Pattye Benson

Community Matters

Tredyffrin Interim Supervisor Candidates . . . Bravacos, Brazunas, Heaberg, Mayock, Muir

Because of Warren Kampf’s resignation from the Board of Supervisors, there is a vacancy for an ‘interim supervisor’. The interim supervisor will serve on the Board of Supervisors until the Special Election in May.

At this week’s Board of Supervisors meeting the vacancy was formally announced and interested residents were asked to send their resumes to the township manager by Monday, January 10. Because the vacancy was anticipated, the interim supervisor position has been advertised on the township website since early December. Residents who have applied for the interim supervisor position is public information and I contacted the township manager for the list of candidate names.

After receiving the names, I sent an email to each candidate explaining that I would be writing an article and would be including the candidate names. As a means of keeping the selection process transparent and open, I offered to include a “summary of experience, brief bio or a personal statement” with the article if provided by the candidate.

The following individuals have submitted their resumes to the township manager for consideration as interim supervisor.

  • John Bravacos
  • Eamon Brazunas
  • Mike Heaberg
  • Kristen Mayock
  • Joe Muir

John Bravacos, Eamon Brazunas and Kristen Mayock responded to my email and supplied their resumes, bio, etc. and that information is available below. Information was not provided by Mike Heaberg or Joe Muir. However, I have attempted to find background information to include for these candidates.

John Bravacos

Email received from John Bravacos with his resume. (Click here for John Bravacos resume.)

Below is what I sent to Mimi for the vacancy.

Additionally, I have provided this to Board Members and other interested people. I would like to fill the vacancy only until the Special Election to:

1. Move the Rt. 252 Amtrak bridge forward;
2. Work with Willistown to create the joint municipal authority;
3. Start the discussion about the future of the Paoli Library and its lease which ends soon;
4. Help position the Board for the upcoming contract negotiations; and
5. Briefly enjoy the opportunity to serve the Township residents again.

I am not seeking election as there are excellent candidates for the Special Election and for the Primary that have the fresh perspective, enthusiasm and specific plans necessary to sustain them for the full term.

If you have any questions, I’d be happy to talk with you.

John G. Bravacos, Esq.


Attached is my resume. I am interested in filling the vacancy on the Board of Supervisors created by the resignation of Warren Kampf. Having served on the Board for eight years and lived in the Township for more than 40 years, I believe I can provide valuable service during the brief duration until the special election. As I am not interested in being a candidate in that special election, my time can be focused on the needs of the residents and not electioneering.

John G. Bravacos, Esq.

Eamon Brazunas

Click here for Eamon Brazunas cover letter to the township manager and resume.

Mike Heaberg

With more than 25 years in investment services, Mr. Heaberg co-founded Axiom Asset Management in 2003 and currently serves as the company’s managing director. His previous experience was with Prudential Securities and PaineWebber. Mr. Heaberg is a graduate of Vanderbilt University and is a member of the CFA Society of Philadelphia. An original board member of FLITE, Mr. Heaberg continues to serve on the organization’s board of directors as chair of the Finance & Investment Committee.

Kristen Mayock

Email received from Kristen Mayock with her resume. (Click here for Kristen Mayock’s bio and click here for her resume.)


Pursuant to your request, I have attached my bio and my resume.

I am committed to serving Tredyffrin Township because I believe it is the ideal place to live, work and raise my family. The surroundings are idyllic, rich in history, accessible, safe and affordable. Our Township services and schools are among the best in the region. By serving as a member of the Board of Supervisors, I hope to preserve and improve upon the unique quality of life that Tredyffrin offers to the individuals and families who live here.

Thank you for the opportunity to share my background, experience and commitment to our great Township with Community Matter.

Kristen Mayock

Joe Muir

Mr. Muir was a member of Tredyffrin Township’s 2009 Budget Advisory Working Group (BAWG). He has a Marketing and Finance degree from Susquehanna University and his career has been in sales and sales management in the healthcare industry and is currently employed by IMS Health.


