Pattye Benson

Community Matters

Month – January 2010

How Can the Residents of Great Valley School District be so Different from the Residents of Tredyffrin Easttown School District?

January 13, 2010
2 Comments

How many residents typically attend our school board meetings vs. how many residents attend township meetings? There is quite an imbalance in attendees; does low school board attendance equate to apathy, lack of interest, . . . ? The school district is facing a $9.3 million deficit and what undoubtedly could be the highest tax increase to the residents in years. I just do not understand.

OK, now I hear that Great Valley School District held their budget meeting tonight and unlike TESD meetings of late, there was not a free seat in the house. Great Valley is facing a $3.2 million deficit in their 2010-11 budget of $78.8 million budget. Three main options discussed – (1) 2.9% in accordance with the Act 1 index, (2) 4.7% increase if the district gets two exceptions and (3) no tax increase. If the GVSD board applies for an exception, 4.7% is the maximum for a tax increase. However, if they take that route the preliminary budget must be approved by February 16. Last year, GVSD imposed a 1.7% tax increase. The current property tax rate in the district is 18.22 mills and the owner of a house assessed at $234,900 now pays school taxes of $4,279.

It would seem to me that neighboring Great Valley and Tredyffrin Easttown school districts are of similar quality, teacher and staff qualifications, economics of taxpayers, etc. so why is there is such a disparity in the interest of between both sets taxpayers? Why don’t we have standing room only at school board budget meetings? Keene Hall at the Township Building was full to overflowing for the township budget meeting yet only a handful of residents are at the school board meetings? And our school tax increase is going to be enormous! What am I missing here?

Lower Merion, Radnor, Ardmore — Comments from our Neighbors on Political Committee Members Holding Elected Office

January 13, 2010
Comments

When I was doing research for my posting concerning political committee persons holding elected government positions, I went to another community blog, Save Ardmore Coalition for help. I posted a question and then many people provided thoughtful insight from their various communities. I just checked and there now have had 22 comments on my initial posting. I thought that Community Matters readers might enjoy reading the comments. There is one comment from a Haverford Commissioner who is also a local committeeman However, his comment was not shared by many of the others. Here is the link in case you are interested:

http://www.saveardmorecoalition.org/node/4021

Tredyffrin Easttown School District Facing $9.2 Million Deficit . . . What's This Mean for Taxpayers?

January 13, 2010
15 Comments

In today’s Main Line Suburban Life newspaper, writer Blair Meadowcroft gives an update on Tredyffrin Easttown School District’s severe economic situation. There have been a number of postings and ongoing comments on this blog about the school district budget, but I think we need to bring the commentary back to the front page.

I know that the TESD budget is not a simple problem nor is there a simple fix but I want to pose a question to some of you who regularly comment on school district matters. If you could only offer one suggestion as to how to make a major impact on the budget, what would it be? I know that there is not much chance of re-opening the union contracts for the teachers but if that were possible would that be your solution? Would cost-cutting measures include teacher/staff layoffs? Would you suggest cuts in specific programs (if so, where — foreign language, sports, theater?) Decrease costs with increase in class size? Additional or increase in student activities fees (sports, after-school programs, parking charges) OK, it’s a perfect world and anything is possible (including re-negotiating of teacher contracts). What is your suggestion to the $9.2 million deficit in the TESD budget?

As we have all agreed, there seems far greater resident participation in the township government process than we have noticed with the school district — so I’m suggesting that we get TESD back on the front page of Community Matters. Some of our regulars — Ray, Andrea, Mike of Berwyn, Kate, Sarah . . . I invite your personal suggestions, help the community understand what this deficit means in real dollars to the taxpayers.

Taxing times are ahead for T/E board

By Blair Meadowcroft

The Tredyffrin/Easttown School District is facing a potential $9.2-million deficit for the 2010-2011 school year.

The shortfall comes from the fact that the proposed budget for the upcoming academic year, effective July 1, has expected revenues of $101.9 million and the projected expenditures are $9.2 million more at $111.5 million. According to district business manager Art McDonnell the $5-million increase in employee fringe benefits was the major factor increasing the deficit but there were others.

“The loss of revenue, the loss of transfer taxes due to the loss of sales, commercial mostly, the loss of interest income,” he said. “That’s been ongoing; we’re experiencing that now. And the increase in benefits costs comes from health-insurance coverage, and some from retirement and salaries.”

Increases in health care are to be expected, explained McDonnell, but on average the rates have increased 10 to 15 percent in the past, and this year the increase to the premium rate was 28 percent from Blue Cross.

“We did not expect that much of an increase,” said McDonnell. “This was the first time in a couple of years that the increase was way above what we were planning on. We were also expecting an increase to the retirement rate but not to the extent that it went up.”

