Pattye Benson

Community Matters

Tredyffrin Township

Another Angle on St. Davids Escrow Desision . . . STAP (Sidewalks, Trails & Paths) Committee Member Weighs In

February 5, 2010
1 Comment

Molly Duffy, member of the STAP (Sidewalks, Trails & Path) Committee looks at the recent Board of Supervisor decision in a different light. What does this decision say to its residents about the future walkability of our community? The STAP Committee thought that the supervisors shared their vision for a walking, biking landscape, but do they? Below is Molly’s letter to the editor that appears in this weeks edition the Main Line Suburban Life newspaper.

Tredyffrin supervisors missing the big picture

To the Editor:

Five years ago a handful of concerned Tredyffrin residents got together to talk about how we could make the township more walkable and bikable. The township agreed that this was a worthy goal. After all, 78.5 percent of residents who responded to the 2004 Parks Recreation and Open Space survey stated that they would be likely to use an interconnected townshipwide trail system in Tredyffrin designed for pedestrian, runners, skaters and bikers.

Later in 2005 the Board of Supervisors formally created the STAP (Sidewalks Trails and Paths) Committee and charged it with the mission of identifying priority trail and sidewalk areas, determining appropriate trail and sidewalk types, and researching funding options. This very committed and energized group of volunteers did just that. The township’s Green Routes Network can be viewed at www.tredyffrin.org. As a member of STAP I’m proud to say that our highest-priority sidewalk project will be under construction within a few months. New sidewalks will connect T/E Middle School, Conestoga High School, Daylesford Train Station, the YMCA, the Easttown Library and the village of Berwyn. Residents will no longer have to walk on the road and risk their lives to get to any of these locations, and the school district may be able to eliminate the cost of operating a few buses. Because of the dedication of STAP and the township’s very talented and effective staff, the township received a $2.8-million grant that will pay for this project. If STAP and the Board of Supervisors had not had the vision and patience to move ahead with this project, it would not have been shovel-ready and consequently it would not have received ARRA grant funds.

The Board of Supervisors’ Jan. 25, 2010 vote to forgive St. Davids Golf Club’s obligation to build a path along Upper Gulph Road, which is part of the Green Routes Network, makes me wonder if the township still cares about its future.

Transforming Tredyffrin, largely developed in the car-centric 1950s and 1960s, into a walkable, bikable community is no small task. A best-case scenario estimate would put completion of the Green Routes Network at 15 years. Nevertheless it is a task we must complete if we want Tredyffrin to be a place where people want to live and work in the future. Yes, it will cost something. Perhaps it will be grant-funded. Perhaps it will not. Regardless, it is a wise investment in our future.

It is standard practice for new developments in Tredyffrin and elsewhere to include sidewalks in their plans. For many reasons people don’t want to rely on their cars to take them every place they need to go. People of all ages call Tredyffrin home. Many are too young to drive, some are unable to drive, and many more just want another option for getting from here to there. The ability to walk to school, church, work, the library, the dentist’s office or shopping gives us all, young and old, a sense of independence and some decent exercise.

The Green Routes Network will never include every street in the township. Instead it strives to connect residents to popular destinations. In the next few years, the Chester Valley Trail will cross our township on its way from Downingtown to Valley Forge. If we plan proper linkages, many Tredyffrin residents will be able to safely walk or bike to the trail from their front doors.

Recently the national news has focused on studies showing that while real-estate values have dropped, homes with a high walkability score have dropped much less. It is becoming standard for real-estate listings to show a home’s “walk score” because many homebuyers want to be able to walk or bike to a destination. You can find your home’s walk score at www.walkscore.com.

If we don’t begin to implement the Green Routes Network that the board of supervisors recently approved in the updated Comprehensive Plan and reaffirmed in the Green Tredyffrin Resolution, we’re taking a step backwards and depriving our children and grandchildren of a livable, desirable community.

Sincerely,

Molly Duffy, Paoli

Save Ardmore Coalition's Readers are Now Following Supervisors Lamina, Kampf, Olson & Richter!