Sometimes elected officials find it easier to embrace open government in theory than to facilitate citizen access. By keeping the candidate process in the public’s eye, I hope the supervisors will be open, transparent and accountable to the residents of Tredyffrin as they interview the candidates and ultimately choose the interim supervisor.

The intention of this post is to provide information to the public. Although I will accept comments on this post, I ask that your remarks be thoughtful and accurate. As a former political candidate myself, I know how it feels to be on the receiving end of negative campaigning and misrepresentation of issues and I do not wish to see these candidates have similar experiences!

Share or Like:


Add a Comment
    1. I think the way the law reads, they absolutely have to confine their interviewing and their deliberation to public meetings. They don’t get to scrutinize someone for how they will vote unless they are willing to ask those questions in the Sunshine. And as voters, we get to hear everything (and read anything they submit) so that we know about our elected officials.
      Thanks for doing this research Pattye. SInce the process is open for a few more days, I guess we’ll have to see if this encourages or scares people off.

      1. It was clearly stated that the supervisors will be interviewing the candidates — and this will not be in a public meeting. When you are interviewed to sit on a township board, you are not interviewed at a public meeting. Example — 10 years ago when I applied to be on the HARB (Historical Architectual Review Board) there was an interview day/time and as many supervisors that were available attended. It was not open to the public. I would assume the process for the interim supervisor will work the same way.

        1. Not legally. We do things around here “like we do them”….but this is a requirement of the Sunshine Law. They may NOT do it in private. The fact that they have stated they will is no less egregious than the St. Davids backroom deal.

  1. Thank you for bringing this information to the public.. I like that Mr. Bravacos was already a supervisor. When there was an open seat on the board the last time, I think the appointed supervisor was someone who had served before as a supervisor. Why not do the same thing this time.

    1. Well, then. elect one. The only one of the five candidates with absolutely no shot at appointment to the position is the lone Democrat, Brazunas. Frankly, I’m surprised he couldn’t see this political reality and chose to waste his time by submitting an application.

      I thought his cover letter was interesting. Apparently, he’s a good candidate because he ran twice – and was twice rejected by the voters.

      1. Interesting. We are purging Democrats on the national level and state level too, and for good reason. I think Brazunas is admirable for his work with the fire department. But yes, he has been rejected 2x.

        1. I’m sure he’s a good guy. He’s just green and incredibly naive. This is just the most recent evidence of that.

        2. Not to completely get off topic here, but a difference of about 70 votes in the last election Brazunas ran in isn’t exactly a “rejection” It’s more of a slight to the Democrats for not getting behind their candidate enough to eek out the extra votes they needed.

          It’s no surprise to anyone he’s a long shot at being appointed as an interim supervisor, but that doesn’t mean it’s a waste of time for him to put his hat in the ring.

          What’s another couple hours to someone who gives so much to his community already!

        3. It’s takes real men to attack a volunteer whose service to this community is second to none. God forbid someone from the other half of the population be apart of the process.

        4. To Vallon: You want a seat at the table? Win an election. And it’s not attacking the young man to point out facts about his political record and to suggest that, based on that record, he’s naive and could use some seasoning.

          Not for nothing, you don’t get to be a Township Supervisor just because you have the desire to serve in that capacity. And it’s laughable that some Democrats think they are entitled to a seat on the board in the name of “bipartisanship.” You want it? Work for it. Win an election. Don’t expect it to fall in your lap like some entitlement or the benefit of some political “redistribution of wealth.”

