Pattye Benson

Community Matters

Paul Drucker

Ray Clarke Provides Notes from TESD School Board Meeting & Budget Approval Process

June 15, 2010
14 Comments

My friend, Ray Clarke once again has not let us down with his detailed notes and commentary from the TESD School Board meeting. Posting the agenda from last night’s meeting, I noted its 101 pages so I have a feeling that last night was long and tedious. Which makes me all the more grateful that Ray attended, took notes and then provides us with his thoughtful remarks. Thanks Ray!

I was particularly interested to know that PSERS was discussed at the meeting. The large white elephant in the room, we’d all like to hope that PSERS goes away or somehow just self-corrects but we know that’s just wishful thinking. PA House Appropriations Chair Dwight Evan’s proposed legislation addresses PSERS, but appears to be a delay tactic where the major liability to the taxpayers remains. But I suppose one could say his bill is better than nothing . . . which is where we currently are on the subject.

At the end of Ray’s notes he asks for State House candidates Drucker and Kampf to weigh in, but my experience says that will be doubtful. Unfortunately, my discussions with politicians anymore seem to be laced with an ‘it’s off the record’ remark . . . but maybe these candidates will surprise us!

Read over Ray’s comments from the meeting and please provide your thoughts. Any other readers attend the meeting, if so, please weigh in with your comments.

The School Board passed:

  • The 2010/11 budget with a 2.9% property tax increase, as developed and communicated over the past six months
  • Issuance of $23.6 million of bonds at “record low interest rates” – but which will still cost $36.7 million to repay over the next 15 years. Part will be used to advance refund existing bonds, which will save $170,000 next year and have a total net present value savings of $377,000 over the next dozen years. Note that the savings are front-loaded, extra costs come in the out years (see later, re PSERS……)
  • A bid to demolish the ESC, leading to a total project cost of $450,000 – about half the working estimates, which is very good news. The work to take place at the end of the calendar year.
  • Modifications to the K-6 class sizing practice that will save three teaching positions next year and more later, while remaining in accordance with current staffing policy. The implementation enabled by more recent resignations than expected.
  • A bid for printing services to replace the print shop currently housed in the ESC. Important to note that the budget strategy to save $84,000 did not explicitly articulate the $52,000 cost for the outsourced services, although apparently that cost is included in the budget. There was an agonizing 15 minute discussion while the Board and Administration talked all around this without facing up to it.

Interesting update about PSERS: PA House Appropriations Chair Dwight Evans has introduced a bill to implement a Rendell plan to delay the increase in employer (= taxpayer) contributions to teacher and state employee pension plans. Basically this limits the rate of increase of contributions via “collars” on the percentage of payroll that the taxpayer would have to contribute. Here’s an analysis:
http://www.paindependent.com/todays_news/detail/alternate-state-pension-plan-would-cost-8-billion
From some of the numbers floated, I guess this would provide TESD with at least a $5 million annual expense saving (vs the current forecast) in the problem years coming up.

But of course, the liabilities are still out there, so, to quote another website:
http://www.pennsylvaniavotes.org/forum/forums/p/149/300.aspx#300:
“An actuarial note attached to the bill by PERC (the PA Public Employee Retirement Commission) estimates that the higher costs in later year will far outweigh the contribution reductions in earlier years – to the tune of an astonishing $52 billion over 30 years. That is an additional $52 billion that taxpayers – through higher state and school property taxes – will have to fork over to pay off the pension obligations, and this assumes an 8% annual return on investment.”

This bill is being compared to refinancing a mortgage, which is not a bad analogy. Continuing with that: the plan does of course completely fail to address the fact that the principal (the public sector pension liability) vastly exceeds the market value (= pensions valued at private sector levels). Not a thought being given to writing down that liability!

For how long will voters put up with the union stranglehold on the legislature? At some point the economic pain will become overwhelming. What do our current and would-be representatives think about this?

Tredyffrin’s Police Union Fundraising . . . a sign of the times?

June 11, 2010
53 Comments

All residents and business owners in Tredyffrin Township received a letter in the last few days from the Tredyffrin Township Police Association, the union for the police officers in Tredyffrin’s police department.

The letter from Kevin Moore (president of the local police union) stated that this was the first annual letter drive and that contributions were needed by the police for ‘local community programs’ and to ‘support our employee assistance fund’. Many thoughts went through my mind as I read the letter; I wondered about the authenticity of the letter and the fundraising effort by the police. Just a few weeks ago, our local firefighters had warned residents to be aware of professional solicitors asking for donations while claiming that they were raising funds for our local firefighters. Initially I wondered if this was a similar scam; the unsigned letter did not provide a contact telephone number or email address. Although I have been unable to authenticate the letter, I am going to assume that it is legitimate.

