an essential part of every candidate’s plan to get into office. Today’s example by the Tredyffrin Democrats shows that the use of social media is a two-edged sword. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc. are all useful tools to help win an election but as Anderson (and possibly Ed Sweeney) learned today, can also be the secret weapon in local politics.

School Board candidate George Anderson and Tredyffrin Township Republican Committee Chair Neill Kling both provided responses to the posting by the Tredyffrin Democrats (see statements below).  The Chair of the Tredyffrin Township Democrats, Kathleen Keohane, was contacted and should she provide a statement, it will be added to this post.

The calendar may say July, but it looks like this could be a very long campaign season for local voters.  And the battle begins …

From the Tredyffrin Township Democrats email and posting (To read, click on the graphics or go to their website, www.ttdems.com)

TTDEMS

TTDEMS 1 TTDEMS 2

In response to the Tredyffrin Township Democrats posting, School Board candidate Dr. George Anderson provides the following:

In response to carefully excerpted selections from my personal Facebook page being put up by the Tredyffrin Township Democratic Committee I plead guilty… I am guilty of believing those holding political office should not use governmental power to promote their personal political agenda, (as America witnessed in the recent use of the White House as a screen for the Rainbow Flag). I am guilty of believing in every American should have the ability to defend themselves and their families by exercising their Second Amendment Rights. I am guilty of believing Darwin’s explanation of how life developed on our planet was incomplete and is unsupported by science as it developed over the last 150 years. I am guilty of believing drug addiction is a horrible affliction and having the threat of imminent death may reduce the number of those who take the chance for a thrill. I am guilty of believing, there has been no global warming for the last 10 years and the continued calls for more draconian regulations are more about governmental control than they are about saving the planet. If basing my opinions upon the American Constitution and the existing science is extremist, then I am most certainly guilty.  (I have little doubt the next email from the Tredyffrin Democrats will headline … “Extremist Candidate admits Guilt”)

The level of effort which went into this email is interesting. I do post many political items on my personal page, and they are generally opposed to the policies of this administration but it also includes photos of my new Koi pond, photos of my birds and pictures of Bulldog puppies. One is forced to ask; why has someone put in so much effort, going through thousands of posts, to slandering me? Is it because on my official Facebook page (Dr. George Anderson for TE School Board), I expressed the radical concept that “We owe our children the best education we can provide. We owe it to our citizens to achieve that goal in the most transparent and frugal way possible.”  or perhaps it was the extremist concept that members of the School Board work for the citizens of the TE school district and should be available to them.

It is an old saying “If you cannot attack their ideas, attack them personally.”  With, personal attacks this early in the election cycle, one is forced to ask, who or what is the Democratic machine trying to protect?

Tredyffrin Township Republican Committee Chair Neill Kling provides the following statement in response to the Tredyffrin Democrats posting:

Dear Pattye:
I understand that the Tredyffrin Democrats (in the person of Region 2 School Board candidate Alan Yockey) have sent out an e-mail attacking Region 1 School Board candidate George Anderson as an “extremist” based on material that he has re-posted on his personal facebook page. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to respond.  

This is a tactic that the TT Democrats used in the last local election to foment opposition to our Republican school board members and candidates. It seeks to demonize certain of our neighbors who put themselves up for election and divide our electorate rather than bring us together to address the challenges that our school district faces.  I’m sure that we Republicans could find material against our Democratic opponents that would perhaps paint them in a way that some of our electorate would consider extreme.  But these are our neighbors, this is not the campaign that we Republicans choose to run, and we will not respond in kind.  Such tactics do not produce a healthy environment for school board (or any other) governance going forward.

Our school board candidates, while certainly all good Republicans, are individuals with many perspectives and  talents who bring their personal opinions to specific issues (issues we hope to engage fully in the Fall campaign) while focusing generally on the core principal of good stewardship — of our children’s education and safety, of our hard-earned tax dollars, of our invaluable school employees, and of our school facilities.  School Board is an unpaid, difficult, often thankless job and each of our neighbors who has served and has stepped forward to ask for your vote this November (Republican and Democrat) deserve our respect.

I also understand that Mr. Anderson has sent you a response to Mr. Yockey’s post.  For my part, I know Mr. Anderson as a devoted father and husband, as a former student of the T/E Schools, as an educator at Valley Forge Military Academy who is also tasked by that institution to bring diversity to its ranks, and as a person with a strong background in finance.   Mr. Anderson has told me that he welcomes any discussion about his views and he will be walking the neighborhoods this Summer (as will all of our candidates) so that our neighbors can get to meet him and engage him in conversation.  I hope that all take the opportunity to do so.

