Pattye Benson

Community Matters

Tredyffrin Township's St. Davids Golf Club Decision Now on YouTube

To make sure that more people are able to see the January 25 Board of Supervisors meeting, my husband Jeff has uploaded the relevant part of the meeting to YouTube. Due to time restrictions on YouTube, the St. Davids Golf Club portion of the meeting is provided in 3 sections – Supervisor Kichline’s remarks, Supervisor DiBuonaventuro’s remarks, and the final board comments and vote of the supervisors.

We all make choices in life, some are better than others. This line in my article, ‘ . . . A moment of choice is a moment of trust and it is a testing point of character and competence . . .’ sums up how I feel about the recent St. Davids Golf Club decision of our Board of Supervisors.

I absolutely encourage everyone who reads this post, to forward it to your friends, neighbors and co-workers. Watch each of these video links . . . this is important for all residents of Tredyffrin Township. Our local government is based on policy and procedure. What happens when a few people are allowed to make the rules (or break the rules) as they see fit. You be the judge.

Share or Like:


Add a Comment
  1. I just watched the clips from the supervisors meeting. As a resident of this township for the last 30 years, I helped elect Paul Olson and I am outraged at his behavior. Shame on him for making the motion, and then what about Lamina, Kampf and Richter for going along with it. Isn’t Warren Kampf a lawyer — how can he have such blatant disregard for the law? Certainly wouldn’t want him defending me, he’d be too confused what the law really says. Pattye is right, this is not about sidewalks. I didn’t really get it until I watched the videos. Why is it that Lamina acts like Michelle Kichline doesn’t know what she’s talking about — she’s a lawyer and was on the Zoning Hearing Board. The people of Tredyffrin Township need to demand better government from Lamina, Olson, Kampf and Richter.

  2. Outraged Resident, love your comment. Now if everyone feels the same, we might be able to keep Warren from running for the 157th. He doesn’t have the integrity to run for higher office.

    1. I guess this will be one area of the township that WK won’t be able to pound pavement for his bid of the 157th.

  3. I understand that this is not about about sidewalks
    but I just want to point out that nobody in the Mt. Pleasant neighborhood along Upper Gulph Road was asked to participate in Mr. Olson’s “survey”.

    He also kept repeating how dangerous Upper Gulph is to walk on. I agree. Every time I see a kid from my neighorhood walking to or from the library along this road, I pull my car over to give them a ride. Kids should not be walking on this road. It isn’t safe.

    We also have more and more students from Cabrini College residing in my neighborhood who also walk along Upper Gulph. Just ask the group that received citations for underage drinking while walking on it a few months ago.

    Although I’ve only been attending Township meetings regularly for the past 7 months, this is not the first time I’ve witnessed a bad precendent set . It appears to happen all the time. Policies, Procedures, Rules, Ordinances – they either don’t exist or they’re selectively enforced.

    Also, thanks for posting these videos. I’m one of the few who do not subscribe to cable. And because this issue was NOT included on the agenda, I did not feel as though I had to attend this particular meeting. Now, I guess, I don’t have the option of not attending. I encourage people to actually physically attend the BOS Meetings. It’s much more difficult to ignore someone if they’re sitting right in front of you.

  4. Pattye,

    It might be a good idea if we could also post the Utube video of Bob O’Leary’s “debate” with the BOS from last year.

    1. Disappointed Republican,
      John Petersen had posted these 2 YouTube videos which are between Planning Commissioner Bob O’Leary and Supervisor Lamina. These videos from an earlier Board of Supervisors meeting provide additional background information on the St. Davids Golf Club issue. See John’s comments on this previous post for a link to those videos.

  5. Pattye,
    Here is a link to Mr. Lamina’s article defending the St. David’s action:

    I find two quotes from Mr. Lamina very interesting. First, he opined that:

    “Under our current rules, any supervisor is free to offer any motion he chooses at any time,” said Lamina. “It is not unusual at all for board members to offer unpublished motions during discussions at our meetings and I believe it’s reasonable and appropriate for our board to have this flexibility where needed in its proceedings. In my nearly 12 years of experience on the board, I can’t recall an instance where the township ever consulted with another municipality or the school district on when we schedule our meetings.”