February 4, 2010
3 Comments

Save Ardmore Coalition is following Tredyffrin’s Lamina, Kampf, Olson and Richter. Yes, our own YouTube stars are playing to a larger audience — the Board of Supervisors meeting clips are now on Save Ardmore Coalition’s website. www.saveardmorecoalition.org I thank Carla for presenting our local stars with greater play time. And remember, Warren Kampf, one of the infamous ‘4’ is now in the race for State House 157. To go directly to the YouTube post on Save Ardmore Coalition site, click on this link:

http://www.saveardmorecoalition.org/node/4114

Supervisor Lamina's Outrageous Defense of His St. Davids Golf Club Decision

February 4, 2010
14 Comments

As if the decision of Supervisors Lamina, Olson, Kampf and Richter at Tredyffrin’s Board of Supervisor meeting to return the escrow to St. Davids Golf Club was not outrageous on its own terms, we are now subjected to Chair Lamina’s defense of his actions in the Main Line Suburban Life newspaper. This Bloc of 4 is determined to rule (that’s right rule, not govern) at any cost to the community. As the outcry gets louder and louder from the community, please read how Chair Lamina plays the ‘spin doctor’ on this situation.

As a caveat to this story, it did not escape me that next to Lamina’s explanation of his St. Davids actions, was Warren Kampf’s announcement of his State House 157 run. Let’s all remember that the Bloc of 4 is not just Lamina, Olson and Richter, but attorney Warren Kampf was that 4th supervisor vote that allowed the motion to pass. Guess the ‘deal-making’ and the ‘law-stretching’ techniques learned locally may help in the campaign!

Lamina Defends Board Decision on St. Davids Club

By Blair Meadowcroft

A motion passed at the Jan. 25 Board of Supervisors meeting had many Tredyffrin Township residents both upset and confused. Although not on the agenda, the topic of the St. Davids Golf Club, an issue that has been thoroughly discussed for years, was brought up under the “New Matters from Board Members” section of the meeting.

After hearing discussion from board members and residents on both sides of the issue, the board voted 4-3 in favor of releasing $25,000 from an escrow account to the St. Davids Golf Club. The St. Davids Golf Club became a topic of importance many years ago when, as part of a development- approval process, the club agreed to construct and pay for a public sidewalk along its perimeter. Since then, however, the club continues to be without the promised sidewalks. Additionally, according to Tredyffrin Township’s Budget Advisory Working Group’s final report, the golf club offered a cash donation of $50,000, in lieu of the requirement to install the sidewalks, but the offer was declined.

The motion, which was introduced by Vice Chairman Paul Olson and passed by the board, left residents feeling unsettled and feeling that the golf club had been absolved of its obligations. Additionally residents expressed fear that passing this motion sets a precedent that will allow other developers the same sort of relief, and that this motion undermines past discussions against giving the golf club a way out.

In response, however, Chairman Bob Lamina explained that the golf club did not receive a “financial gift” from the township, and that “the only action taken related to relieving St. Davids was from an escrow in the form of a letter of credit they had previously established with a local bank to complete the sidewalk.” According to Lamina, the action taken by the board is not costing the township or the taxpayers anything, and that no money is changing hands in any way.

In addition, Lamina explained that his reasoning for why the motion was passed was due to the unnecessary nature of the project in the first place. “The Board of Supervisors agreed with the majority of the citizens of our community that sidewalks are not desired by its residents in that area of the township,” said Lamina. “This is a matter of policy and whether we should hold taxpayers, be they resident or business, on the line for a sidewalk that made no common sense, in an area where they were never intended and would require clear-cutting of trees and add new impervious surface. The only way we could affect this unnecessary sidewalk was to take the action we did. This is not about St. Davids; this motion would have been offered if it were a barbershop, a hoagie shop or ‘John Q. Citizen.’”

He went on to explain that the sidewalks in question did not relate to public safety, and that “given these challenging economic times, we should only be expending resources from our taxpayers for sidewalks” that will keep the public safe.

While the motion may have been made and passed at any board meeting, residents were left questioning whether or not the timing was purposeful. Attendance at the Board of Supervisors meeting was expectedly low given that there was a planned Tredyffrin/Easttown School Board meeting at the same time. “Under our current rules, any supervisor is free to offer any motion he chooses at any time,” said Lamina. “It is not unusual at all for board members to offer unpublished motions during discussions at our meetings and I believe it’s reasonable and appropriate for our board to have this flexibility where needed in its proceedings. In my nearly 12 years of experience on the board, I can’t recall an instance where the township ever consulted with another municipality or the school district on when we schedule our meetings.”