Since receiving the police solicitation letter, I have received a number of emails and phone calls from residents with comments, questions and concerns about the solicitation by Tredyffrin’s police union. In addition to wondering whether the letter from the police union was legitimate, I have been asked if this solicitation implies that the police force is not fully funded by our tax dollars. The letter stated the police would use the funds for community funds — what kind of programs and (if the programs are required) why are the programs not currently funded. Another comment I received from a resident, was in regards to the timing of the fundraising and would this resident and business solicitation somehow affect the volunteer firefighters funding efforts.

I am not exactly sure how I feel about the solicitation letter by our local police. I have a few questions about this fundraising effort; specifically, I would appreciate further details on the use of our contributions. Do police departments in our neighboring municipalities fundraise? Fundraising is a common practice by police departments in other areas of the country so maybe this is a sign of the times. I’d be very interested how others feel on this topic.

Will Ardmore Transit Center’s Funding Issues Impact the Future of Paoli Transportation Center?

June 7, 2010
20 Comments

The $180 million Ardmore Transit Center planned for downtown Ardmore shares many similarities with the vision many are planning for the Paoli Transportation Center. Ardmore’s downtown facelift is to include replacing the existing train station plus a new Main Street area with 500-car parking garage, stores and a five-story apartment building. The project is set to completely revitalize the historic community of Ardmore by the creation of a new mixed-use village much like what is planned for Paoli.

The developer for the Ardmore project, Dranoff Properties of Philadelphia is asking Lower Merion Commissioners for a one-year extension claiming design issues with Amtrak. In December, Dranoff learned that Amtrak will be upgrading its electrification system in 10 years and the overhead power lines needs to be factored in to the planned design; resulting in at least a 6 months delay. Dranoff’s extension request will be discussed at Lower Merion’s next commissioner meeting. However, residents are learning that there is more than design delays, there are money problems due to SEPTA. If you recall, SEPTA had made a big publicity splash with its announcement of 22 capital projects. However, now SEPTA is saying these projects may have to wait indefinitely. SEPTA’s contribution to the Ardmore Transit Center was to be $10 million – SEPTA’s general manager Joseph Casey is blaming Washington, pointing the finger at the federal government’s decision not to add tolls to Pennsylvania’s I-80.

The Ardmore Transit Center has been bogged down by one problem or another since the project originally launched in 2004 with a federal grant. Just 2 years ago, the original developer pulled out of the project and was replaced by Dranoff Properties. Last year, Carl Dranoff of Dranoff Properties and township commissioners said they were counting on $5.8 million from the Federal Transit Administration, $6 million in state funding for the 500-car parking garage, $10 million from SEPTA, and $250,000 from Montgomery County.

This past Friday, St. Joseph’s University hosted a state House transportation and policy meeting where SEPTA’s general manager revealed that insufficient funding from Washington was forcing SEPTA to cut $110 million from its capital budget for the fiscal year starting July 1. Although extremely frustrating, Dranoff and Lower Merion officials appear to be optimistic that their money troubles will be resolved and that project will go forward. Or is this going to be another sign of the economics of our times where we see major projects such as infrastructure repairs on roads and bridges, transportation centers, etc. all put on indefinite ‘hold’?

Hearing the news on the Ardmore Transit Center project, Rep Jim Gerlach (R) responded, “. . . I am becoming increasingly concerned that continuing delays will ultimately threaten the federal funds I have already worked to obtain. Rather than asking for more delays, the residents and taxpayers deserve a redoubling of efforts by all parties – Amtrak, SEPTA, the township, and the developer – to get this project done as expeditiously as possible.”

So what exactly does this news mean for the Paoli Transportation Center? SEPTA forced to cut their capital budget by $110 million, doesn’t that impact the future of our economic revitalization project in Paoli? Since Ardmore started their transportation center project before Paoli, it would seem that their project is ahead of us for SEPTA, state and federal funding.

I would like for State Rep Paul Drucker to weigh in on the status of funding for Paoli’s transportation center. As the developer for the Paoli Transportation Center, maybe Peter Monaghan of Strategic Realty Investments could comment as to whether he thinks Ardmore’s funding situation with their transit center will have an impact on Paoli’s redevelopment project.