    2. This is a role where sitting supervisors identify the best steward for the job of supervisor for 3 months. It’s not about leveling the playing field. It is exactly why the interviews are not legally allowed to take place in private. The only qualifications that are relevant is an assessment of competency — not politics. It is a perk of being the majority party that they can easily ensure that the replacement is a Republican, but since voting on party lines is such a weak premise in a one-party atmosphere, I would be more concerned that they not be allowed to vet the candidates for their positions and what they want to get done. John B said he was concerned about the 252 rail crossing. What if the folks on the board are opposed to getting that done? They would eliminate him. I don’t think “positions” is the process — it’s why they appointed John Shimrak before. They might have known his positions to be sure, but they also knew his competency.
      Judy D would be a perfect appointee, but especially if we allow these interviews to go on in private, she would likely get more scrutiny to be sure she would vote with the BLOC.
      This isn’t about picking someone who goes along to get along, nor is it about picking someone who will run the next time. This is about fulfilling the obligation to appointment someone as a temporary legal steward of the job.

      1. For the record, I was not able to ‘twist’ Judy’s arm at lunch today — even though I was persistent, Judy will not submit her resume for consideration as the interim supervisor. Too bad!

      2. democrats want bipartianship when they are the minority. overused word. The health of our republic depends on non violent factions with differing ideas to appeal to the public for the promulgation of these ideas.

        Bi partianship is a folly.

  2. So by the time this selection is made and the person appointed it will be February. The election is in May. So this person will sit for what…7-8 meetings???

    Did they have to wait for the actual resignation to do anything? Why did Kampf wait so long to resign? If we actually new this was going to happen early November, why is this just happening now?

    This is going to be a whole lot of ridiculous political posturing over a matter of barely 4 months worth of a position.

  3. I would hope that the Board of Supervisors would appoint someone who would pledge not to run in the election. If they appoint someone who plans to run for the office in the fall, it would give that person an enormous advantage in terms of being elected to office. And that seems a bit partisan to me.

    I would support having someone from either party as long as they pledged as Bravacos did that they would not run for election. I don’t want someone (of either party) who would not use this special appointment to gain visibility for a future campaign for the office.

    It’s just the fairest possible solution to appoint someone who pledges not to run in the fall. I see the merits for many of the candidates, but they all seem like they would want to run for the office. By appointing one of them, the Board of Supervisors would be acting like kingmakers…and that would just be wrong.

    1. Of the 5 candidates, John Bravacos is the only candidate to publically state that he will ‘not’ be a candidate in the Special Election. It is my assumption that the other 4 are expected to be candidates. The appointment as interim supervisor will have a term of about 3 months. If someone is appointed as interim supervisor who intends to be a ‘candidate’ does that not give them an advantage over other candidates? John Bravacos was a prior supervisor as was John Shimrak when he was appointed to fill out the term of Bill DeHaven. There’s no ‘learning curve’ for a former supervisor and, in the case of John Bravacos, no political posturing and early campaigning during the interim term as he has publically stated that he will not be running in the election.

      Judy DiFilippo would be another excellent candidate to serve as an interim supervisor — 20 years of experience on the Board of Supervisors and she would serve only as an interim supervisor & would not appear on the May ballot. I’m having lunch with her today; maybe I can convince her to send in her resume :) She has until Monday, 1/10! I wonder what rationale the supervisors could use ‘not’ to appoint Judy. I’m no insider in the local political system but I have to believe that there must be a lot going on behind the scenes!

  4. Pattye —

    Thanks for doing this. The thing that disturbed me was the answers of Mayock and Brazunas…both basically went straight to politics.

    Mayock’s bio reads like a GOP resume, and Brazunas’s letter seemed like he was explaining to a political party why he would be the best candidate for them to support. Bravacos was the only one who really talked about what he wanted to do for the community.

    I would assume that a Republican would get the spot if only because they would be replacing someone (Kampf) who was elected as a Republican.

    While I know there is no requirement to match the Party of the departing Supervisor, it seems to me it would be disrespectful of the public to choose someone of a different party when the voters elected a Republican.

    That party change can/may occur in the Special Election when the people get a chance to speak their minds again.

    As for choosing someone who will or won’t run again, I would not be surprised to see the BoS choose a candidate-to-be. That is one of the political “perks” of being in the majority and it is done regularly by both parties in situations like this across the state, and at many different levels of government.

