Pattye Benson

Community Matters

YouTube Moments from Tredyffrin’s BOS Meeting of 4/19

I have received many emails and calls regarding Monday night’s Board of Supervisors meeting. Like many of you, I too am dismayed by the attitude and behavior of some of our elected officials. Contrary to Mr. Lamina’s remarks on Monday night, I believe that when you are elected to serve a community, . . . you are elected to serve all the people, not just those that are of your own party affiliation. Whether you are a Republican, a Democrat, an Independent or a member of the party of ‘purple’ — your job as an elected official is to serve all of us. It is unfortunate that does not seem to be the case with some of those currently elected to serve this township. As I stated on Monday night and here on Community Matters, I sent 2 emails to the Board of Supervisors last week inquiring about an official update on the fire company funding and received no response. Had there been the courtesy of a response to my questions by Chairman Lamina, it would not have been necessary to publically repeat the questions that I detailed in the email.

In review of the meeting on Monday night and Lamina’s claim of disappointment in me . . . I think, no Mr. Lamina, I am disappointed in you. At one point you reference being on the ‘bully pulpit’. On that we would agree. I know now what it is like to be at the hands of a bully. I was your target, as was Carol Clarke. As the chairman of the supervisors, does being a bully make you feel good, . . . are you are a better person for it, . . . is this your idea of leadership? Maybe disappointed is not the right word, maybe I should just say that I feel sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can not allow other people to have opinions, to offer solutions or ideas unless they are in agreement with you.

For those of you who did not see the Board of Supervisors meeting on Monday night, my husband Jeff kindly created video clips for YouTube.

BOS Meeting 4/19/10 Part I: Pattye Benson\’s Statement

BOS Meeting 4/19/10 Part II: Response to Pattye Benson\’s Statement from Lamina, Kampf, & Olson

BOS Meeting 4/20/10 Part III: Carol Clarke\’s remarks w/response from Bob Lamina

BOS Meeting 4/19/10 Party IV: Dariel Jamieson

As an amusing aside, I was just notified that Jeff’s YouTube video selections from Monday’s BOS meeting have now been picked up by Reality TV on Twitter — guess these local government moments will be shared throughout cyberspace. This is probably meaningless to those like Mr. Lamina who diminish the merits of ‘Benson’s Blog’ as he calls it. I say Community does Matter — here’s hoping that there’s enough of us in this community that agree.

Share or Like:


Add a Comment
  1. it seems to me that the simplest way to clear up this whole firefighter fundraiser fiasco is for the fire companies to return the money back to all the donors who gave to the supervisors holiday fund drive.

    1. if raising money that is given directly to the firefighters is a violation of the home charter rule, then obviously the home charter rule should be amended.

      1. lets say that a business owner who is paying attention to the budget process approaches the BOS and offers to donate the money to the firefighters to make their budget whole. what happens then? the firefighters cant accept the money because the supervisors know about it?
        what if i ran into a supervisor and we talked about the budget/firefighters. are they not allowed to suggest to me that i should make a donation to the firefighters if i want to? or if i do make a donation because of the conversation i had with the supervisor, he then has to resign from his seat because i donated money?
        how ridiculous it all seems.

        regardless, the witch hunt will continue.

        my favorite part of the videos is when dariel pretended that pattye was not associated with the democrats after running on the democrat ticket and being featured/endorsed on their website as a candidate! you are kidding, right?

      2. I think you need to look up the word “solicit” or “solicitation” in the dictionary. That is where your hypotheticals falter. A business owner who approaches the supervisors has not been solicited. Talking to the supervisors vs. being solicited by the supervisors, while it is a fine line, makes a difference.

        Once again, the issue is SOLICITING. I’m not sure how much more clear that can be.

      3. another hypothetical question… if eamon brazunas had won his election to the board, is he then prohibited from fund raising or encouraging anyone whatsoever to donate to the fire companies?
        perhaps then JD should consider stepping down from the board, as obviously his being a member of the paoli firefighters gives the appearance of a conflict of interest? is JD involved directly (or even indirectly) with the fund raising efforts? has he ever asked anyone (individuals or businesses) to donate to the fire companies?

