Pattye Benson

Community Matters

Paul Drucker

Request that Political Posturing by Candidates re Rt. 422 Wait Until the Facts are In!

August 11, 2010
20 Comments

The following letter to the editor appears in this week’s Main Line Suburban newspaper. The letter is written by the Tom Caramanico, President and CEO of McCormick Taylor and Co-Chair, Infrastructure Working Group, CEO, Council for Growth. Mr. Caramanico takes to task those political candidates that are jumping ahead and using Rt. 422 in their election strategy before knowing all the facts.

Mr. Caramanico is in the trenches when it comes to the slow process of reconstructing Philadelphia area’s infrastructure. Like many cities in America, Philadelphia and its surrounding suburbs need to have serious attention paid to its roadways and bridges. Unfortunately, infrastructure improvements (and paying for it) is something that few elected officials or political candidates wish to discuss. Many candidates feel compelled to assure their constituents of ‘no new taxes’ mantra at all costs.

Is it possible that applying that type of attitude to Rt. 422 may be short-sighted; both for future economic development in the region, as well as safety concerns? Remember that 8-lane bridge collapse in Minnesota in 2007 which killed 13 people and injured 145. Immediately following that incident there was nationwide discussion on our country’s aging infrastructure and need for improvements, . . . but what has actually happened?

Fast forward to 2010, we have the CEO Council for Growth and Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, among other organizations, trying to improve the safety and efficiency of the area’s transportation system. Yet as Mr. Caramanico points out, politics and political posturing by candidates may be slowing the process of discovery. I agree with Mr. Caramanico, we should keep the options open and explore all alternatives . . . not just take the knee-jerk approach and say ‘no’ before knowing the facts.

Although Mr. Caramanico’s letter was not written specifically for the political race between Paul Drucker and Warren Kampf, it should cause those campaigns a degree of pause . . . are these candidates keeping an open mind on the 422 corridor master plan? As an aside, I would suggest that the website http://notolls422.com/ is not helpful for those working to improve 422.

Review the letter to the editor – I’d be interested in your comments.

Calmly look at U.S. 422 issues

To the Editor:

More than two years ago, the effort to restore passenger rail service on the R6 line to Reading was on life support because of the lack of federal and state funding, and the most recent version of PennDOT’s 12-year plan does nothing to address the daily 15-mile backup on U.S. 422.

Yet congestion on the corridor is an enormous drag on the region’s economic prosperity. Whether it’s time spent in traffic commuting to work, lost time with family or trucks stalled from delivering their cargo, congestion is costing individuals time and businesses millions of dollars each year.

Although the needs along U.S. 422 are great and the benefits of rail service and highway-capacity improvements are very understandable, it is also apparent that government alone cannot accomplish these goals.

That’s why a group of businesspeople in our region got together to seek a solution now. The CEO Council for Growth along with Montgomery, Chester and Berks counties and other stakeholders along the U.S. 422 corridor commissioned a study to look at the feasibility of financing infrastructure improvements there. The study is in progress and preliminary results are expected this fall. The study will examine a variety of financing options, including an assessment of collecting a toll on U.S. 422 to pay for transportation improvements in the U.S. 422 corridor.

As businessmen and women, we are not committed to any financing option until we have all the necessary information available. Information such as: what improvements could be provided, how would rail service and highway improvements work together, how would we guarantee the money is spent on our improvements and not in other areas of the state, how much would a toll be, and where would it be collected? Only when these and many more questions are answered should anyone take a position for or against the idea.

Unfortunately some candidates running for office have taken a position before all the facts are known. This is a mistake. As statements containing half-truths, pseudo-facts and misinformation come from both political parties, the public is not well served. Sadly for purely political purposes, issues that require mature and reasonable discussion are reduced to a sound bite or simplistic headline.

Worst of all, this kind of political posturing will effectively chase away the private sector. Entrepreneurs and business leaders won’t want to invest in a public/private partnership if they believe the “public” piece of the partnership to be impetuous or, worse, misguided.

This is a call for restraint on the part of our candidates and elected officials. Let all concerns and issues be raised and considered, but please refrain from taking a position for or against any ideas until the facts are known. If the numbers don’t work or the impacts are too great we will all be opposed to it.

However, if there is a way to improve our transportation system in the corridor, we can work on the issues together. When the study is done, let the proposal be discussed and let it rise or fall on its own merits, based on the facts. Let the process work – the success of our region requires it, the public deserves it and these difficult times demand it.

Thomas A. Caramanico, P.E., President and CEO, McCormick Taylor Inc., Co-Chair, Infrastructure Working Group, CEO, Council for Growth

Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission Releases Press Release to Design Roundtable Members

August 5, 2010
Comments

As a member of the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission Design Roundtable, I received the following official press release concerning approval to construct the Turnpike’s Rt. 29 slip ramp. I know I posted Paul Drucker’s press release yesterday, however there is additional information contained in the PTC release that I found of interest, including the timeline for construction.

Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission Approves Construction of Route 29 All-Electronic Interchange

Construction of the E-ZPass-only facility to start in March 2011 with opening expected in late 2012.

The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission announced today that it is moving ahead with the construction of an all-electronic interchange linking Route 29 with I-76 in Chester County. Located midway between the Downingtown exit (#312) and the Valley Forge exit (#326), the new facility will provide convenient access to and from such business parks as the Great Valley Corporate Center, the Commons at Great Valley, Atwater and business districts in Malvern and Paoli.

“The decision to move ahead to construction is a significant step that will enhance safety and convenience for thousands of Turnpike customers in the region traveling to and from work each day,” said Turnpike Chief Executive Officer Joe Brimmeier. “In addition, the interchange will cut travel times for thousands of other regional commuters and help relieve overcrowding on local roads.”

Each day about 45,000 to 50,000 vehicles travel the 14-mile stretch of Turnpike between Downingtown and Valley Forge.

The announcement was made at an event held this morning hosted by Senator Andrew Dinniman (D-19). He was joined by Pennsylvania Turnpike officials and other business and elected officials.

“The Route 29 interchange is crucial to the continued economic vitality of our region,” Senator Dinniman said. “We are pleased that the Turnpike Commission has agreed to advance the project to construction and appreciate their commitment to move expeditiously to achieve the 2012 completion date.”

State Representative Duane Milne (R-167) also stated his support for the project. “I am delighted that a positive resolution has been reached and that this vital infrastructure enhancement will be completed in the near future. This transportation upgrade will prove a positive step for the quality of life in our area.”

State Representative Paul Drucker (D-157) added, “I am pleased the Route 29 interchange project is finally moving forward. It will ease congestion on local roads, reduce travel time for thousands of commuters and create jobs.”

Brimmeier said the interchange will reduce backups at the Valley Forge Interchange (#326), at the I-76/Route 202 interchange and on Route 202 itself, and will contribute to an overall decrease in traffic on Route 29 in the vicinity of Swedesford Road and Matthews Road, and on Route 401 and Phoenixville Pike, west of Route 29.

Turnpike officials expect construction of the E-ZPass-only interchange will start in March 2011 with a late fall 2012 opening. The estimated $60 million project calls for bridges to be built over the Turnpike, over Yellow Springs Road, over Atwater Drive as well as construction of a culvert and several retaining walls. The construction area will cover one-half mile along the Turnpike in three separate Chester County municipalities: Charlestown Township, East Whiteland Township and Tredyffrin Township.

In March 2009, the Turnpike shelved plans to build the interchange while it worked to resolve design issues with the widening and reconstruction of the adjoining six-mile Turnpike section to the east of Route 29, between Mileposts 320 and 326. Over the past 16 months, the Commission has worked closely with township officials, residents, interest groups and elected officials to address concerns they raised about the widening project – most notably storm-water management and noise walls.

“We believe sufficient progress has been made to enable us to proceed with the design of the Milepost 320 to 326 reconstruction and widening project and the construction of the Route 29 interchange,” said Brimmeier.

PA Turnpike Commission Approves Construction of Rt 29 Slip Ramp!

August 4, 2010
8 Comments
The PA Turnpike Commission approved construction of the Route 29 slip ramp. I received the following press release from State House Rep Paul Drucker’s Office today:
Construction of Route 29 all electronic interchange approved

Today, I joined officials from the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission at Atwater Business Park to announce approval of the construction of the all electronic interchange linking Route 29 with I-76 in Chester County.

This project will not only ease congestion on local roads and reduce travel time for thousands of commuters, but will create local jobs.

Located midway between the Downingtown exit (No. 312) and the Valley Forge exit (No. 326), the new facility will provide motorists with convenient access to and from such business parks as the Great Valley Corporate Center, the Commons at Great Valley, Atwater Business Park and business districts in Malvern and Paoli.

Turnpike officials said they anticipate the project to be bid in time to begin construction in March 2011, and plan to open the interchange to traffic in late fall of 2012. The project will include the building of bridges over the turnpike, over Yellow Springs Road, over Atwater Drive and the construction of a culvert and several retaining walls. The construction area will cover approximately one-half mile along the turnpike in three separate Chester County municipalities: Charlestown Township, East Whiteland Township and Tredyffrin Township.

The interchange is expected to reduce traffic congestion at the Valley Forge Interchange (No. 326), at the I-76/Route 202 interchange and on Route 202 itself, and contribute to an overall decrease in traffic on Route 29 in the vicinity of Swedesford Road and Matthews Road, and on Route 401 and Phoenixville Pike, west of Route 29.

Pennsylvania Ranks #1 . . . but don’t know that residents want this distinction!

August 3, 2010
4 Comments

Sometimes it’s good to be #1 – to be at the ‘top of the class’, but I don’t know that the following is a distinction that will excite us. A report from the Pennsylvania School Board Association (PSBA) that was just released lists Pennsylvania as the national leader in public school teacher strikes for the 2009-10 school year – 6 strikes over the 501 school districts.