Additionally, while the topic was not on the agenda, Lamina added that he did not feel this was a surprise to anyone involved in the St. Davids issue. “This issue has been before the Planning Commission in many public meetings over the last three years,” said Lamina. “Members of our own board tried to broker a compromise for months after the applicant failed in several attempts to convince the Planning Commission that this made no sense and was very costly. Since the board has delegated authority for land development to the Planning Commission, our vote on the escrow was the only vehicle available for the board to effect a change to plans in that area of our community and that the majority of the residents in that area clearly did not want.”

The following are comments from the readers from mainlinemedianews.com which follow this article online. The people that commented are all thinking similarly to myself; I have yet to find anyone (of course, other than the ‘4’ supervisors and the few hand-chosen people which Olson called to attend the Supervisor meeting). Please read the comments and I would encourage you to add your own.

Comments

Panhandler wrote on Feb 3, 2010 12:59 PM:

” Elitism and racism is alive and well in Tredyffrin. They kiss the behind of the golf club, while they allow Mt. Pleasant to deteriorate and be taken over by students and shady developers.Lamina should be laminated and put at the back of a deep dark shelf to gather dust. He’s a jerk ”

Moderate Girl wrote on Feb 3, 2010 1:14 PM:

” Blair, Good for you Panhandler!

The issue is about an escrow deposit (not a letter of credit)on record with the township, and the precedent it will set if monies are returned prior to completion of a plan. It is not about sidewalks. What Lamina is saying is a bunch of hogwash!

It will also cost the taxpayers money in the end. When sidewalks/paths are installed in that area, the cost will far above what it was a couple of years ago or even today. Thus the taxpayers will be faced with a tax increase. I guess the Band of 4 are too stupid to see it. ”

Christine E. Johnson wrote on Feb 3, 2010 1:26 PM:

” I just had the opportunity to view the BOS Meeting on youtube and I’m appalled. I was one of those TRUSTING citizens who had to rely on the posted agenda because they don’t have cable. Obviously, due to the bad precedent this motion establishes, it’s not just about money or a sidewalk, BUT… I would like to point out that none of the residents of Mt. Pleasant who reside along Upper Gulph Road were asked to participate in Mr. Olson’s sidewalk “survey”.

Also, he kept repeating that Upper Gulph Road is dangerous. Um, Yeah. That’s why every time I see a kid from my neighborhood who is walking to or from the Tredyffrin Library, I pull over to give them a ride. Kids should not be walking on this road. It is not safe.

And, as Panhandler indicates, we have more and more students from Villanova and Cabrini College residing in Mt. Pleasant. And they are walking along Upper Gulph. Just ask the group who got cited for underage drinking along Upper Gulph a couple of months back.

Anyway, so now does this mean that any developer who has an agreement with the Planning Commission does not have to abide by the agreement? Plans be damned, we’ll do whatever we want and get our money back? Is development going to be allowed to run rampant and without proper supervision in Tredyffrin? ”

TT Republican wrote on Feb 3, 2010 2:14 PM:

” Mr. Lamina would be wise to read his own Township’s code prior to making statements on public record. Specifically, Mr. Lamina, please refer to Section 181-34(G) which plainly lays out the requirements for releasing an applicant from a performance guarantee. Where is the request in writing from St. David’s? Where is the evidence this was referred to the township engineer? Where is the written report from the engineer back to the board? Where is the recommended amount to be released made by the township?

The argument that the Board can do whatever it wants simply by making a motion flies in the face of any notion of a democratic government and transparency. ”

Malvern Independent wrote on Feb 3, 2010 11:04 PM:

” TT Republican:

Your points are right on! This whole affair has been a blot on the integrity of Tredyffrin since Olson and gang got involved. It’s a total disgrace and I hope that these people trying to abscond with our government get the legal retribution they deserve. ”

Sadder but wiser wrote on Feb 3, 2010 11:41 PM:

” I encourage readers to watch the videos on this matter to really understand these comments and their purpose by Mr. Lamina. The words bluster and swagger come to mind. WHO CARES if it was money or a letter of credit? His claim that no money changed hands is even more evidence of how insufficient his explanation is. IF there was no cash to return, WHAT WAS THE HURRY? Mr. Lamina is more than aware of the continuing discussions about taking this community into the 21st century — and accepting that municipalities can and do expect land development planning to take place for times far into the future. The 3 supervisors who voted against the motion that night very clearly stated that their objections were procedural — that the sidewalks were secondary to the issue. Mr. Olson made a motion because “he believes what people tell him” and Mr. Lamina explained that the motion was fine, Mr. Kampf rubber stamped his buddy’s deal to help a golf club with sidewalks, and Mrs. Richter didn’t do anything but apparently what she was told. SInce Mr. Olson was her largest contributor during her recent campaign for supervisor, I guess she owed him. She certainly didn’t feel like she owed the community any time to deal with this motion…Mrs. Kichline moved to table and Mr. Lamina did not even acknowledge the motion. Proving that Robert’s Rules of Order in Tredyffrin are Bob Lamina’s personal preferences for control. ”

