Tredyffrin Township Archives - Page 36 of 130

Tredyffrin Township

On Friday, October 25, our community lost a very special person. Losing her courageous battle against cancer, my dear friend Trish Kreek passed away. Her funeral is tomorrow (Tuesday) at 11 AM, St. Peter’s Church in the Great Valley.

The consummate public servant, Trish served on the Tredyffrin Township Planning Commission for 19 years (4 years as chair) and as township supervisor for 6 years. Until her passing, Trish served with me on the Board of Directors of the Tredyffrin Historic Preservation Trust. A board member since the Trust’s inception a decade ago, she inspired us with her outlook on life and living — we will miss her tremendously.

Spirited in her discussion of community issues, Trish was always the ‘lady’ in debate; respectful of others opinions. A Republican by voter registration, Trish supported candidates who best reflected her own values, regardless of party affiliation. Taking the high road by focusing on the issues, she was never one that resorted to disparaging individual members of the community.

However, Trish did want more people to pay attention to local politics and elections and was troubled by lack of voter turnout. In our discussions of local politics, she regularly lamented about the partisan divide, believing that the broader mission should be to address important issues that matter to all of us. Trish never supported the pointless battle between the local political parties and struggled to understand why ‘people’ and ‘issues’ were not the most important factors when voting.

I reflect on Trish’ decades of public service, her spirit and support of this community and our many political discussions. Election Day 2013 is barely a week away. In the perfect world, our local politics would be free of partisan interests and individuals elected to serve would do so for all the community. And the interests of the people would always trump the political party the elected official represents. Of course, as Trish would have agreed, there are no perfect political worlds and this community is no different from the rest.

Why are candidates for local office forced to play party politics? Politics has the ability to bring out either the good or the bad. As I read the political campaign literature from the school board and supervisor candidates, I can only hope that the partisanship will not destroy the fabric of our community. I lament for a future of local nonpartisan elections, where there will victoriously emerge individuals whose intelligence, integrity, intestinal fortitude, character and non-alliance with special interests are beyond question. I wish for a future where important issues and candidate differences can be fairly discussed and openly debated.

“Each man must for himself alone decide what is right and what is wrong, which course is patriotic and which isn’t. You cannot shirk this and be a man. To decide against your conviction is to be an unqualified and inexcusable traitor, both to yourself and to your country, let men label you as they may.” ~ Mark Twain

On Election Day, Tuesday, November 5, we will elect whomever we think will do the best job — or at least that’s how we should cast our ballots. Do not wait until entering the voting booth to start thinking about how to vote. Do your homework – be knowledgeable about the candidates and informed on the issues. Informed voting requires study, thought and reflection in advance of casting your ballot. The people, the voters, get to decide who governs them. That will be the final word on partisan politics in local elections, and local government.

——————————————————————————————–

My dear friend Trish, you touched all that knew you — we will miss you.

“Strange, isn’t it? Each man’s life touches so many other lives. When he isn’t around he leaves an awful hole, doesn’t he?” ~ It’s a Wonderful Life (1946)

Unionville-Chadds Ford School Board director resigns, claiming Board has transparency and communication issues

October 25, 2013

51 Comments

The Unionville-Chadds Ford School District in southern Chester County is a high-ranking school district and often enjoys the same elite national standing for student test scores, etc. as the T/E School District. As an example, high schools from both school districts received gold level standing in the 2013 US News & World Report with Conestoga ranked #5 and UCF ranked #10 in Pennsylvania high schools. Because of their similar academic achievement levels and their geographic proximity (both in Chester County) the two school districts are often compared on Community Matters. Additionally, readers of CM may be familiar with regular commenter Keith Knauss, a member of the U-CF School Board, who often offers his experience and personal insight in our school district related discussions.