      4. thanks john, you have convinced me that the HRC, while probably a righteous idea on paper, might do more harm than good in reality.
        does JD still have regular contact with the Paoli FD? Maybe someone should take a look at his phone records and do some investigating to see if he has ever been involved (even unofficially) with the firefighters since he was elected.
        obviously, the comcast donation is dirty, ‘pay to play’ money and should be returned immediately.

      5. Freddy,
        I’m still waiting for you to address my comments – you seem to completely disregard the distinction here. This is a matter of whether SOLICITATION has occurred. It has nothing to do with contact, phone calls, etc. It has to do with supervisors soliciting funds. You simply refuse to acknowledge the actual issue here.

      6. roger, solicitation has nothing to do with phone calls, contact etc?
        please provide me examples of what exactly solicitation is.
        what if JD was my neighbor and while i am getting the mail one day, he says to me ‘im trying to raise money for the firefighters, can you help out?’
        should he be forced to resign from the BOS? if that is the case, then i understand.

        bottom line, if you believe that the donations the BOS received for the firefighters were somehow coerced from the businesses, then the funds should be returned to the donors.

        a better fix might be to have all the money returned to the donors. then the funds can be recollected from those same businesses using a different donor form (one that does not have the TT logo on it). then all would be well, right?

      7. Making a phone call or talking with someone does not necessarily mean someone was solicited. The examples you gave had no indication of solicitation. You continue to try and throw others under the bus but refuse to acknowledge the bus staring you in the face.

        You ask a question like, “what if a business owner is paying attention to the budget process and then donates to the FD…” Clearly this is not a solicitation by a supervisor and you know that.

        You keep making reference to the “firefighters” returning the money. The money was NOT solicited by the firefighters. You should direct that question/issue to those who solicited the money.

      8. If Mr. Brazunas got elected I doubt he would act like an arrogant SOB like we are seeing now. Would this whole fire fiasco have been allowed to continue if he was sitting there? If anything people should ask why John D. didn’t make more noise about this.

        Getting back to the issue —-Someone defend the use of the solicitation form and how it does not violate the Home Rule Charter as many have already talked about on here. Unless I am missing something this clearly contradicts everything certain Board members stated at the last meeting.

      9. “Making a phone call or talking with someone does not necessarily mean someone was solicited.”

        please explain how anyone could possibly solicit the funds without making a phone call or talking with someone.

        the bus is not staring me in the face, not sure what you are trying to insinuate there.

        i guess i will try to explain my point about the need for the money to be returned (again). if the BOS members who raised funds for the fire companies are somehow guilty of violating the HRC and the money was raised via bullying on the part of the BOS (as people seem to insinuate here), then that would imply that the money was somehow extorted. the assumption is that the donors were somehow coerced into giving, right? why should they not get the money back then?
        if you are going to imply that the people/businesses who gave were left no choice, that the only reason they gave is because a supervisor demanded it in return for favors to the business from the township, then it seems dishonest for the fire companies to keep the money.

      10. Freddy,

        We are all tired on your combative comments – whether it is here on this site or at the school social last week. Get a life!

  2. I watched the video clips. Lamina, how did you ever get elected? And you’re chairman of the board – guess you used your bully tactics against your fellow supervisors. They are the ones that elected you to chairman seat, right? And the nerve to say that you were disappointed in Pattye. You really are arrogant, aren’t you?

  3. I think what has happened is a disgrace. People should stop by the Cedar Hollow Inn, May 5, 2010 between 6-9 PM. and tell Warren what’s on their minds. That is when Warren is thanking us for the hard work. If only now, we could go back to Feb. and endorse Ken.

    Cannot wait for this primary season to be over.

    1. TTRC Member – I am glad you recognize the issue, and would be thrilled if you are truly a TTRC member and are willing to effect some change within the party. But i have to ask, you didn’t recognize until now that Warren lacked integrity? Next you will tell me that you didn’t realize Bob was arrogant, or that Paul rambles and doesn’t even ‘get’ the issues. Come on… Anyone who is surprised by any of this hasn’t been paying attention to these three at all.

      Please effect some change. The TTRC has let us down repeatedly for many years. Most recently with the WK ‘recommended for 157’, not supporting Judy, endorsing EJ Richter, and that garbage Donahue mailer against Brazunas?