Roger, wrote on Community Matters on February 3rd, 2010 at 3:26 pm

Pattye,

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

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

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

Second, he makes the statement that

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

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

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

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

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

February 3, 2010
12 Comments

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2Ngs60RjuQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GV1K9nuxMmw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydOzfvGFuMQ

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

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

As I See It: Control of Tredyffrin Township is Now in the Hands of Four People . . . as published in today's Main Line Suburban Life

February 3, 2010
2 Comments

In today’s Main Line Suburban Life newspaper is my As I See It article, “Control of Tredyffrin Township is now in the hands of four people”. Since Tredyffrin’s Board of Supervisors meeting on January 25, I have continued to do research on the motion to return escrow to St. Davids Golf Club. I have now determined that Tredyffrin Township has (1) historically not returned escrow without a written request; and (2) has not returned escrow without the completion of the project and review by the township engineer. That is until January 25, 2010.

Based on the actions of 4 supervisors (Bob Lamina, Warren Kampf, Paul Olson and E.J. Richter) precedent has been now set for all unfinished projects (and the outstanding escrow) as well as all future projects in Tredyffrin Township. For those who did not attend or watch the Board of Supervisors meeting, I would encourage you to catch a re-run. I hope to have YouTube sections of the St. Davids Golf Club section of the meeting containing the motion to return escrow, available later today.

Please understand that this issue is not sidewalks; it is about government policy and procedure and what can happen when control is placed in the hands of a few people.

As I See It: Control of Tredyffrin Township is now in the hands of four people

Published: Wednesday, February 3, 2010

By Pattye Benson

I preface the following article by saying that there are very few times in my life that I have been left speechless but Tredyffrin Township’s Board of Supervisors meeting of Jan. 25 was one of them. For me, that meeting represented community injustice of the worst kind.

I attended Tredyffrin Township’s Board of Supervisors meeting on Monday, Jan. 25. In the days leading up to this meeting, there had been scuttlebutt that Supervisor Paul Olson would once again bring up St. Davids Golf Club and the sidewalk issue. The word on the street was that Supervisor Olson intended to make a motion to return the $25,000 escrow to St. Davids. As part of St. Davids Golf Club’s 2005 land-development contract with the township, the country club was to build sidewalks. Since July 2008 St. Davids had been in default for failure to build the sidewalks. The St. Davids sidewalk issue had been thoroughly discussed at the Board of Supervisors meeting of Dec. 7. At the December meeting, questions had swirled about a suggested $50,000 cash offer from St. Davids Golf Club contained in the BAWG (Budget Advisory Working Group) report. Although there was no written evidence of the offer (which was to exchange $50K in lieu of building sidewalks), there was public outcry from many in the community about the St. Davids offer and the message its acceptance would send to contractors and builders doing business in Tredyffrin Township.

I did not think with the St. Davids Golf Club sidewalk history and community debate that it would be possible for Supervisor Olson to make a motion to return St. Davids’ escrow. There had been no notification to the public and the topic did not appear on the meeting agenda. Yet under “new” supervisor matters, Supervisor Olson did make a motion to return the escrow; Chair Bob Lamina seconded the motion and called for a supervisor vote. Supervisor Michelle Kichline attempted to offer her opinion on the motion but Chair Lamina silenced her and instead went to the audience for comment.

Bob Whalen, chair of the Planning Commission, explained that the sidewalks were part of the 2005 contractual agreement with St. Davids for their land-development project. He offered that representatives from the country club had returned to the Planning Commission asking for forgiveness on the sidewalks but the Planning Commission, considering precedent, voted against the club. Mr. Whalen further explained that there are currently at least six other projects in the township with unreturned escrow due to unfinished projects. To return escrow to St. Davids would now “open the floodgates” for contractors to request the release of escrow without completion of projects. Mr. Whalen adamantly opposed the motion. I then asked the supervisors if St. Davids had presented a written request to return their escrow. Although Supervisor Olson offered that he had “talked to some people at St. Davids,” the other supervisors confirmed that there was nothing in writing; in other words St. Davids Golf Club never asked for the return of their escrow!