    Is he really trying to argue that there is no limitation on the power of a supervisor? That’s what it seems like to me. Specifically, he is arguing that the power to make a motion trumps any legislative or judicial limit on that authority. Under this logic, a supervisor could make any motion under the moon, get three other votes, and have four people take a township hostage. Wait, that sounds familiar….

    Second, he makes the statement that

    “Since the board has delegated authority for land development to the Planning Commission, our vote on the escrow was the only vehicle available for the board to effect a change to plans in that area of our community and that the majority of the residents in that area clearly did not want.”

    So in one breathe, Mr. Lamina states that the board has delegated this authority to the Planning Commission and then states that the Board had to take action to return the escrow money. Which is it, Mr. Lamina, does the Board have this authority or the Planning Commission?

    This is a real problem – really this is a micro problem which Tredyffrin residents must understand exemplifies a huge problem facing our township today. The problem being unchecked power in the hands of four.

    The way I see it, Mr. Lamina just gave Mr. Peterson a gift to use on Monday.

    1. Thanks Roger. I am going to insert Lamina’s defense article in tomorrow morning’s post and I’m going to add you comments there also. (Your thoughtful, well-written comments need to on this blog twice!) Unchecked Power in the Hands of 4 — that comment says it all, doesn’t it – thanks!

  6. Thanks for these videos. They confirm for ME what I had speculated on elsewhere on this site. KOL dismisses Ms. Kichline at their peril. She had 20 or so questions regarding the process and the township solicitor sat silent? My guess is that Ms. Kichline will get her answers or there will be hell to pay.

    I am a dem, but I believe Ms. Kichline ran for her position to shape the future of this township and will not let her reputation be tainted. They kick sand in her face one too many times and they’ll end up on their heads out of the sandbox altogether. My money is on Ms. Kichline to get us out of this KOL swamp.

  7. Well said Doug. But we all need to stay vigilant — because Mrs. Kichline cannot accomplish anything if she is marginalized by the fearsome foursome. I still remain confused as to why EJ — who appeared continuously at events during the campaign with Michele — would so blindly ignore her efforts at taking more TIME on the St. Davids issue…That question was decided by four people — and regardless of how hard the other 3 work for progress — together or apart –the OLK and R call the shots if they operate as a block.
    By the way — I don’t like sarcasm much, but I did enjoy the picture on John Peterson’s current blog (it’s in the list on this site — TT Political Notebook) . That’s where the picture vs. words rings so true.

  8. I agree with Doug regarding Ms. Kichline. I believe JD made proper points also.

    What jumped out at me was that no one specifically asked the Solicitor to comment on the record. There was a fleeting attempt to get the Manager on the record against it. Why didn’t JD or MK force the issue with both of them?

    I would have also liked them to push harder to table the motion.

  9. To clarify, I think JD has always been a voice of reason, and Phil seemed to vote his concience. I applaud him for that. Now, these three need to get to work on E.J.

    I sit here and am disappointed by the time wasted due to ideology and favoritism when it would be better spent on actitvities such as recruiting new businesses to my township.

    This is my “generation’s” township now. Warren’s making decisions about my township based on what will get him elected to the next position, not even in my township. Bob seems almost overly uptight due to an ideology he has to follow. And Paul is at least one generation older than I am. He has no clue about what I’m going through right now, so how could he be representing me.

    Any of you out there with small children, facing up to two decades of future residency in my township, should really be worried about the future as these games continue. Now, I know it’s not MY township, but like I said, if you have small children, or just moved here, and/or plan to stay here awhile, you should be thinking this is MY township, and what the hell do they think they’re doing giving away my money when it wasn’t even requested.

    KOL didn’t make that move to help parents of small children, did they?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Community Matters © 2024 Frontier Theme