State Representative Paul Drucker Supports Legislative Reform in Harrisburg

May 31, 2010
4 Comments

Over the holiday weekend, Pennsylvania State Representative Paul Drucker made a foray in to the world of local journalism. Coming on the heels of a statewide grand jury report which detailed reform proposals in the Commonwealth, was an article by Rep. Drucker discussing legislative reform policy which appeared in the May 30th edition of the Daily Local newspaper. (see complete article below).

I completely support Rep. Drucker’s appeal to terminate or at least drastically reduce taxpayer-funded political caucuses. As a start, I would appreciate the imposing of tougher ethics practices and the halt of all payments and benefits to staffers on leave to campaigns and ban compensatory time. If lasting reform is to be recognized in the Commonwealth, the polarization of party politics in Harrisburg needs to end.

Several months ago in Community Matters, I wrote about our state representatives usage of per diem (Pennsylvania legislators can use tax-free per diems for home purchase . . . what about taxability issues for fraud issues?)amounting to $155+/day and its ‘use’ considered a ‘legal perk’ of the job. Some Pennsylvania state legislators are using tax-free per diems as a means of financing real estate purchases. Annually, Pennsylvania taxpayers finance approximately $2.7 million in reimbursed per diems for our elected officials. Previously, I have voiced my concern to Rep Drucker in regards to what I view as misuse of per diems by some of our legislators (although seemingly legal); I am pleased to read that Rep. Drucker supports reform in this area. I would like to see the per diem payments to lawmakers stopped, or at least tied to actual expenses. Why should the taxpayers finance tax-free per diems for home purchases by our legislators?

The inherent problem is that any changes in Harrisburg require legislative approval and I’m betting that the legislature is in no rush to address these reforms. It is good to know that our own state representative supports change; and is willing to take a stand on behalf of Pennsylvania taxpayers.

Everybody Knows Reforms Are Needed

By PAUL DRUCKER, Guest Columnist

It is a sad day when it takes a grand jury to point out what the rest of us already know — that the state Legislature is in serious need of reform. In case you missed it, the grand jury that has been looking at the Bonusgate scandal for the past two years issued a report this week suggesting some badly needed changes to the way business is done in Harrisburg.

There are many of us who have been saying this for years. In fact, the need to make state government more responsive — and more deserving of the public’s trust — was one of the main reasons I decided to run for the state Legislature. I hope the grand jury recommendations are a wake-up call for those in the Legislature who want to keep things as they are. I personally think that when an impartial group of Pennsylvania citizens speaks about an issue this important, we should listen.

As outlined in a story printed in the Daily Local News this week, there are a number of recommendations made by the grand jury that I believe should be implemented, in order to restore public faith in state government and ensure its efficient functioning. Among these suggestions are:

Reducing the number of state employees. The average number of employees per state legislator is nine employees. I agree that this number is too high. I currently employ three full-time staff members for two offices, and one staff member who only works one day per week. Despite this, in 2009 my office was in the top 15 of constituents served out of all Democratic state representatives.

Fixing the budget process. The state budget process, as we all know, is broken. The lack of line-item control by the rank and file is frustrating and non-productive. The lack of communication between the two caucuses during budget negotiations sets the stage for budget battles and gridlock. As the grand jury recommends, I believe taxpayer-funded political caucuses should either be terminated, or modified drastically to help reduce paralyzing partisan politics.

Reforming discretionary accounts. The problem with these accounts is not the projects that are funded as much as the secretive process. I believe discretionary grant-making should be publicly disclosed, as Congress has done with appropriations earmarks.

The fact that there are separate, taxpayer-funded human resources, information technology and print shops for the Democratic and Republican caucuses is a waste of taxpayer dollars. State legislators’ staff should be employed by the state — not a political caucus. Salaries and job descriptions and all personnel matters should be handled by one state non-partisan office, as should IT support and print and copy needs.

The outdated practice of blanket per-diem payments needs to be modified. It is certainly fair to reimburse legislators when they are required to be in Harrisburg, away from home. I do accept per diem payments when I am required to be in Harrisburg, but I believe I have been prudent and have not abused the system. In addition, I do not use a state car, I do not accept reimbursement for mileage to attend district events (which would amount to a large sum of taxpayer dollars), my staff salary total is in the lower end of all representatives, and my staff has not received any raise in salary since my term began.