Other audience members said passionately that supervisors cannot make a motion on a matter that was not on the agenda … that procedurally you must advertise the matter to the public … that you cannot just gift the country club with $80,000 (the estimated value of the sidewalk project). Several in the audience suggested that Supervisor Olson orchestrated the motion on Jan. 25 to coincide with the important Tredyffrin/Easttown School District meeting held at the same time; therefore expecting fewer residents in attendance at the supervisors meeting. Remembering that St. Davids Golf Club and the return of the escrow were not on the supervisor-meeting agenda; Supervisor Olson (and other supervisors) might have concluded that residents would attend the important school-district budget meeting in lieu of the township meeting, thus allowing for less opposition. But to those of us who did attend the supervisors meeting, it was obvious that Supervisor Olson (and possibly other supervisors) had contacted a few local St. Davids residents who opposed the sidewalks, as they came prepared with written statements of support for the motion. One of my many questions is: why should a select group of residents receive preferential notification of the meeting rather than full and public disclosure to all?

Following resident comments, Supervisor Kichline, a municipal attorney and former member of the township’s Zoning Hearing Board, spoke passionately about procedural law and the inappropriateness of Supervisor Olson’s motion, and moved to table the motion until these serious legal and procedural questions could be answered by the township solicitor. Chair Lamina again dismissed Supervisor Kichline and would not allow her motion “to table the discussion” to come to vote. Supervisor John DiBuonaventuro likewise argued against the return of St. Davids escrow, citing multiple reasons as to why the Board of Supervisors should not pass the motion. Township Manager Mimi Gleason added, when asked, that the passing of this motion would set precedent for all future township projects.

Having heard the comments from the residents and stated objections from Supervisors Kichline and DiBuonaventuro, Chair Lamina called for a vote to return the escrow to St. Davids Golf Club. Supervisor Phil Donohue along with Supervisors DiBuonaventuro and Kichline voted against the motion, and Supervisors Paul Olson, Bob Lamina, Warren Kampf and E.J. Richter voted for the motion. The motion carried 4-3 in favor to return the escrow to the country club.

Tredyffrin’s Board of Supervisors meeting of Jan. 25 was a rude awakening for me … I learned that in our township it is OK for four individuals (Olson, Lamina, Kampf and Richter) to make up the rules. At one point, when Supervisor Kichline offered that in Tredyffrin Township, the Planning Commission actually had the “last say” on the land-development process rather than the Board of Supervisor, Chair Lamina declared that he thinks that the Board of Supervisors will take back their control. Supervisors DiBuonaventuro, Kichline and Donohue did not watch silently as the “Bloc of 4” (Olson, Lamina, Kampf, and Richter) acted against Tredyffrin’s operating principles. Supervisors DiBuonaventuro, Kichline and Donohue understand that personal responsibility means doing the right thing when others do not.

The issue is not sidewalks; it is about following government policy and procedure. Historically Tredyffrin Township has never returned escrow without written request. In addition Tredyffrin Township has never returned escrow without completion of the work and review by the township engineer. That is until now. However, I like others on Jan. 25 discovered that our government policies and procedures do not apply if you are Supervisors Olson, Lamina, Kampf and Richter.

This is a sad reality … but if you are the “Bloc of 4,” you rule the township. Your other fellow supervisors do not matter, the public does not matter, the Planning Commissioners do not matter, the township solicitor does not matter and the township manager does not matter. These four will get to make the rules (or break the rules) as they see fit. As a government, its elected officials are to guide Tredyffrin Township. While politics play an important role in choosing our leaders and charting our priorities, politics should play no role in the rules of governing. The community entrusts the supervisors to care for its assets and its reputation. Our elected officials must conserve and enhance it, or they fail in their fundamental responsibility as evidenced by the decision of Supervisors Lamina, Kampf, Olson and Richter to return the escrow to St. Davids Golf Club.

What does the action of Supervisors Lamina, Kampf, Olson and Richter say for the future of Tredyffrin Township? What does it say to the residents or to all the many volunteers who serve on our township boards and committees? To take advantage of loopholes, quick fixes and shortcuts that will compromise the public trust … To base decisions such as the unprecedented return of escrow to St. Davids Golf Club on how much you can get away with … Integrity in the broadest sense should lead the actions of our elected officials. A moment of choice is a moment of trust and it is the testing point of character and competence.