      1. At some point, the insanity has to stop. The overriding issues have centered on loyalty to Tredyffrin’s “favorite son”. The issues have been brewing for some time. I for one will not be working for Warren on primary day. The last straw was probably the last meeting where CT pretty much put out the mandate to trash Ken’s literature. The system is not supposed to work that way.

        Unfortunately, if you speak out, there are those in the TTRC that will target you unmercifully. I think Petersen is right in his comments about the importance of a Warren Kampf loss. It is clear to me that if Kampf loses, it presents an opportunity for meaningful change. As a group, it is now clear to me that we are simply being used to further Warren’s political goals. Last night really hit home with me. What’s worse is Bob. He’s not a committee member. And yet, he has the impact of a committee member. How much influence? I know for a fact that Bob Lamina has been on phone conversations with Warren Kampf and Jason Ercole. If you think things are bad with the government, things are worse with the committee. Absolutely nothing is getting done because everything is being directed to Kampf.

        I guess the only other thing i can say is to all of the registered R’s, please come out and vote for Ken Buckwalter. If you are in W2, please also vote for John DiBuonaventuro for the local committee and Joe Tarantino for State Committee.

        Here’s hoping for change.

      2. I just realized that it may not be apparent that I am in fact, a TTRC member. Just to prove the fact and to show how paranoid C.T. Alexander is, consider the last part of an email that was sent on Saturday, April 17, 2010 11:08 AM:


        P.S. Please keep in mind that we have documented that the work of mole is back; therefore, I ask that you keep internecine or ‘ family matters’ from appearing in our e-mails.


        I actually had to look up the word internecine. It means among other things, conflict within a group. It’s a good word to describe us now because there is conflict within the group. I applaud the one committee member who has gone public, withdrawing support for Warren. I can only hope that more go public. I’m not ready yet given the repercussions I am sure will follow.

        The email was in response to the feeling of some that we can simply ignore a recommended candidate’s literature for our lit drops. Fortunately, the correct result will occur and Ken’s literature (hopefully) will find its way to Tredyffrin GOP homes.

        I can also tell you that there are several other members of the TTRC, who happen to be pro-Warren Kampf, comment up here regularly. We have one member who is assigned to actively monitor this site. We also had somebody monitor Petersen’s blog as well.

        For all the problems we face and need to solve, I cannot believe just how off track we have become. I cannot say anything more than that.

        1. ‘I can also tell you that there are several other members of the TTRC, who happen to be pro-Warren Kampf, comment up here regularly. We have one member who is assigned to actively monitor this site. We also had somebody monitor Petersen’s blog as well.’

          I am shocked!

          ‘The email was in response to the feeling of some that we can simply ignore a recommended candidate’s literature for our lit drops. Fortunately, the correct result will occur and Ken’s literature (hopefully) will find its way to Tredyffrin GOP homes.’

          We should not let politics into this process!

  4. To Disgruntled TTRC Member:

    Hopefully there are more TTRC members who feel the same way about WK. But it may be too little, too late.

    As Malvern republican put it, you had your chance to support Judy & you didn’t.

    Instead of supporting WK @ the polls on 5/18 – have your voters vote for Ken (and take out WK).

  5. Tredyffrin is filled with Warren Kampf signs on properties in about every community. He’s a nice family man and people think they know him. Ken is not going to win unless he does some face to face, door to door campaigning. Warren is “one of ours” and that’s the general message he’s sending. We all know that so few people vote in primaries that it’s barely decisive — so getting out the vote that understands the complexities– not the tried and true “read the literature ” folks who do what the TTRC tells them — will be critical.

    1. I’m the fellow on the TTRC who is very publicly and very vocally supporting Ken Buckwalter. For those who would like to meet Ken and hear his views, please e-mail me at and I’ll be sure that’s arranged. He’s already been door-to-door through West-5 (my precinct), but if we’ve missed you please let me know. It’s a big precinct, a bigger township, and it’s hard to meet everybody, but Ken has really enjoyed the very positive feedback he’s had from Tredyffrin voters throughout the township and he’s looking forward to meeting more of you folks. Thanks very much.

  6. An ‘upset’ neighbor of mine sent me the link to this blog and to these postings about the 4/20 supervisor’s meeting.

    I watched the meeting on television ‘live’ and feel that the comments on this blog are way off base. I saw no disrespect by any of the supervisor’s of any of the residents in their comments. Some of the postings here would lead you to believe otherwise but I challenge each of you to watch the meeting.