For those that are interested, these are the six districts in Pennsylvania where strikes occurred during the 2009-10 school year:

  • South Butler, strike from September 21 – October 6
  • Saucon Valley, strike from October 14 – October 30
  • Lackawanna, strike from October 29 – November 2
  • Penn Hills, strike from February 2 – February 9
  • McGuffey, strike from March 22 – March 23
  • North Penn, strike April 19 – 27

To give you a comparison, Ohio had no strikes with 612 school districts during last year’s school year. Pennsylvania is one of 13 states in the country which legalizes strike by state employees, including public school teachers.

There’s a state representative Paul Clymer (R – Bucks) who is the minority chair of the House Education Committee who has decided that to make it his priority to outlaw teacher strikes in Pennsylvania. There are currently 2 House Bills and a House Resolution that would either ban teacher strikes in Pennsylvania or further restrict them. State Rep Daryl Metcalfe (R – Butler) introduced HB 2092 which would amend the Pennsylvania Constitution to prohibit teacher strikes and lockouts. HB 1334 introduced by State Rep Doug Reichley (R – Berks) would not ban all strikes by teachers by would require more arbitration and fact-finding.

Rep.Clymer is arguing that the Commonwealth needs to stop teachers’ strikes in a tough economic year because Pennsylvanians cannot continue to pay the real estate taxes of previous years. “Taxpayers are really hard pressed to pay any increase in real estate taxes and we have to find different avenues to balance school budgets,” Mr. Clymer said. “When the teacher contracts become too onerous financially, too much of a burden for the taxpayers we have some serious problems. I’m sure the school boards do their best to come up with equity in the contract [but] everyone has to cut back, government included.” The Democrat majority chair of House Education did not respond to Clymer’s remarks.

Do we think that Paul Drucker and Warren Kampf would come down on party lines on this discussion? Would Kampf side with some of the outspoken Republicans who want to ban public school teacher strikes? And Drucker . . . would he support the right of state employees to strike? Interesting question.

Senator Dinniman Holds Neighborhood Meeting to Provide PA Turnpike Stormwater Updates . . . Great Valley resident Kathleen Keohane attends meeting and shares her notes

July 28, 2010
7 Comments

Senator Andy Dinniman held a small meeting last night to focus on the PA Turnpike stormwater management issues. He brought together turnpike representatives as well as elected officials and individuals representing various homeowner and associated groups in the area. Kathleen Keohane, a resident of the Yellow Springs/Great Valley section of the township attended and graciously provided the following update notes from the meeting. Thank you Kathleen!

Notes from Great Valley Resident Kathleen Keohane

July 27, 2020

It was State Senator Andy Dinniman’s idea to bring decision-makers from the Turnpike Commission together with representatives of the Township and Tredyffrin‘s civic, neighborhood and environmental groups to discuss the Turnpike’s revised stormwater management plan. This is one part of the overall 6-mile-long road widening design plan that will also include sound walls along most of the roadway.

Major discussion points:

-Stormwater runoff from the turnpike will be controlled at near 100%, even with the now planned 26 foot median. This represents a significant improvement in volume control since the original stormwater plan was presented; Control rates exceed DEP standards and in almost all cases, meet Tredyffrin Township’s more stringent criteria.

– Only 18 properties in Tredyffrin will be affected under the revised plan– with 15 partial ‘takes” and 3 complete acquisitions. Among those three, no homeowner has been forced to sell. This also is a far cry from the original design plan which called for the partial taking of almost 90 properties and the acquisition of 8 homes.

The meeting, held in Keene Hall on Tuesday evening, drew about 50 people. As Senator Dinniman pointed out, “The decision-makers are all here” – including PTC’s head, Joe Brimmeier, Head Engineer Frank Kempf and Project Manager, Kevin Scheurich. State Rep. Paul Drucker attended, as did Supervisors Di Buonaventuro, Donahue and Richter. Representatives from civic, neighborhood and environmental groups were there, as well as several residents whose properties are being acquired by the Turnpike.

Most of the evening’s discussion focused on stormwater problems in the Glenhardie area. This eastern-most section of the 6-mile-long expansion project has proved to be the most challenging given the confluence of roadways, the large amount of impervious cover and the extent of local flooding in heavy rains and damage to Trout Creek.

The Township acknowledged that Turnpike runoff is not the only source of the neighborhood’s stormwater problems, and that a “regional” approach will be necessary – one that will involve the Township, PennDOT, commercial property owners as well as the turnpike.

While Tredyffrin stormwater expert and engineer Steve Burgo readily agreed that the Turnpike’s stormwater plan had evolved to include greater volume and rate control, he felt there was more that could be done at off-site locations.

The acquisition of a small parcel from the Richter property located at the confluence of Old Eagle School, Glenhardie and Walker Roads) was mentioned as was the use of a small piece of land (6.-1 acre in size) at Teegarden Park, near the top of the Trout Creek watershed.