In July 2009, I stood with a bipartisan group of legislators and introduced a package of reforms. It included legislation that would require state representatives to pay a percentage of their salary toward their health care costs, redistricting legislation, and a ban on bonuses for all state employees. It also included legislation to create a searchable Web site to track all state legislative expenses over $1,000, and restrict the awarding of contracts that may result in public officials’ financial gain, including the financial gain of family members. These bills are now awaiting action by committees. They are all good ideas, and they need to be enacted into law, but it is unlikely that they will move unless all the members of the General Assembly feel more pressure for reform.

This is why the grand jury report this week is so important, and why we should be thanking them for their work — not dismissing them. Legislative reform must be one of the top priorities in Harrisburg, because important duties, like passing a responsible budget our constituents deserve — cannot be done efficiently until the house has been reformed.

For my part, I will continue to work toward change. I will press my colleagues to act on the package of reforms we introduced last year, and I will support legislation that improves the way Harrisburg works.

(Paul Drucker, of Wayne, represents the 157th Legislative District in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives.)

Republicans Make their Choice for the 157. . . Drucker will Oppose Kampf in November

May 19, 2010
29 Comments

The Republicans in the 157th House District (which includes Phoenixville, Schuylkill and Tredyffrin townships in Chester County, and portions of Lower Providence and West Norriton in Montgomery County) have made their choice. The battle of the Republicans has determined that it will be Warren Kampf facing off against incumbent Democratic State Rep Paul Drucker in November.

Phoenixville Borough Councilman Ken Buckwalter captured the Phoenixville precincts but Kampf’s strong showing in the Tredyffrin area and Montgomery County became the deciding factor and ultimate victory for Kampf.

On the Democratic side, Drucker, who ran unopposed yesterday, is completing his first term in Harrisburg. Drucker filled the seat after he succeeded longtime Republican Carol Rubley, who retired in 2008. In a nail-biting close race, Drucker defeated Republican opponent Guy Ciarrocchi by a narrow margin of 50.9 percent to 49.1 percent in 2008.

As was the case with the Drucker-Ciarrocchi race, the November election for the 157 will pit two local attorneys against each other. Interestingly, both candidates from Paoli and also from the same precinct – W2. As this new phase of the State House race starts today, here’s hoping for a campaign of civility and one focused on the issues.

Pottstown newspaper, The Mercury . . . ‘Two Vie for 157th House in Republican Primary Tuesday’

May 17, 2010
8 Comments

The clock is ticking down to the start of Primary Election Day. The Pottstown newspaper, The Mercury has an article written by Dennis Wright which details the Republican race between Ken Buckwalter and Warren Kampf for the Pennsylvania State House 157 race. The winner of the Republican Primary race will appear on the ballot with incumbent Democrat Paul Drucker in November’s General Election.

Don’t let the forecasted cold temperatures and rainy weather keep you from the polls tomorrow. Participate in democracy and get out and vote. The polls open at 7 AM and will remain open until 8 PM. Here’s hoping for a good turnout of voters tomorrow and best wishes for the candidates and their families.

Two vie for 157th House seat in Republican primary Tuesday

By Dennis J. Wright

PHOENIXVILLE — Two spirited Republicans — Kendrick Buckwalter and Warren Kampf — will compete Tuesday for the chance to take on incumbent Democratic state Rep. Paul Drucker in the 157th House District.

Drucker is completing his first term in Harrisburg after he succeeded longtime Republican Carole Rubley, who retired in 2008. He defeated Republican opponent Guy Ciarrocchi by a narrow margin of 50.9 percent to 49.1 percent and the race is expected to be competitive again this year.

Buckwalter, a Phoenixville borough councilman, announced his seeking of the Republican nomination in January. A Phoenixville resident, Buckwalter is a small businessman and 15-year veteran of municipal government in the borough. He has served as chairman of Phoenixville’s zoning hearing board, and has been elected to two terms on Borough Council, where he currently serves. He has also volunteered as a firefighter, and is well-known for his support of the work they do.

Buckwalter said he is running for the seat to utilize the experience he’s gained over the past two decades. “I’m at the point of my life where I can take the experience I’ve gained over the last 22 years of public service to represent the people in the 157th District,” Buckwalter said. “I can do this now as a full-time citizen legislator.”

While he wants to see reforms in state government, Buckwalter said change takes time. “I’m not running to try to change everything overnight,” he said. “I’m just one person. I’m trying to use my experience as a fiscal conservative and apply it to the state budget and the pension problem. We got to get to a point where we don’t bankrupt the state while fulfilling the pension obligation.