    1. Are these people trying to get on the bake sale committee or on a POLITICAL board? Based on Mr. Bravacos’ information should we assume he is a bad choice because he worked with HUD who has been riddled with problems over the years? The answer is no. All of these people stepped up to fill a void on the Board. One would also assume that each person will explain to the Board what they want to focus on when they are interviewed. Just because we don’t see it on a blog or in their resume means nothing. Better yet, if you are so ‘disturbed’ why don’t you contact them.

    2. Kristen is a good person and cares about this Township. She wants the best for everyone and not 1 party. For a committee person from her own party to say her bio reads like a GOP resume is funny. I thought this blog was going to try and keep commentary positive and constructive on this topic.

  5. I share Anon80’s belief that this process should be carried out in public view, but we know it never has and will not be for this appointment.

    Pattye has performed a real public service by informing us about those under consideration for the interim position. I appreciate her efforts but am disappointed that two of the candidates chose not to provide any information. Is it because they want to avoid public scrutiny? Were they advised not to by the TTRC? Or do they simply feel no obligation to offer the public any information since the public has no input into this decision?

    It would be a significant gesture of bipartisanship to appoint Democrat Eamon Brazunas to fill the open seat for the three month term. He is a qualified candidate representing a large block of the voters in Tredyffrin. (Current party breakdown: 39% Democratic,;45% Republican)

    However, I have no illusions about that probability. The balance between the conservative and more moderate elements on the Board is at stake, with the interim choice being the potential tie-breaking vote on matters such as the upcoming vote on the future role of the Planning Commission .

    Given the outsized influence of the TTRC on township matters, I assume there is a clear mission to preserve the status quo. by whatever means.The backroom interviews will determine which candidate can be counted on to vote with Lamina, Olsen and Richter on the fate of the Planning Commission. A litmus test to pass muster. Equally important is the political calculation of who will be fortunate enough to enjoy public exposure while running in the special election.

    In this sense the choice of , Mr. Bravacos would provide a welcome relief from campaign politics for a few months. Imagine, someone stepping forward to serve the public with no other agenda? Priceless!

    At least an informed public can take all of this into consideration as they decide whom to vote for in the special election – which will allow voters to cross party lines and independents to vote for Warren’s replacement.

    The public should be aware of this and weigh in.I would suggest those who have an opinion contact the BOS.

  6. Kate
    If you agree with me, and we know it is the law, why aren’t people more exorcised about it? The Sunshine Law is a law, not a recommended approach. There is no personnel issue involved here. This is a public candidate. They are acting in lieu of voters, so they may not scrutinize as a group. Each supervisor is certainly free to contact the potential nominee personally, but no one can do this collectively.

    Today’s paper has an article about Harrisburg needing to put more teeth in the Sunshine Law, and specifically references the fact that two Montco commissions (Matthews -R and Hoeffel-D had breakfast together regularly — now known as Breakfastgate when their topic of conversation was overheard and reported by a local reporter.

    As a result, the MOntco DA’s office “On Dec. 3, Ferman announced that her office had launched a grand jury investigation targeting the two commissioners after they were reportedly overheard deciding county business during weekly breakfasts at an East Norriton diner. Such discussions, as alleged, would constitute a violation of Pennsylvania’s Sunshine Act.”

    IN the Dec 30th Times Herald (and today’s MLSL), “State Rep. Mike Vereb (R-150th of Montgomery County) has announced plans to introduce legislation aimed at strengthening the state’s Sunshine Act — even as far as calling for jail time for the most egregious offenders.

    News in recent weeks has revealed a troubling reality for some lawmakers — that the act has no teeth, giving way to disregard and even abuse by politicians.

    Vereb admitted the now-public breakfast meetings between Montgomery County commissioners Jim Matthews and Joe Hoeffel were not the first revelation to bring this matter to his attention.