If Tredyffrin Township’s Board of Supervisors meeting of Jan. 25 is any indicator, I question the transparency of Tredyffrin’s local government, fair dealing practices, full disclosure of information and public communication. Don’t the residents of Tredyffrin Township deserve better from some of its leaders?

Pattye Benson lives in Tredyffrin Township.

Montessori Children's House of Valley Forge Opens on Valley Forge Park Grounds

February 2, 2010
3 Comments

The Valley Forge Montessori Children’s House of Valley Forge moved in to its new ‘old’ home in Valley Forge National Historic Park this week. The article below was in today’s Philadelphia Inquirer newspaper. Montessori Children’s House is very special to me . . . our only child spent the first 3 years of her school career at this school when it was located at St. Matthews Methodist Church on Walker Road in Wayne. This was 25 years ago, and our little girl is now grown and will graduate from medical school and marry a young attorney this May.

Congratulations to my friend Gill Gutteridge, the parents and teachers for following your dream . . . your vision created the magic for the children!

School Opens on Valley Forge Park Grounds

By Kristin E. Holmes Inquirer Staff Writer

Not every preschooler gets to learn the alphabet in a park that commemorates an epic struggle for independence, but when 80 students at the Montessori Children’s House of Valley Forge look out their window, history stares back. The students and their teachers yesterday moved into the school’s new headquarters – a renovated barn and early-19th-century house on a southern corner of Valley Forge National Historical Park.

“We are so excited,” said Gillian Gutteridge, school administrator. “When we used to take a field trip, we went to the Great Valley Nature Center or the Perkiomen Watershed Conservancy. Now, we can just take them outside.” The school is one of only a handful within the country’s 392 national parks, said Phil Sheridan, spokesman for the National Park Service, Northeast Region.

But the move yesterday is an example of the kind of relationship that the park system is seeking as a way to renovate and maintain some park buildings that have fallen into disrepair or remain unoccupied. The agency enlists organizations to lease and renovate buildings on federal land that the National Park Service can no longer afford to maintain.

The Montessori Children’s House, which for four years held classes in Phoenixville, spent $3.8 million to renovate a 3.5-acre property known as the David Walker Farm, or Ivy Hollow Farm. The parcel on Thomas Road included a main house, a barn, root cellar, and several small houses. The farm had been vacant since 2002. By the time Gutteridge took her first walk through the property, a ceiling had started to fall in, and ivy was growing in the buildings. But Gutteridge saw the possibilities. She envisioned an ideal marriage between the natural resources of the park and a school that would offer hands-on lessons in science, the environment, and history.

To Gutteridge, the park was perfect. But not everyone thought so. When neighbors heard talk of the school’s relocation, some expressed concern about the increase in traffic and congestion along Thomas Road and nearby Richards Road, heavily traveled, two-lane streets with no sidewalks. “Nobody minds the sounds of laughing children,” neighbor Barton Lynch said. “It’s just the traffic it might cause.” Neighbors Richard and Jacqueline Kunin say a double standard is in play. Neighbors argued against the school for reasons similar to ones enumerated by park officials when they fought the American Revolution Center, once proposed to be built in the northern section of the park, Richard Kunin said. The site was eventually abandoned, and the project moved to Philadelphia. “They thought their argument was good enough to oppose the ARC, but ours wasn’t good enough to oppose the school,” Richard Kunin said.

While park officials acknowledged that traffic would increase, they maintained that the $375 million ARC, a complex of new construction on open land, was different from the school’s renovation of four existing buildings. “Our dual mission is education and preservation,” said Deirdre Gibson, the park’s chief of planning and resource management. “We think it’s a wonderful thing to have a private nonprofit who shares a mission with us to share a part of the park with us.” The school and the park have signed a 40-year lease.

Construction began last April. The result is a main house with beige exterior accented by black shutters, with a stone fireplace once used by colonial families to cook meals. The building will be used as a library and parent meeting room. The school building – the old barn – has large windows trimmed in red, six classrooms, and barn motifs throughout the decor. Suzanne Snyder Schrogie called the school’s relocation a welcome change. Schrogie lived with her family on Ivy Hollow Farm for 30 years before moving to Chester Springs. They had moved to the farm in 1972 but lost it in 1978 when the property was acquired by eminent domain. She was allowed to live on the park land for up to 25 more years, but left in 2002. Over the years, Schrogie raised horses in the barn, hosted children’s Halloween parties in the root cellar, and watched Michael Jackson play basketball on her home court in 1975 when the singer and his brothers were recording an album in Philadelphia. “I’m thrilled with what they have done,” Schrogie said of the renovation.