Kampf is an attorney with White and Williams LLP, and has served on the Tredyffrin Township Board of Supervisors for the past six years, including serving as chairman in 2008 and 2009. Prior to becoming a supervisor, Kampf served on the Tredyffrin Zoning Hearing Board. Kampf said he is looking to bring his experience with him to Harrisburg.

“I’m running because I think state government is fundamentally broken as far as our taxes go,” Kampf said. “It spends too much and delivers so little as far as education and economical development. While a Tredyffrin Board Supervisor, I’ve helped deliver four no-tax budgets so everyone can live within their means. I think it is that kind of experience is what we need in Harrisburg.”

Fiscal discipline in state government is needed, Kampf said.”I hope to bring this strong fiscal discipline to our state government,” he said. “There are voices talking about that, and I would like to join them. There is also education and job safety, and if we focus on those priorities, and eliminate things like waste and outdated programs,”

The 157th House District includes Phoenixville, Schuylkill and Tredyffrin townships in Chester County, and portions of Lower Providence and West Norriton in Montgomery County.

A Weekend of Celebration . . . medical school graduation!

May 17, 2010
1 Comment

Apologies in advance for a bit of personal indulgence . . .

This was a weekend of celebration in Cleveland for my husband and I. Our only child, Lyndsey graduated from the Cleveland Clinic Lerner School of Medicine. With the distinction as the youngest in her class at 25, Lyndsey was 1 of 27 in her med school graduation class receiving her MD. This week she is off to Chicago with her attorney husband (of 2 weeks!) to find an apartment and prepare to start OB/GYN – fertility surgery residency in mid-June at the University of Chicago Medical Hospital.

Returning from Cleveland last night, my husband and I were overwhelmed with pride of Lyndsey’s accomplishment; it is so hard for us to believe that we are now parents of a Doctor! And the realization that after 23 years of private school tuition, the Benson bank will now finally close with yesterday’s medical school graduation!

Now on to the Primary Election tomorrow — I have read various reports that are forecasting a low turnout tomorrow. Let’s see if Tredyffrin can ride the tide of higher than expected voters. The polls open at 7 AM and stay open until 8 PM. Don’t let a few rain drops keep you away . . . don’t sit on the sidelines . . . make a difference by voting!

Tredyffrin Republican Committee Race Heats Up in W-2 Precinct

April 28, 2010
17 Comments

The upcoming Primary Election will present an interesting phenomenon in Tredyffrin’s W-2 voting precinct. This is the voting district for State Rep Paul Drucker, Supervisor and State Rep candidate Warren Kampf, and Supervisor John DiBuonaventuro — interestingly, my part of the Great Valley is also included in the W-2 precinct.

Tredyffrin has 17 different precincts and I believe that W-2 is the only district that will have a contested primary election for a committee seat (either Republican or Democrat). If my math is correct, there are 2 positions in each precinct; 17 districts x 2 positions = 34 positions. There are 34 Republicans and 34 Democrats committee positions in Tredyffrin. Sixty-four total committee positions from both political parties; and the only precinct contested is my W-2 precinct. The W-2 Republican committee race will feature supervisors Kampf (current W-2 Rep committeeman), DiBuonaventuro and attorney Bill Lynch running against each other in the primary. Yes, the only contested committee race in Tredyffrin and it will feature 2 supervisors against each other. In addition to running for the local committee seat, Supervisor Kampf is also on the ballot for the Republican State House opposing fellow Republican Ken Buckwalter of Phoenixville. Democrat Paul Drucker is the current State House Representative and will be on the primary ballot unopposed.

This week, registered Republicans in the W-2 precinct received the following campaign letter from supervisor DiBuonaventuro. Anteresting battle is brewing in this section of the township . . . I’m thinking that Primary Day in W-2 could provide a Kodak moment or two when I go to vote.

Dear ____________,

Thank you for all of your support these last two years. It has been an honor to serve as your Supervisor, representing the Western District of Tredyffrin and providing the support and constituent services our citizens need.

I am writing to let you know I am a candidate for Republican Committeeman in our voting precinct, W-2. This position, along with Committeewoman Jean Sauer, represents registered Republicans in Tredyffrin Township who vote at Delaware Valley Friends School on East Central Avenue in Paoli.

On May 18th, I am running to challenge appointed Committeeman Warren Kampf. Kampf, who recently moved to the district, is also a Township Supervisor and is also running to be the Republican Candidate for State Representative. There is a third person on the ballot who is also challenging Kampf for committeeman.