This week saw a surprise resignation of U-CF school board director Holly Manzone. On the surface, Manzone’s decision is not significant for TESD residents, but in reading the resignation letter (that includes the reasons for her departure), her words contained an eerie familiarity. During the recent League of Women Voters debate, most of the T/E school board candidates used buzzwords like trust, transparency, and open communication and morale issues. All but one candidate supported the need to improve the communication relationship between the Board and the residents. TE School Board president Kevin Buraks, who is seeking re-election, disagreed with his fellow candidates and stated during the LWV debate that the Board already provides an open forum for the public and that there are no morale issues in the District.

In her resignation letter, Manzone acknowledges the excellent quality of the Unionville Chadds Ford School District but criticizes the U-CF School Board for what she says amounts to ‘rubber stamping’ decisions of the Administration. Claiming that the U-CF School Board is a model for ‘poor governance’, meetings ‘scripted’ and decisions ‘baked’, Manzone states that she can, “no longer continue to participate on the Board on this basis without violating my principles and disturbing my conscience. I cannot allow my continued presence on the Board to connote agreement with these practices.” Manzone listed the following six issues in her resignation from the U-CF school board:

“Open discussion is frowned upon and dissent is squelched at both the public and executive meetings.
Meetings, especially public meetings, are often orchestrated, with many “pre-meetings” and phone calls behind the scenes to prevent genuine public discussion of contentious issues and avoid any embarrassment to the administration or the Board, i.e., “no dirty laundry.”
Executive sessions are over-used. If there is a way to characterize a topic so that it can be discussed privately in executive session, it is. Engineering topics in this way may allow the district to comply with the letter of the Sunshine Law, but it surely violates its spirit.
Community members raising issues are often themselves considered the problem. Energy is expended complaining about these individuals rather than focusing on improvement.
Access to underlying data and original documents is withheld, even if it is not confidential. “Confidentiality” is used as an excuse to withhold access to broad categories of data, without foundation.
Information is shared unequally, with not all Board members receiving the same background for deliberations. Also, private “votes” are held without canvassing all members.”

Manzone is not seeking re-election; and decided that to take her issues with the UCFSD Board public in her resignation statement. I have read some of the comments to Manzone’s resignation letter — several Board members (including Keith Knauss) have come out strongly against Manzone’s allegations. Conversely, Manzone does have her supporters, particuarly members of the public who have attended school board meetings. (To read the comments in the Unionville Times, click here.)

Similar to the issues raised by Manzone, we have heard several T/E School Board candidates voice concerns and suggest the need to improve the communication, transparency and trust issues in the District. My takeway — whether it is UCFSD, T/E or any other school board — open dialogue between school boards and the residents they serve is essential to building mutual trust; citizen input should be respected and welcomed.

League of Women Voters Debate: Part II, Tredyffrin Township Board of Supervisor Candidates

October 21, 2013

3 Comments

NOTE: The TE School Board candidate debate and the Tredyffrin Township Board of Supervisors candidate debate are now available on the township website, click here.

—————————————————-

The League of Women Voters candidate debate for the Tredyffrin Township supervisor candidates followed the TE School Board candidates debate on Saturday. The format was the same – 2-minute opening statements, audience questions read by LWV moderator and then 2-minute closing statement by candidates. All six candidates participated, Michelle Kichline (R), Trip Lukens (R), Mark Freed (D) and Murph Wysocki (D) for the two At-Large supervisor seats and Laurie Elliott (D) and EJ Richter (R) for the Middle supervisor seat.

Many of the audience members from the school board debate remained for the supervisor debate. Perhaps due to the lateness in scheduling of the school board debate, there appeared to be many more residents attended the supervisor debate. Whereas the focus of many of the audience questions for the school board candidates focused on communication, transparency and trust issue, it was interesting to note that no such questions were posed to the supervisor candidates. Both the TE School Board and the Tredyffrin Township had two incumbents participating in the LWV forum – Kevin Buraks (D) and Rich Brake (R) for the School Board and Michelle Kichline (R) and EJ Richter (R) for the Board of Supervisors. TE School Board president (Buraks) and the Board of Supervisors Chair (Kichline) are both incumbents, seeking reelection.