Turnpike Engineer Kempf was firm in the limits of the Turnpike’s involvement. “We do not want to commit to something we cannot control,” he said. Since off-site property is privately held, there is the problem of eminent domain, which “could hold up the Turnpike’s project and add to the cost.”

Though the Turnpike is willing to listen to alternatives, in their view, they have proposed a viable solution that handles 100% of the turnpike’s runoff in the Glenhardie area. Despite some differences regarding what constitutes adequate stormwater mitigation in this area, a spirit of cooperation seemed genuine and all remaining issues appeared solvable as the meeting wound down.

Engineer Pete Goodman, past president of Trout Unlimited and a long-time advocate for maintaining the “exceptional value” of Valley Creek, brought up two areas of concern: that discharges from several of the Turnpike’s proposed detention basins would flow directly into Valley Creek or Wilson’s Run (a tributary) with no volume control. TP Project Manage Scheurich countered that the discharges were not direct in his view and met over 100% of the volume criteria. Both agreed to follow-up with more detailed discussions.

Near the end of the meeting, Supervisor DiBuonaventuro questioned the Turnpike’s decision to build a 26 foot median instead of the 16 foot size previously favored. From his perspective as an EMT – and echoing Police Chief Chambers’ position, a wider left-hand shoulder would encourage drivers to use it for emergencies. DiBuonaventuro believed it posed a danger to emergency vehicles coming to a driver’s aid as well as to drivers merging back into the fastest lane of traffic. Engineer Kempf defended the wider shoulder as recommended by the National Transportation Safety Bureau.

DiBuonaventuro also raised the issue of additional tree buffer having to be cut down to accommodate the extra 5 feet of roadway needed on each side for a 26- foot median. Kempf acknowledged that some additional trees would need to be cut down but promised to work on a property-by-property basis to determine what had to be cut. He pointed out that residents should be pleased that the Turnpike planned to build retaining walls instead of taking additional private property. He also committed to continue monthly Roundtable meetings throughout the entire construction phase so that residents could express their concerns.

Still, as one environmentalist pointed out, building a 26 foot median will require the elimination of 8.2 acres of woods over the length of the expansion in Tredyffrin That’s a lot of trees…..

Another meeting was scheduled for the end of August to continue what proved to be a very informative and useful discussion.

Questions Posed to State Representative Candidates . . . Should Voters Expect Responses from Drucker & Kampf

July 22, 2010
58 Comments

Voters can visit the campaign websites of State House 157 candidates Paul Drucker and Warren Kampf and read about the issues . . . explore how the candidates feel about jobs, economy, spending, education, environment, etc. Using social media as an integral component of their campaigns, the candidates suggest that you follow them on Twitter, become their Facebook fan . . . sign up for email updates, etc. Drucker and Kampf give voters contact information including special campaign email addresses and encourage questions or comments from the public. Just this week, Kampf tweeted, “. . . if you have any questions or comments feel free to contact the campaign at contact@warrenkampf.com.”

Representing Community Matters, I recently contacted each of the candidates through their campaign websites. Based on Community Matters discussion and questions posed from readers, my questions to Drucker and Kampf were straightforward and non-confrontational. Candidates encourage questions from the public so I asked each a question and the results are in . . . below are the questions that I posed to Drucker and Kampf and their respective responses.

Recently, Drucker presented a $1 million check from the Redevelopment Assistance Capital Program to Strategic Realty for phase 1 funding of the Paoli Transit Center. In the press release, Drucker stated that the project would “. . . ultimately create more than 5,000 construction jobs and more than 2,000 permanent jobs in Paoli.”

My question to Drucker: Could you please provide the analysis for the 2,000 permanent jobs in Paoli that would be provided by the Paoli Transit Center Project?

Peter Monaghan, president of Strategic Realty provided Rep Drucker with further details on temporary job and permanent job estimates for the Paoli Transit Center Project. Estimates for permanent job creation are based on the square footage of planned office, retail and residential space. The private development component of the Paoli Transit Center project will yield approx. 300,000 sq. ft of office space, 75,000 sf of retail space and 525,000 sf of residential space. The formula for permanent jobs is as follows:

  • Retail: 75,000 sf @ 1 job/500sf = 150 jobs
  • Office: 300,000 sf @ 1 job/200sf = 1,500 jobs
  • Residential: 525,000 sf @ 1 job/10,000sf = 53 jobs
  • Transit: 50 jobs

A recent post on Community Matters prompted 80+ comments (including Phoenixville Councilman Ken Buckwalter). The subject of the post – the current FBI investigation of local attorney Jeffrey Rotwitt for his role in the Family Court land development project scandal in Philadelphia. In April, Rotwitt hosted a campaign fundraiser for State Rep candidate Warren Kampf. As a result of Kampf’s association with Jeffrey Rotwitt, Rep. Drucker released a statement calling for Kampf to return of money raised at the Rotwitt fundraiser. Hoping to provide Kampf an opportunity to respond to Drucker and to the resident’s interest in the topic, I contacted Kampf for a response.