    While this blog is attempting to promote dialogue about ‘community matters’ in tredyffrin, it appears that it is just another campaign by the democrats (and perhaps other republican primary candidates) against Warren Kampf.

    1. You must have watched a different meeting than I did. When a sitting supervisor has to resort to a person’s political affiliation to attempt to discredit comments, that supervisor clearly cannot answer the questions or have an active dialogue on the issue. Why? Because they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar….again….

      1. Sometimes political affiliation is a valid point. Should only the members of the board be apolitical?

        I have noticed Republicans have been critical of Republicans, as it should be. I can’t remember recently when I heard a Democrat speak ill, at least publicaly of another Democrat.

        This is especially true on the national scene.

        What is wrong with candidates and their proxies monitoring this board? I would think that a compliment to this board.

  7. i am sure the ‘disgruntled ttrc member’ or ‘malvern republican’ or ‘lifelong repub’ monikers are probably those of ttdems executive committee members… give me a break!

    my guess is that this hit-piece blog will not affect the inevitability of kampf’s primary win, despite the best efforts of the dems and company (petersen, benson, jd, and those carrying the water for buckwalter).

    the bottom line is that if the ttgop turns out numbers and they vote for their favorite son kampf, he will win the primary. phoenixville just does not have the numbers to upset kampf and buckwalter has not made any inroads. will petersen be at the polls with a buckwalter table?

    the average gop voter is not a dimwit or drone as some on this blog would want you to believe and when we turn out and vote the party line for kampf, he will win he primary.

    bottom line – kampf held the line on taxes. if you saw the budgets meetings, that is what the majority of citizens wanted and that is what they will vote on. if kampf did it for political reasons, who cares – he is listening to the will of the majority of tredyffrinites.

    i understand the fire company funding is an issue to some people, but how many people actually signed the well publicized petition – 500? out of the 30,000 or so residents (not sure if all voting age), that is a minority. i have no doubt most residents see the cut as an across the board cut of the entire budget and is reasonable. the silent majority would not say that because you would get lambasted. being for fire company finding is like being ‘for motherhood and against sin’.

    1. Nope, I not a TTDEM member of any sort. I am a registered and voting Tredyffrin republican for the last 20 years.

      Unfortunately many in TTRC probably dismiss this bipartisan commentary and frustration as easily as you. Anyone who believes that TTRC and LOK actions have not seriously eroded the support of the local republican base is clearly not looking at the voting returns in the local races at all.

      In the last three or four TTBOS election cycles the democrat candidates have repeatedly captured significant republican votes – even in 2007 vs. the two republican incumbents Bob and Warren… Yes, two democrat first timers were able to significantly garner republican votes away from the two republican incumbents. What does that tell you??

      Without the hardline straight party tickets, many of these TTBOS races would have gone to the Democrat candidates.

      The TTRC needs to change quickly and start endorsing only qualified, thoughtful, honest candidates who are willing to listen to the needs and desires of the taxpayers, all of them.

    2. As of the 2009 Election there were 21999 registered voters in Tredyffrin Township. Of the 21,999 voters, only 6116 cast a vote in the election. Which equates to 27.8% of actual registered voters. It would be safe to assume the 500+ signers of the petition would be “likely voters” instead of just an insignificant number like you would suggest.

      500+ from 6116 rather than from 21,999. Now, 500+ or so is still almost 10% of “likely voters” A big mathematical difference. You need less signatures to get on the ballot for supervisor or for state rep.

      (election numbers pulled from this morning)

      CT Alexander himself publicly claimed he signed this very petition when he actually didn’t. A public lie. Why would he claim he signed it when the petition is as insignificant as you suggest?

      Why did recently elected supervisors Donohue and Kichline sign this insignificant petition?

      Petition aside, If the fire & ems funding isn’t important to Tredyffrin Township why would they spend nearly $70,000 on a needs study only to brush the report under the rug and pretend it doesn’t exist?

    3. How many of the 30,000 residents responded to the BAWG survey?

      Once again, we hear of a vast left-wing conspiracy to distract from the issue at hand…SOLICITING.