The supervisor forum quickly became the debate between (1) the accomplishments of the current board versus (2) the criticism from their opponents of what more could have been accomplished. Three of the four At-Large supervisor candidates (Kichline, Freed, and Wysocki) are attorneys; their banter and positioning making the fact obvious. However, with a background in commercial real estate evaluation and six years on the Planning Commission, Trip Lukens, the at-large supervisor candidate (without the legal background) handily held his own. Although currently serving as an at-large supervisor, Chesterbrook resident EJ Richter is seeking election to the middle district seat, her opponent is Laurie Elliott from the Glenhardie section of the township.

Elliott’s message was primarily focused on safety and stormwater. On safety, she supports the police department but due to increase in daytime burglaries, wants to make certain that the department remains fully staffed. As a Glenhardie resident, she is eager to see solutions to the township’s stormwater issue and believes we need action rather than more studies.

Richter focused her statement to her role as ‘taxpayer advocate’ as she did in the 2009 election, claiming that while in office she has never voted for a property tax increase. In addition to her no tax increase stance, Richter offered a couple of accomplishments during her term as supervisor – the creation of ‘Tree-dyffrin’, the planting of trees in Wilson Farm Park for storm water management and working to get township street lights replaced.

In her second year as chair of the Board of Supervisors, Kichline pointed to some of the township achievements including the development of a citizen advisory committee that is working on ideas for keeping Tredyffrin competitive in the commercial development market. Under her leadership, Kichline noted a new township website, new software that improves the planning and zoning process, and named several companies that have relocated to the township, including Auxilium and Teleflex, in addition to Shire’s decision not to leave. Kichline argued that the revitalization is beginning in Paoli and cited the $15 million residential project recently approved the SEPTA plan and the planned relocation of the dangerous N. Valley Bridge to Darby Road.

As a member of the Planning Commission, Lukens spoke of the process to rewrite the commercial zoning ordinance for the township as a vehicle to encourage development in the township. According to Lukens, the rewrite required a ‘looking outside the box’ approach and as an example mentioned the commercial zoning rewrite included increasing building height restrictions and structured parking as a means of better storm water management.

Freed, an environmental attorney, focused his attention on township storm water issues and ‘smart development’, pointing out the ;underused resources in the business parks and shopping centers;. Claiming that he, “knows how to get things done” Freed scoffed at Richter’s suggestion that Tredyffrin is undergoing a Renaissance with new restaurants, retail, etc. saying, “If this is a Renaissance, I’d hate to see what the Dark Ages were like”. As pointed to by Kichline and Richter, a number of new retail stores, restaurants, companies have recently opened in Tredyffrin. Freed dismissed these as individual successes, preferring to focus on empty office buildings, shopping centers and storefronts. According to him, enough with the “plan, plan, plan, study, study, study, money, money, money – we need action”.

With thirty-five years of experience as a commercial real estate lawyer, Wysocki’s focus was similar to Freed on the need for smart commercial redevelopment. However, Wysocki’s particular focus was on the Paoli Transportation Town Center, restating several times that the project has been in the works for 20 years, and there is still no shovel in the ground. His frustration with the project delays was evident; believing that his background and experience can move it forward and that he” knows how to solve problems and get results”. He suggests broadening the tax base with commercial redevelopment projects to increase commercial revenues and as result, residents will enjoy higher property values.

The common thread throughout the 2 hours was the need for economic redevelopment in the township – the question is which candidate can best make that happen. Fifty percent of the supervisor candidates point to change that has occurred, including the updated township website and technology, commercial zoning re-write, new restaurants and retail stores, corporate re-relocations, citizen advisory group, etc. as an indicator of the future while the remaining candidates believe that the redevelopment in the community is not moving quickly enough and that more should be done.

The economic revitalization of Tredyffrin Township is critical to to the future of our community and a topi on which all six candidates agree. The decision for the voter on November 5^th is which supervisor candidates are best prepared to make it happen. I encourage you to watch the debates, review the candidate’s websites and speak directly to the candidates — tell them your concerns; ask them your questons. Election Day is Tuesday, November 5!