My question to Kampf: Do you have an official response to Mr. Drucker concerning the FBI investigation of Mr. Rotwitt and money raised at your April political campaign fundraiser hosted by Mr. Rotwitt?

Unfortunately, there was not a response to my email by Kampf nor any acknowledgement of my communication. Not receiving a reply, I sent a follow-up email that repeated the question . . . to date, there remains no response. For me, I am left to wonder why Mr. Kampf sent this tweet to his followers “. . . if you have any questions or comments feel free to contact the campaign at contact@warrenkampf.com.”

State’s Rights of Interstate Tolling May Pose an Additional Transportation Issue for Drucker & Kampf . . . Tolling of I-95 in Pennsylvania?

July 17, 2010
Comments

The topic of 422 tolling has spurred much debate and discussion on Community Matters – along with the cost to develop the proposed 422 master plan and questions about how it would be financed. As a result, I was interested to read that there are plans in the works in Harrisburg for a special session to discuss transportation issues state-wide.

After recently passing the state’s budget, the idea is that the special session on transportation would present an opportunity to address Pennsylvania’s estimated $3 billion in needed revenue for transportation projects. A funding gap of $450 million was created when the Federal Highway Administration denied the tolling of I-80; the special session focus is to encourage the lawmakers to reach a consensus on how to fund the transportation funding gap.

Unfortunately, the $450 million number continues to increase. In May, the Transportation Advisory Committee said that it would take $3.5 billion annually to maintain Pennsylvania’s roadways over the next 20 years. That need is strongly linked to the increase of traffic predicted for the state’s roads. One report estimates that the number of trucks on Pennsylvania’s interstates will increase by 50% by 2030.

No date yet set for the special session but probably will occur in late August. It is hoped the meeting will encourage consensus building in tackling the considerable transportation issues. One of the specific areas of focus for the lawmakers will be I-95 as it runs through Philadelphia. This section is one of the most expensive to maintain because it is elevated nearly its entire route through the city. But I-95 is also one of the most important roads through the city and not an easy one to close for repairs and upgrades.

With tolling of I-80 off the table, I have read about some interesting proposals to help the transportation shortfall including a series of suggestions by State Rep Rick Geist (R-Blair) who serves as the minority chair of the Transportation Committee. One of Blair’s suggestions is to ask the federal government for the right to toll I-95 as it did for I-80. I don’t really see how there is any difference between the request to toll I-95 vs. I-80. In denying the I-80 toll request, the US Department of Transportation told the governor no tolling because state plans for use of the proceeds are not permitted under existing federal law.

My guess is that there is a grassroots effort to encourage the change in the law and to give the use of the state tolling revenue back to the individual states and out of the federal government hands. This poses an interesting situation regarding federal vs states rights as it relates to tolling of interstate highways. The state of North Carolina has determined that if they were to toll their 185 mi. stretch of I-95, revenue would be $300-350 million annually. So maybe the lawmakers in Harrisburg are going to seriously consider the tolling of I-95. But to expect a different outcome than received from the I-80 toll request would require Pennsylvania to join the movement to change the federal law and give authority of how the tolling dollars are spent to the individual states. How do we feel about changing federal law and giving more rights to the individual states as applied to interstate tolling? Remember the federal vs. state control issues . . .

Another idea of Griest’s is to raise the ceiling on the Oil Company Franchise Tax, which reached its current ceiling in 2006, and divesting the state police from the Motor License Fund, which could free up $500 million annual for transportation.

The chair of the House Transportation Committee, State Rep Joseph Markosek (D-Allegheny) said one idea which had gained some support was the use of public-private partnerships (known as P3’s), which allow private firms to manage public properties such as highways.

As an aside, a toll increase on the Pennsylvania Turnpike in January will make it the most expensive long toll road in the nation. This past week the Turnpike Commission approved a 3 percent increase for users of E-ZPass and 10 percent increase for cash customers, effective Jan. 2, 2011. That will raise the cash cost of driving the turnpike to 8.5 cents per mile, highest of the 11 U.S. toll roads of 100 miles or longer. Currently, the Pennsylvania and New Jersey turnpikes are tied at 7.7 cents per mile.

It is looking like 422 tolling may not be the only transportation topic debated in the upcoming Drucker – Kampf square off . . . I look forward to hearing the 157 candidate’s opinion on I-95 tolling and on federal vs. state’s rights on interstate tolling.

And just when we thought it was safe to go back in the water . . .

Kampf’s Campaign Fundraiser Hosted by Jeffrey Rotwitt Raised $$ . . . Rotwitt Under FBI Probe Over Family Court Scandel . . . Should Kampf’s Campaign Return $$?