  8. “Disgruntled TTRC” — please provide more proof than “I know for a fact” when you make charges.

    TT Dem Moderate — “we should take politics out of the process” Seriously? Take politics out of a political party primary? It IS a political process…

  9. I watched the videos of the meeting and I am a conservative Republican that is leaning to Libertarian philosophies. I do not view this site to be a political haven for left wing liberals.
    I do however feel that we need to rid government of the “good old boy” mentality and stop electing favorite sons to any level of government. Rid our legislative bodies of all attorneys – and replace them with “representatives” of the people.
    I found the attitude of Lamina to be condescending and repulsive. Kampf is yet another “good old boy” and feels he is also above the intelligence level of his constituents and is free to do what ever he cares to — without any fear of repercussions.
    It seems that these 3 guys had a guilty conscious after getting the political bump from reducing spending and felt a need to help the Fire folks. If the 3 of them had gone to the local Acme markets and held a tin can asking for donations that may have been ok. The use of the logo and the bold arrogant PR spot of presenting a card board check smells like a pig.
    And now they are in a box.. justify their actions.

  10. Question:
    The solicitation form didn’t have the money made out to the township, just the fire companies right? that seems pretty clear to me the twp wasn’t doing it or they would have collected the money and then written one big check.

    Yes, the money came back to the twp bldg — but that was to keep track of it is my guess. that was probably a good idea as Pattye and everyone here kept pressing the supervisors to see if they “made their goal.” without that tracking system, Pattye, et al would be beating them up for that now instead of this.

    my biggest question remains: why don’t the fire companies do this themselves? why don’t they hire a professional fundraiser instead of trying to do it themselves?

    they have a great product to sell — why don’t they sell it and get some people who know how to do it to help them?

    if they did that every year, then maybe they would get more than expected (on top of any budget money).

    everyone here says helping the fire company is important, but other than signing a petition and demanding more from taxpayers, how much did you collect, give, etc? the supervisors went out and did it when others only talked or whined

    1. I am troubled by the efforts here to distinguish between the Pitcairn and the Fire Funds. It’s a distinction with very little difference — except that the Pitcairn decision was about hypotheticals and appearances — denying the opportunity for a non-profit to benefit from a generous party who wanted to be helpful in the township. The appearance there of steppiing up to curry favor apparently was enough to disqualify the donation.
      Now we have the Tredyffrin supervisors soliciting donations from township businesses, several of whom do business with the township. There is no coercion there — but there certainly is a “pay to play” undertone — some law firms who do business, some cable company that is about to negotiate an agreement. Certainly they were free to turn down the request — in the same way the township would have been free to let Pitcairn do this third party work and disregarded that as they made their decision.
      Here’s the difference: did the companies that were solicitied feel obliged to donate? We all know that when Paul Olsen did his library fundraising, he felt free to point out the people who did not contribute when he ran his campaign. Freddy — it’s different if you talk to your neighbor because there is no expectation of a quid pro quo — no way to think your donation would be influencing him in a political/BOS decision.
      Donating to the Supervisor Solicitation was a polite decision — but the refusal to accept the parallels to the Pitcairn issue is not only naive — it’s obfuscation.

      We can all go along to get along, but at some point, we have to come to terms with the fact that this is a very corrupt world — our economy wouldn’t be in the tank if the folks on Wall Street and countless governments around the world weren’t so motivated by personal greed. Things like the HRC are in place to limit the exposure to temptation or corruption — the BOS had a business manager steal from them after all. Just because the intent was honorable does not mean the result is okay. The funds collected absolutely should be returned to the donors, who on their own — without accountability to the BOS solicitation — can choose to donate or not. The FD specifically said they do not list donors — which means they do not want a public burden on people to donate. After all — people donate to many charities to be on the “gold” list, to go to the Patron’s party, to have their name on a wall. There’s nothing wrong with that impulse either. But to be asked for money — to be solicited — by people who have the power to affect your business — that is the ethics violation. I don’t believe it was intentional — anymore than the casual observer would have to assume Pitcairn was only offering his help to advance his own cause — but IF the Pitcairn was so clear cut, then this is a no-brainer. How Pitcairn found out about the need for his services is a missing piece here — “pay to play” is a reality. If you want to do business, you join the Chamber of Commerce, you join the Paoli Business associations….all those things are to promote your business. It’s the fact, however, than when an elected official is associated with the request for the money — it’s all bad….regardless of the outcome.