    “I frankly think that when crooks steal, they go to jail,” said Vereb. “If politicians violate the Sunshine law and knowingly deceive the public with some type of a vote based on an illegal meeting, then I think they should be incarcerated. Guess what? The people keep fighting for it, and you better start listening and not just get a $100 fine.”

    Interviewing these “candidates” in private would be an illegal meeting. No debate, no discussion. The supervisors should not do it, and no candidate who wishes to be appointed should be willing to be part of it.

    1. anon80 & all Community Matters readers —

      I stand corrected in regards to the legalities of the supervisors interviewing in private. Although they can interview candidates for the township boards privately, interviews for elected officials must be in the public. There will be a post tomorrow on Community Matters speaking to this subject — we will know the schedule for candidate interviews. It does not necessarily mean that they will interview before or after the next supervisors meeting. The supervisors could decide to have a special meeting on a Saturday and do the interviews. The point is they will be public and not private interviews. I looked in to this matter further today as a result of anon80 comments — you were right and I thank you.

      1. So if 2 legislators walking down the hall at the statehouse are talking about an upcoming vote or issue, is that also a violation of the sunshine act? How about if their aides do it too? I mean, where is the sanity/insanity line?

        1. 2 meant a quorum since there are only 3 commissioners. The point is — no deliberating on issues in private. This is nothing unusual. They don’t even have to (and probably should not) interview them. They sent resumes and have qualifications. The group can and should debate it publicly — but what questions are necessary? “Do you have time for this? Do you agree with us? Will you take a pledge to always vote one way?” Nothing in an interview is appropriate that I can think of. A review of their credentials is an independent thing. Each supervisor can and should do it. And then they should vote.

          1. Although I don’t think that the supervisors were required to interview the candidates — you are right, they could have received the resumes, discussed the candidates and voted — it was stated at Monday’s meeting that there would be interviews. Would it now be OK to retract that statement and say we have decided ‘not’ to interview. I don’t know – and I am certainly not a municipal attorney.

    2. If the sunshine law applies to 2 montco commissioners having breakfast together, I suppose the TTRC meetings might be in question then….

        1. I will stand corrected then. Tredyffrin quorum = 4.

          I will point out that until Mr. Kampf’s resignation there were 3 TTRC committee people on the BOS.

          Now there are only 2, Kichline and Richter.

  7. Does anyone think that the decision has not already been made??

    I think without any ounce of doubt that the decision of who will fill this spot has already been made. I think the rest is just semantics.

  8. and as Democrats keep moving farther to the left, the voters will come out and repudiate them. Fox like machine? Can’t you do better than that? Whats rachel maddow’s and Obermann’s ratings? So ramble on. Thanks for your opinion. By the way, I think Mr Brazunas is a good guy and has demonstrated his interest in the community. He put his money where is mouth is. Whether he wins or not is not up to you or me.
    Can you ever say anything positve about a Republican anywhere? Or are we all right wing lunatics, religious to a fault and the group of folks that want our elders to eat dog food. C’mon, now. NOT TRUE! Blinded by the light……..

    1. FF,

      As you may have noticed, Pattye removed my comment regarding the qualifications and mindset of some supervisors. I asked her to do it . I wrote in reaction to a series of comments by James Baker, but I should have taken a breath before pushing send.

      FYI, Flyers Fan, I have said many positive things about good people who happen to be Republicans. I think highly of some of the sitting supervisors and am a big fan of one of the Republican candidates. I appreciate elected officials whose positions are moderate and whose inclinations are to work across party lines. And no, I differentiate between wing-nuts on both sides of the political spectrum and those who believe the political process involves openness, accountability and compromise.

      I reacted strongly to the bluster in James Baker’s statement: “Not for nothing you don’t get to be a township supervisor”. (Great grammar, btw, but we all get his point.)

      He goes after Mr. Brazunas with such arrogance that I felt compelled to point out that someone totally unqualified currently sits on the BOS.

      However, my focus was and is on the fact that Mr. Brazunas is well qualified and has earned the right to be given serious consideration for the interim position.