Yesterday, teachers led the children on tours. Wow was perhaps the most popular word of the day. Four-year-old Ben Kenneck pronounced his new school “great,” and an improvement over the old, “much more boring-er” school building in Phoenixville. For Gutteridge, it’s like coming home: “I can’t think of anything better for the Montessori Children’s House of Valley Forge than to be in Valley Forge.”

Draft 2010-11 Budget Strategies Released by TESD

February 2, 2010
45 Comments

As was discussed at today’s TESD Public Information meeting, the district has released a draft 2010-11 budget strategies. We thank the district for releasing this background information in advance of February 8 Finance Meeting. These proposed strategies are to aid in the budget gap and I suggest a review prior to next week’s meeting. Your comments/input on the suggested strategies are encouraged but understand that this a ‘draft’ and should be viewed as a starting point (rather than the end result).

I just received an email from someone who was unable to open the pdf in this post. I have checked it and it is working on my end. The document is 50+ pages, so it may take a couple of minutes to upload. You can also find this document on the school district’s website, http://www.tesd.k12.pa.us/

TESD Public Information Committee Meeting Update

February 2, 2010
4 Comments

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I was surpised to see the discussion of community blogs as an agenda item for the TESD Public Information committee meeting. I attended this morning’s meeting and Ray Clarke has kindly provided an update on the meeting which I share below. Ray mentions the TESD 2010-11 budget strategies that are to be available online today. I will post the document when it becomes available.

Ray Clarke’s Meeting Notes:

A quick update from this morning’s Public Information Committee. I came away with the sense that the Board is working diligently to improve communication with the public, but will take its time to embrace technology (eg video, blogs, Twitter) that reduces its control.

The good news is that there was support for a change in the Board Meeting process to allow public input on each priority Discussion/Action item – after any presentation of background material/recommendations and before Board discussion and vote. I suggested that while the Board needs to have the flexibility to manage the overall meeting length, the fewer a priori limits on number and length of comments the better. I think such a policy, if approved, would go a long way towards addressing the problems highlighted at last week’s meeting. It’s important to have a gauge of the extent and depth of public opinion.

On the Budget …..Next week’s Finance Committee meeting will be televised, but – I think – not live and not made available over the internet. The Committee was encouraged to look at practices from our neighbors, particularly Great Valley.

Also, in case anyone missed the item in the recent TESD Press Release, the “proposed 2010-2011 budget strategies that will be presented at the February 8, 2010 Finance Committee meeting will be posted on the T/E School District web site by the end of business on Tuesday, February 2, 2010”. TODAY!

So, plenty of time to identify your favorite at risk program and be prepared to speak for it! All the Info Committee members and the public at this morning’s meeting were concerned that this document be viewed only as a starting point for discussion.

And to close with comments relating to this blog (Community Matters): I got the sense that individual Board members do look on this (and others) as one of those gauges of public opinion I mention above. Along with, for example, formal District monitoring of traditional press sources, direct emails to the Board, etc. It may not have fully sunk in, though, that this is often a source of important news and information as well as opinion and analysis, and should perhaps be accorded a higher regard.

Back to TESD's 2010-11 Budget, Where Are We With the Discussion?

February 1, 2010
8 Comments

Over the last week, I have been focused on the recent Board of Supervisors decision. I know that some of you were urging me to get back to the school district budget discussion. So for the moment, I’m leaving the unfinished township business and re-focusing front page discussion on our school district. Ray Clarke sent me an interesting note, to look at this week’s agenda of the Public Information committee meeting of TESD. Wasn’t I surprised to read that the sixth item on tomorrow’s committee meeting agenda was ‘The Districts Role in Community Blogs’. I have to assume that this is referring to my Community Matters. I have never attended a Public Information committee meeting but guess where I will be tomorrow morning at 9:30 AM? I have preached greater ‘transparency’ on the School Board website to at least 3 of the current school board members so perhaps tomorrow’s meeting may be the right place for that discussion. Since I will represent myself tomorrow, any particular questions/issues that any of you would like mentioned at the meeting? This could be great starting point for Community Matters to help ‘bridge the gap’ with missing information that taxpayers (and teachers?) might need.