July 13, 2010
81 Comments

Just a couple of days ago, I was writing about the PA Turnpike Commission officials in trouble with the law . . . and then I receive a press release about a FBI investigation probe involving local attorney Jeffrey Rotwitt. Rotwitt hosted an April fundraiser for State Representative candidate Warren Kampf.

If I understand the story correctly, Rotwitt earned fees on both sides of a deal to build a new Family Court building in Center City. In late May, Rotwitt’s law firm, Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel LLP fired him after Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille killed Rotwitt’s deal to develop a $200 million Family Court tower at 15th and Arch streets.

The Family Court project is still going to move forward but with the state serving as developer. There is no way of telling whether the state will recover any of the millions in fees already paid out to Rotwitt and his partner, Conshohocken developer Donald W. Pulver. Taking money from the state ($1.1 million) and also receiving $500K as developer of the project . . . what did Rotwitt miss the ‘conflict of interest’ course in law school? Rotwitt who was with Obermayer for 35 years, continues to suggest a ‘misunderstanding’ as the FBI investigates. (As an aside Rotwitt’s developer partner Donald Pulver either received or was in line to receive $6.2 million in fees and costs for the project from the state!)

I was aware of the FBI investigation of Rotwitt from reading the Inquirer but did a little research on Rotwitt’s employer, Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel. The Philadelphia-based firm has 125 lawyers and has been a big-money player on Pennsylvania’s political scene; last year contributing a total of $175,000 to statewide campaigns.

It wasn’t until I received the following press release that I made the connection between Jeffrey Rotwitt and Warren Kampf. Just prior to his firing from Obermayer in late May, Rotwitt hosted a $250/person campaign fundraiser for Kampf in his home. As he follows the FBI investigation of Rotwitt, I’m guessing that Kampf may want to distance himself from his friend and the FBI probe . . . probably returning the dollars raised at that April fundraiser might not be a bad idea. What’s that saying about ‘judging people by the company they keep’?

In case you are interested, here is the press release that is being circulated from State Rep Paul Drucker in regards to this matter:

Rep. Paul Drucker Calls on Opponent to Return Money Raised by Fundraiser under Federal Investigation

Kampf received thousands raised by Jeffrey Rotwitt, currently under investigation by the FBI for role In Philadelphia’s scandal-plagued
Family Court project

PAOLI, Pa. – State Rep. Paul Drucker today called on his opponent Warren Kampf to return money raised for him by Jeffrey Rotwitt, an attorney who is currently under investigation by the FBI for his central role in the scandal-plagued Philadelphia Family Court development. Kampf held an April fundraiser at Rotwitt’s home that raised thousands of dollars for his campaign.

“Warren Kampf can’t call himself a reformer if he tries to ignore the fact that one of his chief fundraisers is under federal investigation for his role in the Family Court fiasco,” said Drucker today. “We need to change the way business is done in Pennsylvania, and if Kampf is serious about running an honest campaign, he should return the money Rotwitt raised for him immediately.”

A Philadelphia Inquirer investigation revealed that Rotwitt, who was a paid advisor to the courts for the project, was also working as a partner in the development itself – getting paid by both sides without fully disclosing his dual role. Rotwitt was fired from his law firm when his dual role became public. The scheme has cost taxpayers millions and is being investigated by the FBI.

“While I work toward real solutions, my opponent is working with people who epitomize our broken system of government,” Drucker said. “This is not the kind of reform Harrisburg needs.”

422 Master Plan & Tolling . . . Talking Point of Drucker & Kampf

July 13, 2010
30 Comments

It’s fascinating how political campaigns evolve . . . the tolling of Rt. 422 has become an interesting talking point between the Drucker and Kampf campaigns. Back in April, Drucker spoke on a news video for Times Herald; the video was accompanied by an article where the 422 master plan and tolling was discussed. I heard the words ‘tolling on 422’ and immediately assumed that my trips to the outlet malls just became more expensive! However, I discovered that occasional or short on-off users of Rt. 422 would not be charged a toll in the proposed 422 expansion plan. Likewise, my trips to the 422 movie theater would remain ‘untolled’ under this plan.

In fact, I was able to go back a few months and find the Times Herald article, where Drucker explains — “The plan, as it was explained to me, is that short-term users – on- and off-type users of 422, will not be tolled, because of some of the technology that is in place,” said Drucker. “Tolling will be for the people who use it during more of a steady period.”

Drucker provided follow-up information in last week’s Main Line Suburban newspaper — should there be any misunderstanding among residents. Drucker wrote the following op-ed article on the master plan for Rt. 422:

Looking Carefully at the Route 422 Corridor Master Plan
By PA State Rep Paul Drucker (D-157)
Recently the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission and the Chester County Planning Commission have presented to several municipal boards in our area the Route 422 Corridor Master Plan. This is a proposal that could significantly alter the transportation infrastructure of the Route 422 corridor.

The Route 422 Corridor Master Plan, among other things, provides for light rail service through the corridor and could be economically advantageous to our region. Pennsylvania needs a strong infrastructure to keep us competitive to attract and retain businesses to our state, and along with them, much-needed jobs.