      Is it a Republican seat? Is the gesture of bipartisanship just naive wishful thinking? In this town, the answer to both questions is YES.

      But in many other communities, there is no chance of one party control because by-laws require that at least one seat be designated for the minority party. This strikes me as eminently fair.

      But to deride Mr. Brazunas for merely submitting his resume made me angry. In my view, Baker’s comment comes from the belief held by some Republicans that they own this town; and no others need apply.

      I ask anyone with an open mind to consider the merits of choosing a young, long-time resident – a young family man with a business management background- who has proven his devotion to this community in many ways over the years – and offers a different forward-thinking perspective that is in line with many, many other young residents in Tredyffrin.

      What a breath of fresh air…someone under 40 serving on the BOS!

      As even the Pailn/Romeny supporter concedes, all five candidates are qualified. Now let the process play out in the sunshine.

      1. “But to deride Mr. Brazunas for merely submitting his resume made me angry. In my view, Baker’s comment comes from the belief held by some Republicans that they own this town; and no others need apply.”

        That wasn’t my point. Not at all. There is a political reality here that is going unacknowledged. I still can’t believe after all the discussion on this subject there are folks who are still advocating for Democratic representation on the Board in the name of “fairness” and “bipartisanship” as if party members, without having won election (and having lost two, incidently, in the case of Mr. Brazunas) have some kind of right to be included. As if the political wealth should be “spread around” or “redistributed” evan after voters have made their feelings known to the contrary.

        I am prepared to reconsider, however, my initial opinion that Mr. Brazunas’ submission of his application was naive. In fact, it may have been downright canny. It makes sense that, if he has an interest in running for the position for a third time, he’d want to take every opportunity to publicize that fact in order to: 1) get his name out there (again); and 2) clear the Democratic primary field for himself.

        I believe that, on this sort of local level, political affiliation means less than in higher levels of government. I further believe that folks who take an interest in local government (i.e. the announced applicants for the Board) are probably motivated more by a desire to serve their communities than anything else. And so, I have no issue with Mr. Brazunas’ interest in the position. I just hope he’s aware of the political reality – that he will have to earn the position by election, pursuant to an exercise of democracy, that it will not be gifted to him in a gesture of inclusion.

        Citizens own this Township. The voters own it. Not one political party or another. If your goal is to have a Democrat on the Board, nominate a good candidate, run hard, convince voters that your point of view is a good one. Republican successes in Tredyffrin has come about, historically and for a long time, because the GOP has done just this. They don’t sit around whining, they work hard and get the job done.

  9. The five taxpayers who stepped up to the plate to fill this seat are qualified based on what I have read about them. Let’s put the bows and arrows away and let the Board of Supervisors do their thing.

  10. James. Baker,

    You say, “I believe that, on this sort of local level, political affiliation means less than in higher levels of government. I further believe that folks who take an interest in local government (i.e. the announced applicants for the Board) are probably motivated more by a desire to serve their communities than anything else” .

    Which is it then ? At the local level, is the criterion for an interim supervisor demonstration of a proven record of community service? Or is it really about maintaining political control?

    Because Mr. Brazunas’ community service trumps anything any other candidate has contributed to this community. By far.

    Further, there is no requirement that an interim supervisor already have won and served as a supervisor. If this were the case, only John Bravacos would qualify.

    Unfortunately, the process of choosing a replacement to serve FOR ALL OF THREE MONTHS is likely to proceed in a business-as -usual-in Tredyffrin fashion – with NO transparency.

    Interestingly, the threat to the status quo has occurred because the Block of Four is now reduced to three, and the other three supevisors may band together in support of another candidate. And create a tie.

    Acording to the Sunshine law, the public has a right to witness the process and hear the deliberations of the BOS before they vote to appoint someone to an elected position. This is NOT a personnel decision to be concluded in executive session.. The vote is in the public interest.