The position of Committeeman for W-2 will have significant impact for not only the residents of Berwyn, Paoli, and Malvern, but for all of Tredyffrin as we elect four Supervisors next year. The committeeman post is for two years and will have a direct role as to which Republicans are candidates for Township Supervisor and School Board in 2011.

Over the last two years as your Supervisor, I have represented the interests of all of our citizens in the Western District and throughout Tredyffrin. We delivered results together. They include the demanding Turnpike negotiations that directly impacted our Summerhill neighbors and others, the Paoli Train Station and Town Center Plan, and the storm water management issue in Valley Hills. These are just a few of the major challenges we effectively managed as a team.

Many issues and future challenges remain. This is the reason I need your vote on May 18th.Let’s make sure to the extent we can, that candidates endorsed to run for the Board of Supervisors and the School Board are both qualified and that they always put our interests first.

Thank you for your consideration and if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing you on Primary Election Day, May 18th, if not before.

With appreciation, I am

John DiBuonaventuro

Western District Supervisor

Supervisors Lamina, Kampf & Olson Provide Reality TV for Tredyffrin Residents

April 20, 2010
41 Comments

Below you will find the entire transcript of my statement at last night’s Board of Supervisors meeting. I know it is long but I decided that the only way to fully explain, was to insert an unedited version. I do not believe in surprises and it was not my intent to catch the supervisors off guard last night, so I sent 2 emails last week, detailing my questions and concerns about the firefighter funding process and reminding them of the Pitcarin decision of March 2008. The $50,000 in-kind offer to the Tredyffrin Historic Preservation Trust was not permitted due to what could be perceived as a ‘pay to play’ arrangement between the township and Pitcarin. I received no responses to either of my emails.

I had advised the supervisors of my concerns; so my expectation for last night was that they would simply listen and at best, thank me for my remarks. Unfortunately for me, the Keene Hall audience and those watching at home that is not what happened. If one was only interested in the merits of reality TV, than last night was worth watching. As I stated last night, it was my intention to wait until after the first quarter had ended before exploring the process of the fundraising effort. (March 31, 2010 was the announced end date for collection of the fire company donations).

I waited until the fund drive was successfully completed and the money safely delivered to the fire company before opening the discussion on the process. In between the personal insults which were hurled at me, I realized something. It is OK to agree with the supervisor decisions but there’s a personal price paid if you wish to have a differing opinion. At one point, Bob Lamina called Community Matters a democrat blog and told us he refers to it as ‘Benson’s Blog’. Where that came from, I have no idea, but that will certainly be a YouTube moment. (Yes, my husband taped the meeting).

Lamina and Kampf’s admonishment of me using personal attacks and negative innuendos was disgraceful. Following their attack on me, Carol Clarke, a Great Valley resident felt compelled to speak up in my defense and to offer her opinion on the supervisors solicitation of local companies, and the perception by the community (as she saw it). Although a gallant effort (and much appreciated by me) Carol also was viewed as the enemy and similarly dismissed by supervisors Kampf and Lamina. Next Dariel Jamieson took the microphone, determined to seek an apology from Lamina to the democrats in the township and to Pattye Benson. Chairman Lamina retorted that he was allowed to have whatever opinion he wanted, apparently even as chair of the supervisors. Wow, in an instance I was taken back to earlier township meetings over the St. Davids sidewalk issue . . . remembering that Kampf, Lamina and Olson rule the township. They make the rules and once again they are free to break the rules. If you notice, I included Section IX, 902A of Tredyffrin’s Home Rule Charter in my remarks last night. (You will see it referenced below.)

At one point, Kampf referred to the supervisors meeting as a ‘New England Town Hall meeting’ — I have never attended a town hall meeting in New England, . . . are they laced with the same level of disrespect for the speakers? Lamina repeatedly questioned the ‘political timing’ of the fire funding discussion to myself and to Carol Clark. The timing of my remarks had to do with the ending of the first quarter, March 31st, which [by their own admission] was the official end of the Tredyffrin Township Supervisors Holiday Firefighter Fund Drive. I respectfully waited to discuss the process until the drive had ended . . . political timing, I don’t think so.

Supervisors Lamina, Kampf, and Olson consistently held the line that they had solicited as residents rather than supervisors for the Tredyffrin Township Supervisors Holiday Firefighters Fund Drive. But remembering that the cardboard check was presented during a Board of Supervisors Meeting and the members of the solicitation committee were named (Lamina, Kampf and Olson), I am not sure how it would be possible that the businesses did not know that they were supervisors. For those that are interested, here is the solicitation form which was used.