League of Women Voters Debate: Part I, TE School Board Candidates

October 20, 2013

34 Comments

Yesterday, the League of Women Voters held the TE School Board candidate debate and the Tredyffrin Township Board of Supervisors candidate debate. I attended both debates. Although the debates were not shown live, they will be available for viewing (Comcast 2 and Verizon 24 channels) sometime after Monday’s Board of Supervisors Meeting. My guess is that there will be separate schedules for the two debates – check the township website for details.

Unfortunately, due to the lateness of scheduling, the school board debate was limited to a 1-hour format versus the 2-hour supervisor debate format. In speaking with the League of Women Voters representative, Mary Lou Dondero, before the debate, I learned more about their scheduling process. Ms. Dondero was none too pleased about the lateness of which the school board candidates debate was scheduled. When asked who was responsible for debate scheduling, it was interesting to learn that it not the local political party leaders that should ask but rather the candidates themselves who should contact the LWV. This is good information to know going forward.

Six of the eight school board candidates participated (due to prior commitments, Easttown Democrats Maryann Piccioni and Jean Kim were unable to attend). After each candidate presented a 2-minute opening personal statement, the moderator read questions, which audience members had anonymously submitted. Each question was answered by all candidates with the moderator giving each candidate the opportunity to be first to answer. Following the questions, each candidate had an opportunity for a 2-minute closing statement.

The LWV debate is not the traditional format that many of us recall from our high school/college days, but rather a Q&A forum. The downside of the LWV debate style is it does not allow for rebuttal by candidate. Case in point, the LWV repeatedly asked the candidates (both school board and supervisors) to respond to the specific question yet several candidates answered the LWV questions with accusations against their opponents. Due to the LWV format, it made it difficult for the candidates to defend the accusations.

Everyone that follows Community Matters knows that I fought for a school board candidate debate. Important school district issues surfaced this year, making for a contentious situation for all involved — the Board, administration, employees and the public. For my efforts in moving the school board debate forward, some questioned my agenda. If I had an agenda, it was simple – voters need to ‘know’ the candidates and candidates need to have the opportunity to deliver their views on issues, before Election Day. Hindsight being 20/20, I’m actually glad that I had nothing to do with the school board debate other than to attend. I cannot be accused of unfairness or a bias in the organization of the debate – candidates were not coerced; they own their words.

For those of us who regularly attend and/or watch the school board meetings, there was little surprise in most of the audience questions. As a result of contentious school board meetings this year, many of the questions related to communication, trust, transparency and morale issues, — asking what would the candidates do to ‘improve’ the current situation, if elected.

Five of the six candidates spoke of the need to improve communication and several of them mentioned morale issues. School board director Rich Brake (R), who is seeking re-election, accepted that there have been communication issues between the Board and the residents and spoke of the need to improve the dialogue, suggesting town hall meetings. Brake believes that the negativity issues need to be handled directly and wants to bring people together. It was refreshing to have a current elected official acknowledge the problems, accept responsibility and suggest ways for improvement.

With a similar response, Brake’s opponent Scott Dorsey (D) supports greater transparency and open dialogue between the public and the Board, suggesting a public advisory board. Dorsey spoke out against the Board’s use of the consent agenda and suggested its use should be reconsidered. The consent agenda is designed for routine items, such as meetings minutes. However, as Dorsey explained, the consent agenda takes away the public’s right to question an issue. The consent agenda can bury an item that the Board does not want publically discussed. In my opinion, in 2013 we saw the misuse of the consent agenda by the school board for the hiring of Andy Chambers and the inclusion of administrator raises and bonuses. If the hiring of the former police chief as the District’s security expert or giving raises to the administrators was such a good idea, why not openly discuss them in a public school board meeting, than than buried in a consent agenda. Dorsey was the only candidate to address the consent agenda issue.

Easttown Republicans Doug Carlson and Virginia Lastner spoke favorably on the topic of communication, wanting to see greater resident participation and awareness of District issues. Lastner wants the employees to feel that they can speak candidly and not risk their jobs by speaking out. Referring to her background and prior elected positions in Connecticut, Lastner is a proponent of the “listen and learn” concept.