    We also have a right to know whether the four remaining candidates -three of whom have NEVER served in elected office – are given equal consideration. Backroom dealings may have gone on without proper scrutiny in the past.

    But that was the past.

  11. “You say, “I believe that, on this sort of local level, political affiliation means less than in higher levels of government. I further believe that folks who take an interest in local government (i.e. the announced applicants for the Board) are probably motivated more by a desire to serve their communities than anything else” .

    Which is it then ? At the local level, is the criterion for an interim supervisor demonstration of a proven record of community service? Or is it really about maintaining political control?”

    Right, political affiliation means less, not “means nothing.” You still have to win to govern. That the board consists solely of members of one party is a manifestation of electoral success via our democratic process.

  12. Kate
    I hear your angst, but whether he is too blunt or not, JBaker is correct — a failed candidate has very little appeal as an appointee. Even for 3 months, the side door is not likely to be open to someone who has been clear that they plan to run — against one of them.

    The transparency that you have now accepted as a mandate should eliminate some of the concern about how the selection will be made, but the nominees are free to privately discuss with individual supervisors. The supervisors are simply not allowed to compare notes except in the Sunshine. Do we think that’s likely given human nature?

    I agree that Mr. Brazunas has the community service credentials, but he already has a job that his credentials earned for him. Community service is not a credential for local government.
    So it’s not “business as usual” though that is a baiting phrase often used to taunt people out of doing what it is their right to do. Why so much attention for a mere 3 months? Because we know that vote #4 is gone — but we also know that in an all R board, how many topics are likely to only get 4 votes?
    As James B says — the dems need to nominate and work for and turn out the vote for their candidates. It’s not the fault of the Rs that they are in power. And while power is an uncomfortable word, it’s fact.

  13. I would like to point out that Mr. Brazunas has done nothing more than submit his resume to fill the vacant supervisors seat. There were no political party requirements or restrictions stated when the process was announced. He has also not made any public announcement of candidacy for a seat, so I think it’s a bit premature to suggest his interest in the appointment is “canny”

    I don’t think how many times someone has run and lost for a position automatically precludes him or her from being a viable candidate again. I believe it took Bill DeHaven three attempts to become elected a Tredyffrin Supervisor, and he was a Republican.

    1. “I believe it took Bill DeHaven three attempts to become elected a Tredyffrin Supervisor, and he was a Republican.”

      Bill was a Republican when he won. He ran unsuccessfully as an Independent and, I believe, unsuccessfully as a Democrat.

      “I would like to point out that Mr. Brazunas has done nothing more than submit his resume to fill the vacant supervisors seat. He has also not made any public announcement of candidacy for a seat, so I think it’s a bit premature to suggest his interest in the appointment is “canny” ”

      Jeepers, Howard. I said that his submitting his application was “naive”, then rethought it and suggested it might have been “canny” – a word having essentially the opposite meaning. You’ve disagreed both times! WTF?

      Also, I think it’s pretty clear that the young man is planning to run again. We’ll see, but he’s given us some pretty good clues.

      1. naive: Lacking worldly experience and understanding

        canny: Careful and shrewd, especially where one’s own interests are concerned.

        If Mr. DeHaven was first a Democrat, then an Independent, then a Republican, it speaks volumes that candidates in Tredyffrin Township don’t need character or qualifications to be elected, they need only to be Republican.

      2. Bill was a Republican when he won. He ran unsuccessfully as an Independent and, I believe, unsuccessfully as a Democrat.


        Bill actually ran unsuccessfully as a Republican in the GOP Primary as well.

        In his first race, which he ran AGAINST the TTRC, he lost by just 8 votes — and admitted he didn’t knock on a single door during his campaign. That tells me that it has to do with candidate quality and their campaign efforts as much as, if not more than, party registration.

        Eamon came within 70 votes and many on this blog have noted that the Dems didn’t “get their people out.” Whether this is absolutely true or not, it does speak to the campaign efforts side of the equation (as it did with Bill’s first run.) By the way, I think BOTH Eamon and Phil put a ton of effort into their races, but maybe Eamon wasn’t backed-up as well as Donahue was in that race.