Thanks again for your courtesy,

Neill Kling
TTRC Chairman

Since this Community Matters post went up yesterday, the graphic from George Anderson’s Facebook page which included Ed Sweeney’s photo was removed from the TTDEMS website and replaced with a different graphic.

Kathleen Keohane, Chair of the Tredyffrin Township Democrats provided the following statement in response to school board candidate George Anderson and Tredyffrin Republican Committee Chair Neill Kling:

Hi Pattye,

I appreciate your bringing this troubling issue to light. I disagree strongly with Neill Kling’s characterization of the TTDEMS’ webpage post and email to our subscribers. They cannot be reduced to “a politically motivated attack” on a private person who reposts what some may find offensive material on his Facebook page.

On July 8, George Anderson stepped way over the line when he wrote, “I personally believe it should be against the law to revive someone who has a drug overdose. Letting them kill themselves would thin the herd.”

Understandably, our candidates expressed disbelief and revulsion that a person holding this view could be in the position to make decisions about the welfare of our District’s children.

No one disputes George Anderson’s right to express whatever views he may hold. But there are consequences to doing so. I believe every Tredyffrin voter needs to take a careful look at each of the candidates running for local office. Yes, they are our neighbors, and we appreciate their willingness to step forward to make a difference in our community. But who are they, and what do they stand for?

We are less than a month into the lazy days of summer, and I know that few people are focused on the fall election right now. From a political standpoint, our party’s decision to take a stand against George Anderson on July 11 was hardly strategic.

It simply had to be taken. His heartless belief that it should be a crime to administer life-saving medicine to a dying addict, along with some of his other extreme views need to be known. I feel certain that the reasonable, caring, well-informed people who live in our community will reject them.

Best regards,

Kathleen Keohane
Chair, TTDEMS

T/E Taxpayers Draw Short Straw: School Board Approves $4.5 million maintenance building & 3.81% tax increase

Last night’s TE School Board meeting did not mark a good night for the District’s taxpayers!  Many of us left the meeting disheartened and feeling like the warm summer evening would have been better spent with a glass of Chardonnay.  Here are the highlights, or rather low-lights of the meeting.

New Maintenance & Storage Building:   $4.5 million, approved 8-1 (Liz Mercogliano dissenting vote)

The District’s Business Manager Art McDonnell and the architect Tom Daley from Daley & Jalboot presented a lengthy presentation on the proposed $4.5 million maintenance & storage building. Helping to convince that the project was necessary, photos of current overcrowded storage facilities, closets, etc. accompanied the presentation.  Taxpayers did not question that something needed to be done to improve the situation but did question the project’s escalating costs, the Old Lancaster Road location and the treatment of the neighbors. The fantasy architectural drawings indicate a tree-lined boulevard, not the realty of Old Lancaster Road … a narrow residential street of small homes sitting below grade to this new, large maintenance building.

2015-16 Budget: Approved deficit budget with a 3.81% tax increase, 8-1 (Liz Mercogliano dissenting vote).

The 3.81% tax increase marks the eleventh straight year that the TE School Board has raised taxes. According to the Philadelphia Inquirer from Sunday, June 14, the 3.81% tax increase for 2015-16 marks the largest tax increase in Chester County.

The last year the TESD saw no tax increase was 2004-05 as seen below:

• 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

Discretionary compensation increases above the 1.7% contract for Supervisors and Administrators:  Approved 7-2 (Liz Mercogliano and Scott Dorsey dissenting votes)

Valley Forge Middle School Fencing:  Board agreed to further discussion of hiring of a fencing safety consultant at the next Facilities Committee meeting.  An RFP for safety expert to be sent in the Fall.

TE School District Redistricting:  Based on the distribution of voters in the school district, there is under representation of elected officials in Tredyffrin, District 2.  It was suggested that the Board’s Legislative Committee would review the redistricting issue at their next meeting, in September. Disenfranchised voters are discussing a grassroots effort of their own re redistricting.

Reflecting on last night’s school board meeting, had me wondering why should I or other citizens bother to show up?  As some have often stated on Community Matters, the Board seemingly makes its decisions in advance and then delivers those decisions as a united front. Questions from the public are only marginally answered, if at all.  The Board views comments from residents as criticism and/or annoyances.

Election Day is November 3, 2015.  Five seats on the TE School Board are on the November ballot – Vote for Change!