Tredyffrin school board candidate Pete Connors (R) remarks on this topic included “morale starts with leadership”. Connors believes that there exists a trust issue in the community and proposed an advisory citizens group. He specifically cited the threat of outsourcing and the proposed demolition of the tennis courts where the Board was forced to reverse their decisions due to the public. Concerned about the Board’s lack of transparency that has decisions being made in private, Connors promoted a greater sharing of information with the public.

The consistent theme from Brake, Dorsey, Connors, Lastner and Carlson was the need for the school board to provide greater communication opportunities for the public. Dorsey, Brake and Connors took it a step further and spoke of changing the negative tone, improving trust and respectfulness and supporting the creation of some type of citizen advisory group.

As president of the school board, Kevin Buraks (D) was center front to the confrontational monthly and committee school board meetings of 2013 yet did not agree with the other candidates on District morale or communication issues. Unmistakably Buraks is disconnected to the important issues raised by his fellow school board director Rich Brake and by Democrat Scott Dorsey. At times, it was hard to believe that Buraks and Brake are both on the same school board or that Buraks and Dorsey are representing the same local political party.

Responding to a question, Buraks stated clearly that there are no morale issues in the District. He further commented that if there were moral issues in the District, the employees would leave. On the issue of communication, his stance is that the school board already provides an open forum, is transparent and that through emails, website, etc. all District information is available. He pointed out that the Board listened to the public about the demolition of the tennis courts and the outsourcing of the aides and paras and reversed their decision. In other words, according to school board president Kevin Buraks, there is no trust, respect or communication issues in the school district. He backed these assertions by continuously pointing to T/E school district’s rankings as his proof.

So overall, was there any new ‘news’ or any surprises learned from the school board candidate debate for me? Yes and no. Because I regularly attend the school board meetings and understand most of the issues, some of the information was not new. However, I did not know the background and views of Easttown residents Virginia Lastner and Doug Carlson, so appreciated the opportunity to learn more about them. I know candidates Pete Connors and Scott Dorsey and both have previously spoken out about the District’s communication and transparency issues, so was not surprised by their responses.

The surprise was in the school board incumbents performances. Perhaps it is because Kevin Buraks is an attorney, but his stance during the debate was not to back down or take responsibility for any of the public’s perceived ‘miss-steps’ of the school board or of his term as the president. I guess as an attorney, you make a calculation and then stand by your decision, using the mantra of no ‘do-overs’ allowed. Taking the approach that because the TE School District is highly ranked, Buraks wants the voters to believe it is a result of his leadership. Other the other hand, incumbent Rich Brake took a completely different approach and surprised me with his candor. Portraying himself as somewhat of a school board outsider, Brake acknowledged that there needs to be greater dialogue with the public and more openness. Whereas Buraks would have the public believe that everything is cohesive and agreeable among the school board directors, Brake paints a very different picture.

These are my personal observations from the school board debate, I welcome others who attended to contribute their opinion. If you did not attend the debate, I would encourage you to watch in on online when it is available.

League of Women Voters to hold candidate debate for TESD & Tredyffrin Board of Supervisors — Saturday, October 19!

October 14, 2013

8 Comments

Washington always has hogged much of the nation’s political oxygen, and in recent weeks, it has grabbed all of it, and probably some of the other basic building blocks of life, as well. But there is an election scheduled for Tuesday, November 5 and as voters, we have choices to make.

The federal government shutdown has invaded this community directly – look no further than the closure of Valley Forge National Historic Park! But our local government and school district affects us more directly than any other public entity – the local roads we drive on, how long it takes someone to come when we dial 911, the school our children attend, etc. etc.

Voters will have an opportunity to learn more about the candidates for the TE School Board and the Tredyffrin Township Board of Supervisors this Saturday, October 19. Yes, it looks like that in addition to the supverisor debate, there will be a TESD School Board Candidate Debate!

The Chester County League of Women Voters will conduct a debate for the TESD school board candidates this upcoming Saturday, October 19, 1 – 2 PM at the Tredyffrin Township Building, 1100 Duportail Road, Berwyn.