      Is this really that complicated????

      1. Thank you Sarah for understanding ‘why’ I used Pitcairn as an example, and thank you for understanding ‘why’ I wanted supervisors Kampf, Lamina and Olson to explain the difference in the perception of pay-to-play between Pitcairn’s offer and their solicitation to businesses.

        So that you further can understand, I always believed (and explained in an email to the BOS in May 2008) that Tony Noce’s offer to help the Trust was just that . . . a kind, generous offer. He and I met at a Trust fundraiser, he was interested in the Jones Log Barn rebuilding project, understood that if the timeline for his office building construction and the barn’s reconstruction could be worked out that Pitcairn could help. Mr. Noce supported the Trust’s mission of historic preservation and understood what an offer of help could mean to this small nonprofit organization — and sure, I accepted that he probably liked the idea of some community goodwill coming his way. But Mr. Noce’s feeling was if he had the heavy duty grading equipment out for his office building and could tack on a extra days of work, less than 1/2 mi. away — why not help. I contended at the time (and still maintain) that this was a decent human being with no hidden agenda . . . just an offer of help.

        What was the most disturbing for the members of the Trust Board was that it was 6 weeks after the offer that the township and the BOS decided that the Trust would not be able to accept the offer. Trust me, by that point — we were all so excited about the prospect of some real help, that the ‘pulling of the carpet’ was devasting news.

        1. Is the Trust chartered by the township? I guess I do not understand WHY the township had anything to do with this decision ? Certainly you would need permits to have the work done, but it seems to me that how you went about funding the work is not relevant to local government. Perhaps it’s the fact that some of the BOS are not in favor of spending a dime on the Log Barn….didn’t they lend the trust money at some point to pay to take it down originally. This is the same BOS that (I’m not sure of the details) required Conestoga to completely rehab the log cabin (or whatever it is) on the taxpayer’s dime to be able to renovate the high school. I think this is all just another quiet example of how some folks — particularly Olson – control the township by controlling the agenda. They aren’t really for low taxes — they just don’t want the township to be the people who levy the taxes…
          I would love to understand just WHY the township was part of any decision on the Trust’s behalf??? WIth Judy on both boards, was there concern? She could have resigned your board if it meant $50K to the trust. All sounds like political manuvering to me….with OLK at the helm.

          1. Sarah, The Jones Log Barn was originally going in to be rebuilt in Wilson Farm Park; because it was township property is the reason that the BOS and township was involved. The barn will now be rebuilt at DuPortail, next to the Federal Barn. In the 1980’s a sister barn of the Federal Barn burned to the ground so the Jones Log Barn will be rebuilt on the original stone foundation of that barn. It’s only appropriate that the Jones Log Barn, which came from British General Howe’s headquarters will be rebuilt at French General DuPortail’s headquarters. Feels right — going from one Revolutionary War general’s location to another Rev. War general’s location. Neil McAloon (who owned General Howe’s headquarters and was a Trust board member) passed away a couple of years ago. Prior to his passing, the Trust Board had made the decision to rebuild the barn at General DuPortail’s location. Neil was thrilled with the idea that his barn would be in such a perfect location, so I’m glad that is where it will be built.

            As for the money — you do have a good memory. You are correct; the township loaned the Trust the money to take the barn down (it had fallen in to disrepair on private property and was slated for demolition) and have the logs numbered and catalouged and moved in to storage at Valley Forge Park. However, the Trust repaid completely all loan money back to the township so the barn has not cost the taxpayers any money. In addition to serving as president of the Trust, I am also on the DuPortail House board and both of these boards are very supportive of the Jones Log Barn project. As an FYI, we are starting the foundation work in the next few weeks at DuPortail House for Phase I of the reconstruction project of the Jones Log Barn.

            So to answer your question, the BOS had control over the Jones Log Barn when it was going to be rebuilt on township property even though it was not costing the taxpayers money – to be funded, owned and maintained by the Tredyffrin Historic Preservation Trust. So between it going on township property and Judy on both boards, that was the control of the situation. If I knew what I know now, perhaps the outcome could have been different but I doubt it. The Trust Board needs BOS support for historic preservation and the Pitcairn decision was a 6-1 vote not to permit the Trust to receive the donation; Judy our lone supporter. Again, because the BOS controlled Wilson Farm Park, even if Judy was not on the Trust Board, we would not have received the $50K in-kind offer.