Question: To fence or not to fence at Valley Forge Middle School? Answer: No for Election Year, but 2016 is another story!

 

I attended the TE School District Facilities Meeting on Friday.   Thinking that the fencing at Valley Forge Middle School discussion would be put to bed finally, the audience learned instead that the never-ending saga would continue…

After months and months of legal bills on the District’s side (i.e. taxpayers) and on the part of the Chesterbrook Civic Association and Green Hills residents, the Board has decided the District needs another school safety study, which will focus on fencing at VFMS, before they can make a decision. After TESD President Kris Graham read her statement proposing the hiring of a safety consultant for the Valley Forge Middle School fencing project, other Board members embraced the suggestion.  What?

As background regarding the school safety study – In January 2013, the District hired Andy Chambers (the former Tredyffrin Township Police Chief) as the safety consultant to review the safety of the eight schools.  Initially Chambers’ hiring was included on a school board consent agenda.  Facing claims of Sunshine Act violation, the District solicitor Ken Roos recommended the ‘reconsideration’ of Chambers at the following Board meeting.  Ultimately, Chambers was hired with a 7-2 vote with former school board members Anne Crowley and Rich Brake citing ‘lack of transparency’ in their dissenting votes.   The public was told that Chambers contract was ‘not to exceed’ $11,500.

The Board has repeatedly cited the safety report as the rationale for building fences around the schools – it certainly provided the basis for why the five elementary schools were fenced last summer. The public was not provided input for the safety study and we were not permitted to see the safety study when completed (the Board cited safety reasons).   The District has denied right-to-know requests for the study.

The taxpayers paid for the District’s safety study two years ago, which claims to suggest that all District schools need to be fenced.  Why is the 2013 safety study not applicable for VFMS?

Now many, many meetings and legal and architectural fees later, the Board has decided that the District needs to spend more money for a new safety study – this study to focus specifically on Valley Forge Middle School fencing.  It should be noted that the Board was quick to mention that this time the District will send out an RFP to find a safety consultant (something they admit was not done before they hired Chambers).

I’m sorry but I just don’t understand.  Why is the District going to spend more money on the VFMS fencing project by hiring another safety consultant?  The uncertainty for the neighbors continues, as the Board was quick to say that when this new study comes out in early 2016, it may still require fencing VFMS. Here’s a question for the Board — why not have Police Superintendent Anthony Giaimo and the Tredyffrin police conduct the safety study for the District?  Certainly Giaimo’s background and experience would make him an excellent choice to review school safety.

Three school board candidates attended the Facilities Meeting (Fran Reardon, Easttown, Region 3 and Tredyffrin West, Region 2 candidates Michele Burger and Ed Sweeney).  For the two open school board seats in Tredyffrin West, Region 2, the Primary election results had Burger (D) and Sweeney (R) receiving the highest number of votes respectfully – with TESD Board President Kris Graham in third place. There’s little doubt that the ongoing VFMS fencing issues cost Graham votes.  I wonder if she thinks that by spending taxpayer dollars for another safety study and delaying the fencing project until 2016, will translate to a higher vote count in November.

—————————————————————

The District’s mega-million proposed Maintenance & Storage Building received much discussion at Friday’s Facilities Meeting.  This proposed maintenance building and the adoption of the 2015/16 Final Budget are scheduled for Priority Discussion at the school board meeting on Monday, June 15. Board discussion and public comment opportunity. 7:30 PM, Conestoga High School

TESD Facility Meeting to discuss school fencing project and mega-million dollar maintenance building

The proposed middle school and high school fencing project and the mega-million dollar Maintenance Building are two of the agenda items for the District’s Facilities Meeting tomorrow, Friday, June 12 at 12 Noon.

The school fencing project, specifically at Valley Forge Middle School, has seen a lot of attention in recent months. The school property abuts the property of some of the Green Hills properties in Chesterbrook. and initially the plan had the fencing going directly behind the Green Hills homes. It now appears that the District has agreed to move the proposed fencing away from the homeowner’s back doors but unanswered questions remain.

Discussion (debate?) continues on the placement of the interior fencing, the height of the fence (4 ft, 5 ft. or 6 ft.), the type of fencing material, signage, etc. The five District elementary schools received chain link fencing but the Chesterbrook residents are asking for a material upgrade to white vinyl fencing to match existing fencing in the planned community.  There appears to be an agreement that any upgrade materials fee from chain link to white vinyl will be split between Chesterbrook residents and the District’s taxpayers.  The white vinyl fencing is to run along the side of VFMS property on Valley Forge Road (Rt. 252).  This upgrade fencing option would only ‘mark’ the District’s property and cannot be viewed as a safety feature.