The following are TESD School Board candidates:

Tredyffrin, East – Region 1: Kevin Buraks (D) **
Tredyffrin, East – Region 1: Pete Connors (R)
Tredyffrin West – Region 2: Rich Brake (R) **
Tredyffrin, West – Region 2: Scott Dorsey (D)
Easttown, Region III: Doug Carlson (R)
Easttown, Region III: Virginia Lastner (R)
Easttown, Region III: Maryann Piccioni (D)
Easttown, Region III: Jean Kim (D)

It is my understanding that six of the eight school board candidates will participate in Saturday’s debate. Unfortunately, Maryann Piccioni and Jean Kim have personal scheduling issues and are unable to attend. There are four Easttown school board candidates on the ballot because current Board directors Betsy Fadem and Anne Crowley have chosen not to seek re-election. As chosen by Easttown voters, the two candidates receiving the highest vote count will be elected to the TESD school board. Incumbents Kevin Buraks (D) and Rich Brake (R) will be challenged on Election Day by Pete Connors (R) and Scott Dorsey (D) respectively.

Immediately following the TESD School Board Candidate Debate, the Chester County League of Women Voters will conduct the Tredyffrin Township Supervisors Debate, 2 – 4 PM, same location.

The following are Tredyffrin Township Board of Supervisors candidates:

Supervisor at Large: Michelle Kichline (R) **
Supervisor at Large: Trip Lukens (R)
Supervisor at Large: Murph Wysocki (D)
Supervisor at Large: Mark Freed (D)
District 2 Middle:: EJ Richter (R) ** (a)
District 2 Middle: Laurie Elliott (D

The Supervisor at Large seats go to the two candidates receiving the highest vote count on November 5. In the Middle District, the candidate receiving the highest vote count wins the seat.

Off-year elections are historically very-low voter turnout. Here’s hoping that the upcoming school board and supervisor debates lead to more informed voting and increased voter turnout!

———————————————————————————-

** Incumbent

(a) Currently serving as a Tredyffrin Township At-Large supervisor, Evelyn Richter is seeking re-election; not as an At-Large candidate but as a candidate in the Middle, District 2 race.

Partisan Politics; No need to go to Washington!

October 11, 2013

10 Comments

The Federal government shutdown has magnified the political partisan bickering in Washington. Unfortunately, over the last week, I have had a front-row seat to the local version – I’ll explain.

In the last Community Matters post, I mentioned that the League of Women Voters is conducting a Tredyffrin Township supervisor candidate debate on Saturday, October 19, 2-4 at the township building. Knowing that in the past a similar LWV debate was scheduled for the school board candidates, it struck me odd that no such event was planned for this year.

I was told that the reason that there was no scheduled TESD school board debate was that the LWV calendar was full and therefore could not accommodate the event. The explanation seemed plausible and I probably would have walked away from the situation except that two TESD school board candidates (Scott Dorsey (D) and Pete Connors (R)) approached me (separately) questioning ‘why’ there was no scheduled school board debate as both were interested in participating in such a forum.

This discussion of a ‘Meet the School Board Candidate’ forum occurred last week as I was completing last minute details for the Paoli Blues Fest. Between the Blues Fest and community street fair on October 5, the 9^th Annual Historic House Tour the Saturday before and eye surgery in between, I was certainly not anxious to take on another ‘project’. However, believing that more people in our community need to be engaged in local issues and to ‘know’ the candidates before casting a vote next month, a debate/forum needed to develop. Without the assistance of the LWV or any other organization, I first contacted Tredyffrin Township to check available dates/times to hold the forum. To the credit of the Tredyffrin Township staff (particularly the township secretary Pat Hoffman) and the police department, township manager and ultimately the Board of Supervisors, I was given approval to hold the candidates forum on Saturday, October 26, 2-4 PM. If you are wondering why I approached the township for use of their building rather than the library or one of the schools – the answer is simple, cost. There is a fee to use the schools or the library for an event.