I would encourage you all to watch last night’s Board of Supervisors meeting and draw your own conclusions. I have received a couple of emails from Blair Meadowcroft, writer with the Main Line Suburban who attended last night’s meeting. She is writing an article about the meeting and I will be curious to read her take on it.

_________________________________________________

Unedited transcript of my statement presented at April 19, 2010 Board of Supervisors Meeting

I would like to address the process of the Tredyffrin Township Supervisors Holiday Firefighters Fund Drive. When the Fund Drive was announced on December 21 Board of Supervisors Meeting with the presentation of the cardboard check, I was as surprised as many in the community. I understood that the significance of the $23,200 cardboard check as presented by Warren Kampf was to make up for the cut to the fire companies that had occurred as a result of the township’s 2010 budget. I was surprised that 3 of the supervisors, Warren Kampf, Paul Olson and Bob Lamina had come up with this idea and with no discussion from the community were already out fundraising. It seemed unclear whether the other supervisors were aware or not of this venture. It was also unclear whether the fire companies had been counseled about the Supervisors Holiday Firefighters Fund Drive. I set aside my concerns and problems with the process until after the first quarter – which as I understood it would be the cut-off for the Supervisors Holiday Firefighters Fund Drive.

We are now safely past the first quarter, the money has been collected and turned over to the Berwyn Fire Company and I would like to address issues and concerns with the process. I should say at this point, that my questions are only addressed to supervisors Bob, Warren, Paul and JD – Phil, EJ and Michelle were not on the Board of Supervisors in December 2009 when the fund drive began.

To receive an official update from the Berwyn Fire Company, I contacted their president Rip Tilden, asking 4 questions. Last week I sent the following questions to Rip Tilden, president of Berwyn Fire Company, and copied the Board on the email.

(1) What was the total amount received by Berwyn Fire Company as a result of the solicitation efforts of supervisors Olson, Lamina and Kampf?
(2) Has Berwyn Fire Company distributed the money to Radnor and Paoli fire companies?
(3) Can you provide a complete list of the donors, individuals and corporate?
(4) Are there any contributions that the fire company can not accept and therefore must return?

Rip kindly supplied me with his detailed response which I have added to my Community Matters blog and also sent to you. The total they received from the Tredyffrin Township Supervisors Holiday Firefighters Fund Drive was $24,400. In response to my question for the list of donors, it was Mr. Tilden’s suggestion that the information come from the solicitors, not the fire company, which would be the Tredyffrin Township supervisors.

When I sent you a copy of Mr. Tilden’s response to my questions, I asked you to add this topic to the agenda, answer the questions and suggested that the public should have a complete accounting of the supervisors fund drive. I received not response to my email to the board of supervisors, nor did I receive a response to my 2nd email to the board of supervisors.

In my email to you, I voiced my concern about the solicitation by supervisors to companies that could be doing business with the township and I cited a specific example from May 2008 and the Pitcairn Company. The same four supervisors, Warren Kampf, Bob Lamina, Paul Olson, and John DiBuonaventuro were supervisors in 2008 and were involved with that decision, as was Mimi Gleason and Tom Hogan. For the benefit of the other supervisors and the public, I will briefly explain. I was and still am the president of Tredyffrin Historic Preservation Trust, a nonprofit 501c3 organization. Judy DiFilippo (who was a supervisor at the time and also a Trust board member) and myself attended a press party for the Trust. At the party I was approached by Tony Noce, a VP for Pitcairn Properties. We had information available at the party on the Jones Log Barn and Mr. Noce was extremely interested in the historic rebuilding project and asked detailed questions about the barn. I explained the background and history of the project and that the barn was to be rebuilt in Wilson Farm Park. Mr. Noce suggested that to me that his company could help with their use of heavy equipment for grading, etc. He explained that his company would be building an office building in Chesterbrook and if we could work out the schedule, he’d have his guys bring the equipment over to do the grading and would have some of his people add a few extra work days to help the Trust.

I was delighted with this generous offer and truly excited about the possibility of some real help with the Jones Log Barn project, in the form of an in-kind donation. Remember, I did not solicit Pitcarin’s help – it was offered to me and the Trust. I viewed the kind offer as just that, a kind offer of help and a gift valued at as much as $50,000. We used the offer in grant applications, pushed up the date for the architectural drawings, etc. so as to be able to accept this offer.