The construction start date for school fencing at Valley Forge Middle, TE Middle and Conestoga is June 24 with a scheduled completion date of August 14.  Since there is a change order for the originally approved fencing at VFMS, the Facilities Committee will need to decide the next step – will it need to go back to the full Board on Monday, June 15?

Although the District has been unwilling to publically state how many residents have contacted the Board regarding the proposed fencing – I know that the number continues to rise.  Many residents have copied me on their correspondence with the District and then complained when they have received no response. To be clear, there may be residents who support the fencing project, but I have personally not received copies of any such correspondence.

Below is a copy of a recent email to the school board from Mr. Gary Wolf, a Chesterbrook resident.  This email is included below with his approval.

Dear School Board,

Our tax dollars are irresponsibly and continually misused by the T/E School Board.  One of my choices to address this concern, besides moving out of our Tredyffrin home that my wife and I have lived in for 27 years, was to exercise my right to vote … which I did.  I chose not to vote for Kris Graham on May 19th.  While my vote is only one in many, I’m fed up with our taxes being increased and our school board acting as though this district is a “money pit.”  Specifically, we don’t need fences at our schools to the tune of almost a quarter million dollars.

My wife worked at VFES for 19 years, and saw the waste and misdirected funding of the T/E administration.  For example, the kids had a paltry allocation of $1.00/year/student for their first aid care while the principal bought new office furniture essentially every year, applying the “use or lose his budget” mentality.  If I managed my department for my employer in that manner, I’d be out of work.  And … we continue to pay for Dan Waters’ amenities and life style that even us reasonably blessed professionals will never realize.   Spend it on the kids!!  Enough is enough!

Gary C. Wolf

Another of the major discussion items on the agenda is agenda items is the new Maintenance & Storage Building.  As we learned at Monday’s Finance Committee meeting, the bids for this project were due in this week on June 9.  The project bid will not include any of the costs leading up to this point – the legal and architectural fees, traffic studies, township permits, eco soil testing, etc.

When the Business Manager was asked about a total of those pre-construction costs, Art McDonnell stated that he would provide a total of those costs as well as the construction bid costs at the Facilities Meeting. At this point, the District has already invested a lot of money on the maintenance building project. Because this project has greatly exceeded initial estimates, it would be fiscally responsible for the Board to thoroughly analyze the costs, and review all available options, before granting final approval. According to the District, the construction start date for the maintenance building is August 17, 2015 with a scheduled completion date of June 29, 2016.

Regarding this week’s Finance Meeting, the proposed tax increase has now edged up to 3.81% for the 2015-16 school year. Should this tax increase be approved, it will mark the eleventh year in a row that residents have seen their taxes go up — you would have to go back a decade to 2004-05 to find the last time that there was no real estate tax increase. Is this really the best time to spend $4-5 million for a maintenance & storage building?

There were a number of school board candidates at the Finance Meeting, it would be interesting to know their thoughts about the proposed budget. There was a brief mention about the District’s food service budget and something about a $400K loss but … that the department really didn’t have a loss but actually had a profit! I have no idea what this is about — is the District practicing a form of ‘new math’?  Perhaps my friend Ray Clarke can enlighten us!

———————————————————————————————

Update: Neal Colligan sent the following email to the T/E School Board Thursday evening regarding the District’s proposed Maintenance & Storage Building and provided a copy for posting on Community Matters.

Dear School Board,

Apologizes for not being able to join you at the Facilities Meeting tomorrow. I did want to take this opportunity to give you some thoughts on your maintenance building that you will be discussing tomorrow.

Much has been said on that project and I see know need to go into its history… You’ll already have reviews all that.  The choice you may make tomorrow is to recommend a contract for the construction of this 14,000 SF facility that has been in the planning stage for so long. At the last Facilities meeting, the revised estimate for the construction of the building is almost $4 MM. After you add the cost of land acquisition, planning and architects, legal, and other sunk costs… This facility could well coat almost $5 MM. On a price per square foot basis, this gets pretty close to $300/SF.