Whether you agree or disagree with the school board’s decision, the district budget for 2010-11 has been capped at the Act 1 index of 2.9% increase. Now I think we need to look at what does working within the Act 1 index mean for the district. What does this mean for the teachers and administration? We know also that it is highly unlikely that teacher contract will be re-opened for negotiations. Where do we stand with the issue of resolving the district deficit? I understand that the administration has come up with a list of proposed cuts . . . anyone know what those proposed cuts are or which programs may be included? And what is the dollar amount on the proposed cuts . . . how much will this lower the budget deficit? And do we know how much of the budget deficit is proposed to come from the district’s capital reserves? Let’s start the conversation rolling . . . I want your thoughts. I am especially interested in public information suggestions/ideas that I can take with me to the committee meeting tomorrow.

Berwyn, Paoli and Radnor Volunteer Firefighters . . . Our Hometown Heroes!

January 31, 2010
3 Comments

Strafford Station Apartment fire, photo by Berwyn Fire Company photographer, Jim DeStefano, Sr

Saturday morning, with frigid temperatures in the teens, a fire broke out at the Strafford Station Apartments, which is close to the Strafford train station. The initial 9-1-1 call came in to the Berwyn Fire Company at 9:25 AM. Berwyn’s Engine 2-3 raced to the fire, arriving at 9:31 AM, reporting that fire was coming from the 3rd floor. Also rushing to the initial first alarm call were firefighters from Paoli and Radnor fire companies. The Tredyffrin Police assisted with the evacuation of the first and second floors of the apartment building, as the blaze quickly went through the 40-unit building. A ‘working fire’ was dispatched at 9:28 AM . . . A second alarm was requested at 9:35 AM . . . and at 10:02 AM a third alarm was requested for the Strafford fire.

As dark billowing smoke shot into the morning air, residents had very little time to get out, grabbing what they could as they raced from their apartments. Thrust in to the cold, the residents were grateful for their lives but were left trying to cope with their sudden loss.

Local firefighters battling Strafford Station Apartment Fire, photo by Berwyn Fire Company photographer Jim DeStefano, Sr

The landlord and the Red Cross of Southeastern Pennsylvania are coordinating help for the victims. The Red Cross assisted 60 people who were forced out of their homes by the fire. They distributed money and food to anyone who was in need, and their medical personnel refilled lifesaving prescriptions for several tenants on the scene. The landlord aided the displaced tenants with temporary relocation to local hotels.

By the time the third alarm was requested for the Strafford Station Apartment fire, Berwyn, Paoli and Radnor fire companies were joined by volunteers from an additional thirteen fire companies*. Fire company apparatus responded from Chester, Delaware and Montgomery counties. The fire extended into the roof and then traveled the roofline horizontally from one end of the building to another, gutting 24 apartment units in its wake.

Interior photo of gutted Strafford Station Apartment, which displaced 60 residents. Photo by Berwyn Fire Company photographer Jim DeStefano, Sr.

At the height of the fire, over 100 volunteer fire/emergency service personnel were on the scene. The fire brought under control around 11 AM and the final fire units cleared the scene just after 3 PM. The Strafford Station Apartment fire is under investigation by the Chester County and Pennsylvania State Police Fire Marshals. Early comment is that the accidental fire may be the result of a second floor heating unit. Damage is estimated at $1.25 million.

It was a stroke of fortune that no one was killed or injured as a result of yesterday’s three-alarm fire. Please join me in saluting our local volunteer firefighters from Berwyn, Paoli and Radnor fire companies . . . thank you for your quick response and for protecting our residents.

____________________________

*In addition to Berwyn, Paoli and Radnor fire companies, the following compaies also responded to the Strafford Station Apartment fire: Malvern Fire Company
East Whiteland Volunteer Fire Association, Newtown Square Fire Company, Valley Forge Volunteer Fire Company, King of Prussia Volunteer Fire Company, Goshen Fire Company, Bryn Mawr Fire Company, Gladwyne Fire Company, Lionville Fire Company, Narberth Ambulance, Lafeyette Ambulance (Upper Merion), Good Fellowship Ambulance (West Chester), and Phoenixville Fire Department Ambulance.

Community Matters © 2025 Frontier Theme