    2. From the West–
      Are you volunteering your services??? Those guys and girls are already volunteering their time running the business side of the firehouses, coordinating ambulance billing, managing the various administrative requirements set forth by the government, handling community education requests, meeting mandated training requirements, meeting with the various governmental and emergency service agencies, just to name a few. Oh, and oh yeah, they are responding to fires, accidents, heart attacks, strokes, and various other emergencies. So when would you have them increase their funding efforts? And to hire someone would cost money to do. Time commited from members for oversight, handling of issues, etc. So where are they supposed to just magically get these funds when the BOS is cutting their miniscule funding as it is? From my nephew, I know that they are always looking for volunteers from the business community to help with the administrative functions. So are you going to walk the walk and help them out? Or just keep talking?

    3. “my biggest question remains: why don’t the fire companies do this themselves? why don’t they hire a professional fundraiser instead of trying to do it themselves?”

      It sounds like you could help. Why don’t you call the fire companies and offer your help? Different issue…get back on topic.

  11. To Fielder’s Choice — or should I address you as Mr. Alexander,

    I can assure you that Tredyffrin Democrats are not masquerading as Republicans on this blog. (Only someone like you would imagine that!) Your assignment to party members that they monitor and infiltrate local blogs for the purpose of damage control and propagandizing reflects your own paranoia and control issues ,not ours. A good diversion tactic though – accusing others of your own acts., assuming your motivations are theirs.

    Though no Democrats currently sit on the BOS, we are proud to identify ourselves as Democrats and will work hard to change that imbalance in 2011.

    However I don’t think you have to be a Dem to have taken offense at Bob Lamina’s calculated decision to attack the questioner instead of answering a valid question at Monday night’s meeting… and at his bungling efforts to demonize an entire group of Tredyffrin citizens – representing about 40% of this township, I might add.

    It IS all political for people like you, Warren, Bob and Paul. They knew Pattye’s question was coming because she had emailed them hoping for a response in writing.. They chose not to respond but instead plot a drama for Monday night – which involved discrediting and personally insulting the questioner and anyone who dared to step up in her defense, while not addressing the issue.

    …The issue being the consistent application of the Home Rule Charter regarding supervisors’ solicitation and receipt of contributions from businesses and individuals having business before the township. If pay-to-play was a worry with Pitcairn, how in the world was it not for fire funding solicitations – actions clearly motivated to get KLO off the hook for voting YES to fireworks and NO to fire funding.

    Political posturing, damage control, spin to sell the TTRC’s golden boy. Most people who are paying attention get it. For Pattye, the question had nothing to do with politics. She acted independently and as the president of a non-profit 18 months ago and asked the question in that capacity. on Monday night.

    An accurate take on her affiliation with the TTDEMS is this: an Independent all of her voting life, Pattye registered as a Dem in 2008 and was asked to run for supervisor as a Democrat. It was not an ideal fit from both perspectives, but Pattye knew she would have a very difficult time running as an Independent . And the TTDEMS recognized they could not find a more community-centered candidate than Pattye.

    We all know how things turned out. Pattye’s motivation in running for office had been to rise above partisan politics and give greater voice to the community. She decided to do that by means of a blog. Its success in the community and favorable feedback from area newspapers and other established blogs have been gratifying to those of us who have supported her from Day 1 – Democrats, Republicans and Independents..

    So in my view, your attempts to marginalize this forum and categorize it as a partisan tool can be seen for what they are – a rather desperate effort at damage control with no basis in truth.

    The wonderful thing about Community Matters is that regular followers have already reached their own conclusions. Pattye presents her take on local goings-on and then posts comments. It’s that simple and that transparent. There is no conspiracy and no party agenda.

    If you knew Pattye, you’d know that no one but Pattye sets her agenda..

  12. What does any of this banter back and forth about who supports who and what party line is involved?

    The bottom line here is nothing short of this:

    The Supervisors decided to cut money from the fire companies that they expected. The fire companies were not happy. At the same meeting, the supervisors voted to keep the fire works. The dollar value was about the same. Fire Company & Residents put pressure on the supervisors with a very compelling show of support and petition.