I work financing commercial real estate and I’d like to share some insights.  In a commercial loan scenario, a lender would give you only a portion of the value of a piece of real estate (typically 65-75%). This discipline is adhered to for obvious reasons..,. The lender would like to get paid back.  If they don’t get paid back frontmen owner, they’d like to see their way to get their money back through taking the real estate back and selling it. Why is the germane?  You’re a not for profit building for your own needs. Here’s why the above is important:  you are borrower inc the money. Further you’re borrowing it on the back of the taxpayers. You just completed a large bond offering.  You have a AAA rating based primarily on the ability of the citizens of our community to pay taxes. Indeed, WE; the taxpayer, are the security for this loan.

As THE security for your bond issue, I would appreciate it if you would apply the same discipline that you would see from a normal commercial real estate deal. If you had that building appraised… You would find out it’s worth about $1 MM. Don’t believe that?  Find out…have it appraised OR ask Tripp Lukens on the Planning Board…. He’s a commercial appraiser and would be happy to speak on value, likely for no charge. At least investigate it…please don’t pay 4x value for a non-strategic asset (one where no learning takes place).

I know you’ve spent considerable time on THIS plan but now it’s costs have far out-stripped it’s utility/value….my opinion. And my opinion should matter; I guaranteed the bond issue by being a citizen of this community. You should not pay anywhere near the amounts recently released by Facility for this asset. There ARE other alternatives….lease/buy an older building/etc. At $4-$5 MM of money borrowed on the credit of this community; you must go look at new alternatives.

Thank you-and I apologize for any miss-spellings; writing on my handheld without glasses.

Neal Colligan

Questions continue regarding VF Middle School fencing — still no resolution!

No FencingThe TE School Board approved the 2015 graduating class of Conestoga HS at Wednesday, May 27  school board meeting.  Commencement will take place on June 2, 7 PM at Villanova University.

Although the infamous Valley Forge Middle School fencing project was not on the Board’s agenda, Green Hills (Chesterbrook) resident Doug Anestad utilized the public comment period with a list of questions to the Board.  His statement and questions –

Doug Anestad, Green Hills

First, I would like to say congratulations to the class of 2015.

This school board has heard from many residents both in person an in email about the proposed fencing project. Not one person has spoken out in support of the fencing project.

Here is my first question

How can the school board continue to hear from the residents in person, in email, and in the voting booths and continue to be deaf to them?

My second question is how many emails have you received so far from residents in the past couple of weeks asking you to stop the fencing project.

I would like to conclude with an observation

The residents in TE Region 2 are really starting to get upset with the under representation that we have on this school board. TE Region 2 has almost as many people living in it as TE Regions 1 and 3 combined. That means that we have half the representation per person.

Perhaps this is why you feel that you can keep shoving this fence project down the throats of the parents of students and residents who live here.

This situation feels like TE Region 1 and 3 coming in like a bunch of carpetbaggers and ignoring the opinions of the people in TE Region 2.

Here is my third and last question

How many more residents do you need to hear from before you halt the current fencing plan and reconsider the scope and placement of proposed fences, this time with actual community input?

I will conclude with the same request that I made at the last school board meeting. I would really like for someone on the board to please make a motion to table the fencing project for further cost benefit analysis and someone else second that motion.

While you are at it, it would be likewise helpful to have someone make a motion to table the new facilities building until a cost benefit analysis is done. That is another project where the school board needs to step in and give guidance as it is running way over the original budget.

Thank you.

For the record, Doug Anestad reports that not one Board member answered any of his questions. Why doesn’t the Board respond to resident questions?

For example, all emails addressed to the school board filter through the Public Information Officer Art McDonnell, who then in turn forward them to the individual Board members. There is no question that residents have contacted the Board with their opposition to school fencing and the use of taxpayer money for fencing.  I have heard from several residents who tell me that they have sent emails regarding the fencing but received no response from the District.  Resident’s emails to the Board are private but there is no reason that the ‘number’ of emails received on an issue is not public.  Not every resident question should require him or her to file a right-to-know with the District to receive an answer!

Doug Anestad is the frustrated District taxpayer who mailed (at his expense) an anti-school fencing postcard (below) to all residents residing in TE School District Region 2.   Timed to arrive days before Primary Election Day, Doug suggested that voters support Michele Burger (D) and Ed Sweeney (R) versus incumbent school board president Kris Graham (R) for the two Board openings.

No one can say if it was the power of Anestad’s campaign strategy or simply coincidental but the election results had Burger and Sweeney receiving the highest number of votes with Graham in third place.

Stop Spending pg 1

Stop Spending pg 2

——————————————————————————

Anestad is representative of a growing concern on a number of issues, including the District’s use of taxpayer dollars for fencing projects and an overpriced maintenance building while continuing to raise taxes. The overall lack of public input and communication between the Board and the residents seems to be the core of the problem.