With over a half a million jobs in Montgomery County and more than 250,000 jobs in Chester County, 28 percent of the Gross Southeast Regional Product is generated in these two counties alone. By 2030, the Route 422 Corridor is expected to add another 30,000 jobs.

Congestion on Route 422 is strangling the area with 15-mile backups daily on the highway and overflow onto parallel local roads. All of us who have spent time on Route 422 knows that it is a frustrating driving experience, to the point that we have recently witnessed a dangerous episode of road rage. In addition, there is no room for businesses to expand or new companies to locate in the corridor.

Currently there is no federal or state money forthcoming to the area to help with infrastructure improvements. Today, over half of the region’s long-range major capital-investment plan for the southeastern counties is consumed by existing assets that need to be rebuilt or replaced, such as crumbling bridges, and the number of major new investments that expand capacity is extremely limited.

One of the more controversial aspects of the plan is the possibility of tolling a portion of Route 422. Modern tolling technology allows for an express lane accessible only to long-distance travelers of the road. It would not be accessible to those drivers who travel Route 422 for short distances. I think such an option could work. However, I would not support a tolling structure that forces daily, on/off drivers to pay tolls.

I know many of my constituents use Route 422 every day, some several times a day. I do not support placing the burden of multiple tolls daily onto my constituents, especially in these difficult economic times.

As a policymaker I have an obligation to give serious consideration to plans that can improve the lives of people in our region and address our serious budget and transportation challenges. This proposal deserves the consideration of all of us who live here.

I will continue to monitor this plan as it moves forward, and I will remain focused on my priorities of delivering a fair, balanced budget in a timely manner, creating jobs in our district and helping Pennsylvania to recover from this difficult recession. I have always, and I will continue to, keep your wallets in mind as I represent you.

Drucker’s op-ed article does well to clarify his position and to once again state that the master plan would not include tolling of occasional users of Rt. 422, or those that are on-off and not traveling the entire stretch of the highway on a regular basis. I think we could all agree that something needs to change on 422 – if you are ever up watching the early news on TV (as I am) you know that the discussion of 422 back-ups and traffic slow-down is part of the daily news updates. It is understood that discussion of 422’s master plan is in the very early stages but it is refreshing to know that there are people with vision and long-range future planning skills. Like it or not, something has to significantly change on 422; the problem isn’t going to solve itself without help!

In response to Drucker’s op-ed article, Warren Kampf wrote the following for his website. Kampf is taking the stance of no tolling, apparently under no conditions. From a long-range planning standpoint, how does Kampf propose to help relieve the traffic nightmare of Rt. 422? What is his solution to the problem? I support debate on the 422 master plan and tolling issue but Kampf’s criticism of the plan without offering a viable alternative is not a solution. Kampf’s is clear that he does not support tolling . . . again, I would ask that rather than poking holes in his opponent’s plan, a better approach might be to present his own options to fix the traffic problems of 422. How would he design the Rt. 422 master plan . . .?

Why I oppose tolling Route 422
By Warren Kampf, July 12th, 2010

I read with incredulity a recent letter to editor by Paul Drucker attempting to change his position on the tolling of Route 422.

As reported by The Times Herald on April 9, 2010, Mr. Drucker told their editor that he supported tolling specifically for the proposed Schuylkill Valley Metro. Now, however, Mr. Drucker is trying to change his position to make it less politically damaging.

My position on tolling Route 422 is clear: I oppose it. I do so for the following reasons:

1. I do not believe that burdening our working families and seniors with added costs in these troubled economic times is a good idea, but that is exactly what a toll on Route 422 would do.

2. The revenue from this action comes nowhere near what is needed to fund the $2.2 billion (or more) cost of the proposed Schuylkill Valley Metro. There is no reason to investigate or begin tolling 422 for the purpose of building a light-rail line unless and until other construction funding is secured. [In 2004, estimated cost for the Schuylkill Valley Metro was $2.2 billion (Pottstown Mercury); taking inflation into account, current costs would probably be higher today.]

3. Tolling Route 422 and only Route 422 equates to unfair taxation. Unlike Mr. Drucker, I do not believe those who utilize Route 422 deserve to bear a greater burden than those who utilize Route 202, the Blue Route, the Schuylkill Expressway, and other highways that are just as important to the economic well-being of our region as Route 422 is.

4. There are no guarantees that tolling revenue will be used as Mr. Drucker and his Harrisburg politician allies claim.

Unlike the Turnpike, which is a separate authority run by the revenue it raises from tolling, tolls on Route 422 would go into the state’s general fund and could be used for any purpose (unless the Legislature passes special legislation approving a local authority.) Remember, these are the same people who passed gaming in our state by promising to use the money for property tax relief and instead spent it to help build a sports arena in Pittsburgh.

There is simply too great a risk that Mr. Drucker’s toll money will be used to fund items other than the construction of the proposed Schuylkill Valley Metro.