The preliminary budget will be discussed again and voted on by the school board Jan. 25. The board however will not be voting on a final tax rate. According to McDonnell, by law the tax rate needs to be set by June 30 and will be voted on in June when the final budget is passed.

But at the Jan. 25 meeting, the board will vote to take one of three actions on the tax rate, according to McDonnell.“Pass a resolution to certify that the 2010-2011 tax rate will be at or below the Act 1 index of 2.9 percent; apply for exceptions to the Act 1 index, which will allow the district to raise taxes above the index without voter referendum; or authorize the administration to begin the process of seeking a voter referendum in May to increase taxes above the 2.9-percent state index,” said McDonnell.

If the board votes to tax higher than the limit set by the Act 1 index, there is the potential for $3 million more in revenue. That would come from an additional 3.73 percent.

However, in an effort to try to not raise taxes, Kevin Mahoney, chair of the finance committee, has asked the administration to come up with different ideas for reducing costs or increasing revenue, and any proposed strategies will be discussed at the Feb. 8 finance-committee meeting as well as at upcoming education-committee meetings.

So far a potential reduction of $2.35 million in expenses has been identified but nothing has been voted on or put into the budget yet.“We have some recommended strategies for the committee to look over and we are going to put together a presentation to show at the Feb. 8 meeting,” said McDonnell. “Hopefully we’ll find a way to combat the $9.2-million deficit.”

Whether or not the board decides to increase taxes, the potential for a deficit of some kind exists for the 2010-2011 academic year. The preliminary budget will again be discussed Jan. 25 at 7:30 p.m. at the school-board meeting and Feb. 8 at 7:30 p.m. at the finance-committee meeting. The June school-board meeting to vote on the budget is scheduled for June 14. All meetings are to be held at the Tredyffrin/Easttown Administration Offices at 940 W. Valley Road, Suite 1700, in Wayne.

“Public input will absolutely be considered and is encouraged,” said McDonnell. “We always have public-comment times at various points during and at the end of the meetings.”

Tredyffrin's Board of Supervisors – Some are Political Party Committee Members – is this OK? Radnor Township Says No for their Commissioners

January 12, 2010
6 Comments

Tredyffrin Township is governed by Home Rule Charter, and you can find a copy on the township website, www.tredyffrin.org. With a new year, and 3 new supervisors on Tredyffrin’s Board of Supervisors, I was curious about something. When someone is a committee person for a political party and is elected to serve their community, I wondered how this subject was handled under Home Rule Charter (or was it even addressed). From my vantage point, supervisors are elected to serve all the residents, and by remaining a committee person for a particular party, I would think that there is an appearance that a political committee person would ‘lean’ in the direction of their party. Of the 7 members of Tredyffrin’s Board of Supervisors, we now have 3 supervisors who are also Tredyffrin Township GOP committee members (Kampf, Kichline, Richter). I think that Supervisor Kampf is also a PA State GOP committee member – but I’m not 100%.

I checked Tredyffrin Township’s Home Rule Charter and this subject is not addressed. So I looked to our neighbor, Radnor Township who also uses Home Rule Charter for their local government. I guess the residents of Radnor Township share my concern with political party committee people serving in elected positions, as they are very clear in their Home Rule Charter. Radnor Commissioners are prohibited from holding an elected or appointed political office. The information below is cut and pasted directly from Radnor’s Home Rule Charter. Reviewing Radnor’s regulations on elected officials holding political party office, I was also interested in their ‘Conflict of Interest’ section (also included below). Reading this, I am wondering if Radnor Township’s Commissioners would have been permitted (under their ‘Home Rule Charter’) to solicit to businesses on behalf of Radnor Fire Company? Interesting question, don’t you think?

From Radnor Township’s Home Rule Charter

§ 21.9-904. Prohibitions.

A. The activities which follow shall be prohibited in the operation of the Township government.

1. Discrimination. No person shall, in his employment by the Township in any capacity, appointment to any Board, Commission, or Authority, or removal therefrom, be favored or discriminated against because of age, race, national origin, sex, handicap, or political or religious opinions or affiliations in violation of applicable Federal or State laws. No person shall be accorded favored treatment in employment or appointment because of family relationship.

2. Improper Gifts. No person who seeks appointment on any Township Board, Commission, or Authority, or employment by the Township in any capacity shall, directly or indirectly, give or pay any money, service, or other consideration to any person in connection with such appointment or employment. In addition, no elected or appointed Township official or employee shall receive any money, service or other consideration in connection with such appointment or employment.