Regarding the VF Middle School fence project, residents have received mixed messages from Board members resulting in a ‘he said-she said’ conflict rather than resolution.  If the debate continues over District spending on fencing and the multi-million dollar maintenance building, the November election results may not be what School Board President Kris Graham wants.

Discussion regarding the school fencing project and the District’s $4 million++ maintenance (“Taj Mahal”) building will continue at the Friday, June 12 Facilities Committee meeting.  It is my understanding that if the committee does not reach consensus, the issues go to the full Board on Monday, June 15.

T/E School District to Build the ‘Taj Mahal’ or … Otherwise Known as the New ‘Maintenance & Storage Building’!

The school district’s planned maintenance and storage building on Old Lancaster Avenue, next to TE Middle School, has mushroomed into a major multi-million dollar project!

The District’s plan is to demolish and replace the existing maintenance and storage building on the site with a new 12,000 square ft. building with 29 parking spaces.  If you recall, the District purchase purchased an adjacent property, 892 Old Lancaster Avenue in August 2012, for $265K and paid to have the house demolished to have it in the ready for the new maintenance building.

According to the District’s ‘Capital Sources & Usage Report’ in October 2013, the estimated building costs for the new maintenance and storage building was $2.7 million. During 2014, the proposed construction cost escalated another $500K to and an estimate of $3,177,500.  Fast-forward to the last District Facilities Meeting and the Taj Mahal (sorry maintenance and storage building) construction estimates has soared again.  The new estimate for the building is $3,966 … nearly $4 million to store tractors, snowplows and extra paper towels. Wow.

Why the significant increase? In two years, the building costs have escalated from $2.7 to $4 million!  According to the Facilities Committee documents, some of the additional costs of the nearly $1 million increase is for site work, including the mitigation of unsuitable soil.  Soil testing has revealed that the soil on the site is fill.  Up to 8 feet of soil has to be removed and then replaced in one foot ‘lifts’, each one being compacted.

Other reasons for the increase are related to the final design of the storm water system (particularly given that this large building is going in to a residential neighborhood), the replacement of the retaining wall, final design of foundations, and landscaping.

It really is inaccurate to say that the District’s new maintenance and storage building is a $4 million project.  You have to add in the purchase of the neighbor’s property, District studies, township fees, geotechnical soil survey, traffic study, Chester Valley engineering, legal and architectural fees, etc. etc. which make the final cost more likely $5 million than the current estimate of $4 million!

The Facilities Committee documents also contained the following language concerning the maintenance and storage building:

As we develop the construction documents, we will continue to make the building as economical as possible. But the scope of the site development is established.  In our experience Becker & Frondorf is a conservative estimator, so we would expect some movement in the number, but I do not expect a significant reduction.

For anyone that has been involved in a construction project of even the smallest scope, there’s never a ‘reduction’ from the original estimate.  From personal experience, construction projects always end up with unexpected ‘add-ons’!

In a comment from Ray Clarke on the subject of the maintenance and storage building, he states, “That $4 million purchases 11,600 square feet ground level, 3,300 square feet “mezzanine”:  $270 per square foot cost.  Google tells me “a typical 20,000-square-foot warehouse will cost you about $35 a square foot”.    How, or rather ‘why’ should the school board allocate $270/square foot cost if a typical warehouse space should cost $35/square ft.  Even if Ray’s Google search is off by an order of magnitude, how can this building cost this much money!

The District’s planned Taj Mahal of a maintenance building is on Tredyffrin Township’s Planning Comission’s agenda tomorrow night for Final Land Development approval. The meeting is at the township building at 7 PM. On May 7, the District released a RFP requesting sealed bids for the new maintenance and storage building listing a deadline of 1 PM on Friday, June 5.  If all goes well at the Planning Commission meeting, my guess is that this project is on a fast track for a summer start date!

How can the District possibly afford a $5 million maintenance and storage building? Seriously, spending $5 million on a maintenance building does not benefit the kids or the quality of the education in the school district. Taxes go up year after year, yet the Board tells us that they are continuing to look at ways to reduce spending.  If that is true, why not look at other solutions to the District’s storage problem that don’t include spending mega-million dollars for a maintenance building.

The Board wants us to believe that they must outsource the aides and paraeducators because the District cannot afford to pay health care but … somehow; there is money for a $5 million maintenance and storage building.  Anyone else but me think that there’s something wrong with this picture?

Community Matters © 2015 Frontier Theme