  14. Pattye-

    “The intention of this post is to provide information to the public. Although I will accept comments on this post, I ask that your remarks be thoughtful and accurate. As a former political candidate myself, I know how it feels to be on the receiving end of negative campaigning and misrepresentation of issues and I do not wish to see these candidates have similar experiences!”

    Are you fulfilling your promise?

    1. Vallon —
      Point taken. The 4 candidates have applied ‘only’ for the interim supervisor position. We need to focus on transparency in the appointment process. The candidates are all qualified to serve for 3 months as an interim supervisor. The decision for the position of interim supervisor is not ours as ‘the public’ to make — but is up to the 6 sitting supervisors. Our vote will have to wait until May at the polls. Comments need to focus on keeping the process open for the public not on individual candidates. Vallon is right to point out my intent with this post . . . may I ask that those commenting to please remember the focus. Thank you.

  15. Anon 80,

    Your point about appointing someone who will run against a sittiing supervisor isn’t relevant this time since Bob Lamina, E.J. Richter and Michelle Kichline are not running in 2011. (Lamina has said he will not run again. Richter and Kichline are not up for-re-election until 2013.) The two at-large seats will be open this time.

    So propping up one of the two TTRC endorsed candidates to fill the seat in February is their highest priority. That person will be more likely to win the special election in May (to fill out Warren’s term) and the general election in November (for a 4-year term.)

    Credentials mean nothing unless an R is attached to them. In the minds of many Republicans, it’s pefectly fine to dismiss any Democratic applicants with a “You’re not welcome here” .And of course this fact motivates the supervisors to keep the “interview” process out of the public eye.

    You find a Democrat who lost by fewer than 70 votes in 2009 to be a less attractive candidate than every untested Republican interim candidate ? That’s no surprise, given that you are no doubt a Republican.

    I’m not whining. Democrats and all those who believe one-party control invites misconduct (St. David’s) and partisan based favors (St. David’s) need to wise up, take more notice of the goings-on in local government, and vote for change.

      1. Yes, the country’s ills weren’t magically corrected in two years – not that Republican obstructionism and their obsession with preserving tax cuts for the rich above all else and protecting their Wall Sreet friends from regulation had anything to do with anything.

        Let’s see how desperate Americans, who voted out of fear in November, react to the new order. Steep cuts to safety net programs, state cutbacks to education which will put pressure on property taxes, and wing nuts like Paul Ryan disregarding Congressional Budget Ofice estimates and pressing to repeal healthcare reform, privatize social security and convert Medicare to a voucher program.

        Wait til middle class America figures out what Republican lawmakers at both the state and federal levels have in store for them.

        The Republican agenda, which caters to their corporate masters (.e.g. Corbett’s support for a tax-free Marcellus Shale) and the wealthiest Americans, will be rejected. Americans are searching for solutions that conservatives have no intention of supplying.

        1. Middle class Americans, not in a selected privileged group like the UAW have been slammed by the last 2-4 years of Democratic rule in Congress. As fuel costs go up, due to policies of this administration, and food costs continue to rise as well, WHO will get slammed? The middle class and the poorer Americans. I believe unrest isn’t far away.

          If someone can unleash the power of the American econony, middle classers will do better. So far, last 2 plus years, we have suffered from overregulation and general suppression of the capitialist spirit. kate, no need to get excited. You disAgree!!! That’s your right my fellow American.

        2. maybe a tax free marcellus shale will provide JOBS. Jobs result in tax revenue…Thought that was a good idea..Maybe a SMALL tax will provide JOBS… Punative tax… kiss it all goodbye

  16. Kate I know some of the price gouging comes from futures contracts on wall Street. What happened to the regulation of wall street?

Leave a Reply

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

Community Matters © 2024 Frontier Theme