    Backed up to the wall, three supervisors took it uppon themselves to go out and directly solicit money to cover the difference. They did it without telling other supervisors or the fire companies.

    In a brave showing, Warren Kampf made a surprise public display of a check representing the dollar value of anticipated pledges to support this band-aid cause.

    The solicitations were done on paper that had supervisiors names, the township managers name, township logo and the township’s address on it.

    This is not how the fire companies run their fund drives. It is not an ordanary process and was done virtually publically, with public statements and all… by the supervisors… after the big check was presented.

    This was wrong for a multitude of reasons:
    1) Fairly clear break of the home rule charter.
    2) Placed the Fire Companies in a fairly itchy possition collecting money they did not solicit and were being told how to distribute agains their normal process.
    3) Some supervisors used this effort to try to boost a public image of the supervisors (at least one) at the sacrifice of others.
    4) Went against a very vocal, large outcry from their residents to utilize the fireworks money for their safety, not recreation.

    I am displeased to say the least that there are some who want to turn this issue into a party line issue. It is an ethics issue. It is a personal agenda issue. It is a priorities issue.

    1. “It is an ethics issue. It is a personal agenda issue. It is a priorities issue.”

      I couldn’t agree more. It’s obvious some people want to attempt to distract from the issue at hand. It’s a real shame when those same people don’t realize that they are not being represented to the fullest extent possible by certain Board members.

  13. Sorry, should have said:

    For those challenging if I would volunteer to help the fire companies with fundraising, I would love to but that’s not my forte. I said they should think about a professional. That’s not me.

    1. Fundraising isn’t the only way you can volunteer. But if you volunteered and helped with something else, perhaps that would free others up to be able to work on fundraising issues. There are all kinds of opportunities for people to help out. Other than critiscizing them on web blogs and saying they should do more, that is.

    2. Can’t speak for all of the fire companies, but some do use professional assistance to varying degrees. In fact, I am fairly sure some of the fire companies already raise more privately than they receive from Tredyffrin each year.

  14. It really bothers me that there are residents in the township who feel it is the Fire Departments job to Fund Raise (which btw, they do fund raise). Personally, & in my opinion I think it ludicrous that they are expected to fund raise at all. The Fire Departments provide ESSENTIAL services to the community! Why couldn’t L-K-O & the rest of the BOS have considered implementing a “Fee”, similar to the sewer fee? They still could have kept their promise of not raising taxes & funded the fire department. Instead for what can be perceived as “Political”, they grandstanded with a card board check – our township heroes.

    Hopefully as a result of all this brew-ha-ha… or should I say hooey? Township residents will no longer take for granted all that the Fire Department does, and on their own consider personally supporting the REAL HEROES!

  15. Bill L —

    Good point about other “administrative” things one could help with. When I replied “not my forte” it was to a suggestion that I could help fundraise.

    As to a comment about professionals costing money, a vast majority of them don’t cost anything to hire — they take a percentage of what they raise in payment.

    I never meant to imply that the fire fighters themselves don’t do a ton of work, but perhaps that is the reason to investigate professional fundraising help.

    To Disilllusioned —

    I wish they had all the money wanted to, along with every other worthy need in the township, but the reality is that taxpayers (including myself) won’t or can’t pay for everything. There are limits on everything, even the fire companies.

    1. There is a difference between “worthy” needs & “essential” needs… PD & FD in my opinion = ESSENTIAL.

      Yes, none of us has an un-limited budget. I’ve lived places where I paid very little in property taxes & you know what I got? Very little! I’ve learned to value the many great services that Tredyffrin township has to offer & realize that they cost money – I knew that when I bought a home here. I’ve also lived places where the property taxes are pretty steep – NY, MA & NH. NH maybe the “Live Free or Die” state, but if can afford to own property, then they figure you can afford to pay taxes on it.

      Lastly, any township resident who as had to call the PD or the FD knows how blessed we are to have such professional men & women watching our back. When your home is on fire or there is an intruder in your home, let me tell you experience just how essential their services are!!!

Leave a Reply

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

Community Matters © 2024 Frontier Theme