About 6 weeks after the offer, Judy receives word at an Executive Session of the Board of Supervisors that the Trust would not be allowed to accept Pitcairn’s in-kind offer.The Board of Directors of the Trust received the following email from Judy from May 6, 2008: (excerpted)

“ . . . Trust Board Members –

1) Last evening in Executive Session there was discussion about Pitcairn’s offer to the Trust. Some of you may know that the Township is trying to negotiate an agreement with them relating to a new office building they want to construct in Chesterbrook. The Board was concerned that there was a perceived ‘conflict of interest’ with their offer to grade and/or excavate the ground in Wilson Farm Park for the construction of the barn, “What did they want in return?” for their offer. . . “

The idea was that there could be a ‘pay to play’ perception because of the final review of the land development project between the township & Pitcairn. Needless to say, I was very upset – I was not on the planning commission, the zoning commission, nor an elected official, and I was not allowed to accept this offer. Warren Kampf was chair at the time and called me while on a business trip in California to discuss the board’s decision. He was absolute that I could not accept this offer because this company was doing business with the township. I knew nothing about Pitcairn’s planning commission review yet I could not accept the offer.

Fast forward 18 months to December, 2009 and the very same people who told me that I could not accept an offer with a company that was doing business in the township (even though I didn’t know it) goes and solicits local companies. Mr. Kampf read off a list of donors at the December 21 meeting of the cardboard check presentation that included:

Cafe Winberie’s
Christopher’s
Braxton’s
Margaret Kuo’s
Comcast
PECO
Devon BMW
Devon Horse Show
Lamb, McErlane
Villanova University
Saul Ewing
Aqua PA
Liberty Property Trust

The way I see it is the only difference between the Pitcairn/Trust situation and the fire company solicitation is that one was an in-kind offer and the other was a monetary contribution; both could be perceived as benefiting the township. If a business that was solicited by the supervisors during the Holiday Fund Drive were to have zoning, planning development projects, contract negotiations, etc. with the township, the perception of pay-to-play would exist. (This was the argument provided when I debated that the Trust should be allowed to accept Pitcairn’s offer.) Conceptually, there is no difference between the situations.

Comcast is currently negotiating a 15-yr. franchise agreement with the township which expires in 2010, Lamb McErlane is the township solicitor and has an agreement with the township and they were solicited and donated, Aqua PA has a contract with the township, and Liberty Property Trust has had ongoing land development issues for the last decade over Church Road in the Great Valley.

Referencing the Home Rule Charter, Article IX, Prohibited Activities and Conflict of Interest

902. CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

A. No elected or appointed official of the township shall:

1. Engage in any activity or take any action by virtue of his official position from which activity or action the official, or any other person or entity in whose welfare the official is interested, shall benefit or realize a gain or advantage. Such benefit, gain or advantage shall not, however, be construed to be prohibited if the action in question is in behalf of a group of citizens of the township and such benefit and relationship is generally known and acknowledged.

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

3. Seek to influence, directly or indirectly, the awarding of any contract where such official is interested or would benefit directly, financially or otherwise, from said contract. Such action is not intended to apply to actions of a Supervisor on behalf of a group or class of citizens of the township who would benefit from the contract and such benefit and relationship is generally known and acknowledged.

I would like to understand why 4 supervisors in 2008 said that Pitcairn’s offer could be perceived as a pay to play but the same supervisors OK their own solicitation of local companies. This is not about the money that was raised. It is about the process that they used to raise the money – the source of the donations and the encouragement donors may have received/felt in responding to the solicitation.

Why was the Trust not permitted to accept an in-kind offer but supervisors can openly and publically solicit? Why are there different sets of rules applied? Same supervisors – different rules.

State Rep. Paul Drucker hosts 2nd Annual Community Leaders Breakfast

April 15, 2010
Comments

Our State Rep. Paul Drucker hosted his 2nd Annual Community Leaders Breakfast this morning at the Radisson Hotel in King of Prussia. Last year’s honoree was former supervisor Bill DeHaven; this year Mary Foote, executive director of the Colonial Theatre in Phoenixville was chosen.

Sitting among the volunteers this morning, I reflected on how these people are giving back to others and are making a real difference in their community. Many attending the breakfast were from Phoenixville who share and support the work of Mary Foote at the Colonial Theatre. Sharing is the keyword to describe the way in which volunteers approach their work. Volunteers share their skills and talents, even their money. But above all, they share themselves. They know that this attitude is the true measure of success in life and that it makes this community strong and healthy.

Thank you Paul for understanding the meaning of community service and for honoring the hard work of our community volunteers.

Community Matters © 2025 Frontier Theme