3. Political Party Office. No Township official elected under this Charter, no appointed official, and no full-time Township employee shall hold any elected or appointed political party office.

4. Improper Political Influence. No elected or appointed Township official and no employee of the Township shall request any Township employee to make a political contribution or engage in political activity.

5. Other Government Service. No Township official elected or appointed to an elective office under this Charter and no full-time Township employee shall hold any other Township employment or any other elective or appointive Township position. No Township official elected or appointed to an elective office under this Charter and no full-time Township employee shall hold any full-time employment, or any other elective position, with Delaware County or the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. This provision shall not apply to employees of School Districts or of other educational institutions.

B. Violation of any provision of this Section shall constitute grounds for forfeiture of office, termination of appointment, or dismissal.

§ 21.9-905. Conflict of Interest.

A. No elected or appointed official of the Township and no Township employee, shall engage in any activity which follows.

l. Take any action as a result of information acquired as a Township official from which action the Township official or employee or any other person or entity in whose welfare the official is interested, shall realize a gain or advantage. Such action shall not, however, be construed to be prohibited if the gain or advantage were realized generally by a group or class of citizens as the purposeful result of such action.

2. Solicit or accept, directly or indirectly, any gift, favor, service commission, or other consideration that might reasonably tend to influence that official or employee in the discharge of the duties of office.

3. Seek to influence, directly or indirectly, the awarding of any contract where such Township official or employee, or other person or entity in whose welfare the official or employee is interested would benefit directly or indirectly, financially or otherwise, from said contract.

B. Disqualification from Action. Any elected or appointed official and any employee of the Township, having a direct or indirect financial interest with any person or business entity proposing to contract with the Township for the purchase or sale of land, materials, supplies, or services of any kind, or seeking formal action of the Board or any petition application, request, or appeal, whether that interest be as an employee, a party, a partner, or a stockholder, shall disclose fully said interest and except where stock holdings in a public corporation shall be minimal, shall not participate in the discussion or formal action relating thereto. Violation of the provisions of this Section shall render the contract of such actions voidable by the Township.

PA Gives Final Nod to High School Exam Requirements

January 12, 2010
Comments

Pennsylvania has given its final nod to high school graduation exam requirements. A couple of weeks ago Attorney General Tom Corbett signed off on the paperwork to create Keystone Exams. I knew that this subject had been bantered about over the last couple of years with much back-and-forth over the merits of graduation test requirements for all high school students – didn’t know that it had received final approval. Keystone Exams had received the support of the Senate education committee, the state Board of Education and the Department of Education and the Pennsylvania School Boards Association and was just waiting on final approval from the Attorney General. The Keystone Exam plan will be a series of 10 end-of-course exams in a variety of subjects. I guess the thought is to create an insurance policy for the school districts and a way to gauge all the students. The Keystone Exams could replace the 11th grade School Assessment test, and would count for at least 1/3 of a student’s final grade in that particular subject. With Corbett’s signature, the only remaining hurdle is getting the new regulation published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin. The tests would be introduced for the class of 2015. Some of the exams will be available for district review in the 2010-11 school year.

Looking at the cost of the Keystone Exams which is estimated at to be $160 million overall, spread over seven years, how does this affect our local school district budget Pennsylvania is grappling with budgets, how does this hefty price tag effect local budgeting requirements? Or does it? It would seem that the Keystone Exam is a done deal, so we live with the spending of the money; I’m just wondering how we pay for it. I have some doubts on the overall effectiveness of this exam; I would like further validation that speaks to that topic. But regardless of my thoughts on the effectiveness of the exam, this new legislature appears to now be in place.

The Power of a Name . . . Curt Shroder Closes Campaign

January 12, 2010
Comments

The power of a name. Just days after announcing that he will run for reelection in the 6th District, Republican US Rep Jim Gerlach’s news has State Rep Curt Shroder ending his congressional campaign. Considered a frontrunner and favorite by some, Shroder is said to be bitterly disappointed about quitting the race. With Gerlach’s sudden and unexpected news, Shroder did not think that he had the ability to raise the kind of money that would be required to compete against an incumbent. Shroder had been campaigning for 6 months and was making steady progress both in support by Chester County GOP committee members and his fundraising had been going well.

Howard Cohen, former state revenue treasurer and Lower Merion Commissioner Scott Zelov both have already closed down their campaigns to defer to Gerlach. Next in line from a support standpoint in the 6th District race, Steve Welch, a local biotech entrepreneur is said to be on the fence about whether to quite the race.

Watching one campaign after another fold in the 6th District race, certainly gives pause to the power of a name . . . Jim Gerlach. (At least from the Republican side).