Since Mr. Drucker made his tolling proposal, I have consistently stated that I do not support it for the reasons above. Unfortunately, once Mr. Drucker was hit with the reality that the people he represents do not want his tolls, he has tried political back-pedaling to re-write history. Today, he is attempting to say that this tolling money would be used to maintain and improve Route 422. As stated above in number 4, we can’t trust that tolling revenue will be used for this purpose.

Rather than always look to new revenue sources (taxes, fees, tolls) first, Mr. Drucker and those like him in Harrisburg should first look to prioritize spending on core services by cutting spending on non-core function programs. Instead, they continue to over-spend and over-borrow (including more than a half-billion dollars this year to “balance” their budget) and then support other fees – like 422 tolls – for projects they claim are vital but don’t have the wherewithal to fight for in the regular budget process.

Yes, we must address congestion on Route 422 and the need to continue building upon the positive economic impact this corridor has on our region. To do so, I believe we must first work to cut wasteful state spending and focus the state budget on priorities like education, job creation, property tax relief and infrastructure improvements.

Only after we have exhausted all efforts at controlling and focusing spending wisely — and only after a thorough and careful analysis of all options is completed — should we ever look toward an increased burden on our citizens. That is what I will work to do in Harrisburg.

Montgomery County’s 2011 Budget Will Require ‘Radical Changes’ – Is this Handwriting on the Wall for Chester County, and Specifically Tredyffrin Township?

July 12, 2010
9 Comments

I just read the following in Norristown’s Times Herald referencing radical changes needed by Montgomery County government to either drastically cut expenses or increase revenue to fill the $22.5 million funding gap expected in their 2011 budget.

OK, I know that we are not in Montgomery County; and I understand that this is county government vs. township government. But is it possible that the crisis facing our neighboring county’s budget for 2011 could be similarly recognized in Chester County, . . . and then ultimately Tredyffrin?

I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to suggest a correlation between Montgomery and Chester County government funding issues. We can only hope that Chester County does not face the enormity of the budget gap for 2011 as forecasted by Montgomery County.

There have been recent comments on Community Matters that Tredyffrin’s 2011 budget can (and some have suggested, should) wait until later in the year for discussion. From my vantage point, postponing township 2011 budget discussion until November or December is short-sighted and not fiscally responsible.

In my opinion, a mid-year discussion of 2010 budget (expenses and revenues to-date) and forecasting for the 2011 budget is a fiduciary responsibility. My desire for a public 2010/11 township budget discussion is not about Warren Kampf’s political campaign or for that matter, ‘party politics’. This country, state, county, and yes, Tredyffrin Township are struggling with finances — so instead of suggesting that supervisors and residents just wait until November or December for budget analysis, I would simply ask why wait?

By July of last year, the BAWG committee was well underway in their 2010 budget meetings. Shouldn’t we review where we are with BAWG’s 2010 recommendations . . . have all the cost-saving suggestions been implemented? I don’t know, but maybe if we started discussing the township budget situation now, there would still be time in the 2010 calendar year to correct or to implement some of the BAWG recommendations. I just don’t understand how putting off the budget discussion helps anyone?

By KEITH PHUCAS
Times Herald Staff

COURTHOUSE — With economy still in the grips of a slowdown, Montgomery County government has to cut expenses or raise revenue to fill a $22.5 million funding gap for the 2011 budget, and officials are expected to discuss shrinking the size of government.

In a June letter to the commissioners from Chief Financial Officer Randy K. Schaible, the county can’t count on transferring funds as it did this year. For the 2010 budget, the county used $8 million from its capital reserve fund for the general fund.

Schaible said borrowing will increase the county’s debt service in next year’s budget. The county borrowed $35 million for open space in March 2010, which will push up debt by $2 million per year. As well, the government is expected to borrow for capital spending, which includes the recent prison expansion, and that will cost $4 million a year in debt service.

At the commissioners meeting Wednesday, Deputy Chief Operating Officer James Maza said officials would ask departments to draw up a proposed no-growth and no-tax budgets, and to avoid raising taxes could mean a 9 percent cut in departmental expenditures “across the board.”

“This gap contemplates that we’re going to have to make some radical changes from previous budget decision making,” he said. “We understand that’s going to call into question downsizing both the function and the size of government,” Maza said.

Also, in order to meet pensions, the county is considering issuing pension obligation bonds to fund the $20 million contribution, he said.

A major concern is state grant funding. Schaible estimates Pennsylvania is behind by $1 billion in its budget. Recently, Congress voted against sending more than $800 in Medicaid payments to the state. Officials hope the Obama administration will reconsider restoring the aid.

In December 2010, the commissioners voted 2-1 to adopt a $407.7 million budget and managed to avoid a tax increase. Commissioners’ Chairman Jim R. Matthews and Vice Chairman Joseph M. Hoeffel voted in favor; Commissioner Bruce L. Castor, Jr. voted against the spending plan.

Community Matters © 2024 Frontier Theme