Medical Marijuana Bill Approved by N.J. Assembly

January 11, 2010
3 Comments

Just in . . . the Associated Press is reporting the following,

The New Jersey Assembly has approved a bill allowing chronically ill patients access to medical marijuana. The compromise bill now heads to the Senate, which had approved a less restrictive version.

Gov. Jon Corzine supports the legislation and could sign it before leaving office next week. New Jersey would become he 14th state to allow medicinal marijuana use. The bill would allow patients with ailments like cancer, AIDS and multiple sclerosis to buy up to 2 ounces of marijuana a month at state-monitored dispensaries.

Home growing would remain illegal, as would driving while high. Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, a bill co-sponsor, says New Jersey’s Compassionate Use Marijuana Act would be the nation’s strictest such law.

I Just Can't Help Myself on this News Flash . . . Sarah Palin Joins Fox News!

January 11, 2010
4 Comments

I know, I know this is a bit of a stretch for Community Matters but I just can’t help myself.

Sarah Palin has just signed on as a Fox News reporter! Palin has inked a multi-year deal with Fox news and will offer political commentary and analysis on the cable channel, as well as on Fox’s website, radio network and business cable channel. She also will host occasional episodes of Fox News’ “Real American Stories,” a series debuting this year that the network said will feature true inspirational stories about Americans who have overcome adversity. No mention made of ex-governor Palin’s salary for her new career move.

“Governor Palin has captivated everyone on both sides of the political spectrum and we are excited to add her dynamic voice to the FOX News lineup,” Bill Shine, executive vice president of programming, said in a statement.

It's Official. . . Berwyn Resident Receives 4 Years for Illicit Business Deals with Iran

January 11, 2010
Comments

Following up on this morning’s posting, Berwyn resident Ali Amirnazmi, a dual US and Iranian citizen who ran TranTech Consultants, an Exton business specializing in software, received a 4-year sentence today for his illicit business deals with Iran.

Amirnazmi, a chemical engineer was convicted last year on charges that included violations of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act – which authorized sanctions against Iran, making false statements to government officials, and bank fraud.

The judge said she weighed many factor before delivering the sentence, including the need to deter Amirnazmi and others from committing similar crimes. She also ordered five years of supervised release for Amirnazmi after the prison term. He already has served about 18 months. Assistant U.S. Attorney Stephen A. Miller described Amirnazmi, who was prone to courtroom outbursts, “as a narcissistic, unrepentant liar committed to boosting Iran’s chemical prowess”.

Guess we won’t be seeing Amirnazmi walking around Berwyn anytime soon.

Not in My Back-Yard . . . Maybe So

January 11, 2010
Comments

Like many people, when I’m reading the paper, I just skim the headlines and may not always connect with the articles. For instance, here was a headline from today’s Philadelphia Inquirer – ‘Chesco Man with Iran Dealings to be Sentenced’. I see those headlines and think Chester County . . . hmm; the man is probably from West Chester. I am not sure why I would think ‘Chesco Man’ means Man from West Chester, except that West Chester is the county seat . . . a university town . . . has a diverse population. West Chester is certainly not South Philly but there is a sense of urban living and I guess the closest area that someone could live his or her life with a sense of anonymity. And don’t we watch the news and need to believe ‘bad’ news happens somewhere else and that ‘bad’ news doesn’t happen to people that we know. That kind of news cannot possibly be about someone we know and certainly cannot happen in our backyard.

So here you go, the ‘Chesco Man with Iran Dealings to be Sentenced’ is from our own backyard . . . Berwyn . . . and Ali Amirnazmi could have been our next-door neighbor. Amirnazmi is a dual US and Iranian citizen who ran TranTech Consultants, an Exton business specializing in software for chemical companies. The 65-year old Berwyn chemical engineer will be sentenced today for engaging in illicit business deals, on three counts of violating the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which authorized sanctions against Iran. A brilliant man, Amirnazmi’s defense attorney Elizabeth Ainslie will argue that her client was a productive, law-abiding citizen for many years. He was a graduate of Tehran and Stanford Universities and resided in Berwyn for 28 years.

According to US attorney Stephen Miller, Amirnazmi has engaged in business transactions with Iranian companies for over a decade, some of which are run by the Iranian government. Miller argues that the sentencing-guideline range of 97 to 121 months is appropriate, particularly because some of the chemicals Amirnazmi planned to provide to Iran are used to make rocket propellants.

So what does this say . . . ? Our world is indeed smaller than we think it is (or maybe just smaller than we want to believe it is).

Are we going to look at our next-door neighbor differently today? Probably not.

I just found this article something interesting to talk about on this cold, January morning in Tredyffrin Township. Community matters, any thoughts?

Community Matters © 2025 Frontier Theme