Once I had the day/time locked in, I gathered the email addresses of all eight TESD school board candidates, which includes incumbents Rich Brake (R) and Kevin Buraks (D). All eight received the same invitation to participate. With my contact information, I sent the following email to the eight candidates:

Dear Tredyffrin Easttown School District School Board Candidates,

‘Meet the Candidates’ forums are central to democratic processes and are an important element of civic action and engagement. In recent years, the League of Women Voters has held these forums for township supervisor candidates and school board candidates. The League of Women Voters will hold a debate for Tredyffrin Township Board of Supervisors candidates on Saturday, October 19, 2 – 4 PM but a similar forum is not planned for school board candidates of the Tredyffrin Easttown School District.

This type of forum establishes connections between candidates and residents; allows voters to make informed decisions on election day, gives candidates the opportunity to present their platforms on issues that matter to residents; and gives residents the opportunity to raise issues that they feel need to be addressed by the successful candidate(s).

Utilizing a grassroots community organizational approach, there will be a ‘Meet the School Board Candidates Forum’ on Saturday, October 26, 2 – 4 PM at the Tredyffrin Township Building, 1100 Duportail Road, Berwyn, PA 19312. All candidates for the T/E School Board are invited to participate in this upcoming forum. The purpose of this forum is to give school board candidates an opportunity to address a wide range of issues that affect our school district…

Appreciating that the moderator of the candidate forum needed to be a non-TESD resident, I contacted a friend who is an attorney and a financial planner. With no questions asked, he agreed to help. I then asked four residents (representatives from Easttown and Tredyffrin Townships) to serve on a committee to help with the planning, logistics, marketing, etc of the candidate forum. For the record, two were Republicans, one a Democrat and the fourth a non-US citizen. As a registered Independent, I looked more at choosing people that understood the local school board issues versus their party affiliation. These four individuals were enthusiastic and anxious to help with the event. As stated in my invitation to the candidates, I was utilizing a “grassroots community organizational approach” to this “Meet the School Board Candidates” forum.

Of the eight school board candidates, I immediately received responses from five candidates (3 Republicans, 2 Democrats), offering support, appreciation for the effort, willingness to re-arrange personal schedules so they could participate, etc. With a moderator, a volunteer committee, a place, day/time and support from the majority of the candidates, I was feeling confident about this TESD school board candidate forum.

Then the rumblings from the local political parties started – I should mention, that my invitations went directly to the candidates, not the political parties that they represent. Believing that elected officials need to be independent-thinkers, it seemed the decision of whether to participate in this public community event should be up the candidates themsevles, without influence from the leadership of the respective political parties. Again, to the credit of many of these school board candidates, there was overwhelming support for the candidate forum.

What do I mean by ‘rumblings’ – I received questions about the format, where would the questions come from and how would the questions be asked, would questions come from the audience, (if so, how would they be categorized), would the process be ‘fair’ or biased to the Republican candidates or biased to the Democratic candidates, what political party were the volunteers, etc. etc. The rumblings started within 24 hours of my sending the invitations to the candidates – but it should be noted that not one of the five candidates who contacted me criticized or questioned my motives or my fairness.

About the time the local partisan politics started to surface, it mysteriously became known that the League of Women Voters schedule was not full and that they could accommodate a school board candidate’s forum. Imagine that! I knew if ever there was a moment when something was meant as a ‘sign’ this was it. It had become painfully obvious and very quickly, that no matter how I organized this candidates forum, either the local Democratic Party or the Republican Party (or both) was not going to be satisfied with my efforts or the results. The finger pointing had already started and it was only 24 hours since I sent the candiate’s their invitations. If a school board candidate debate was to happen, it was up to the ‘D’s’ and the ‘R’s’ to organize it with the League of Women Voters.

As a result, the following email was sent to the eight school board candidates:

TE School District Board Candidates —

I was working on scheduling a TESD School Board Candidate Forum on Saturday, October 26 for two reasons: (1) to provide an opportunity for candidates to present their platforms on important issues facing the TE School District and (2) to give residents the opportunity raise issues that they feel need to be addressed by the candidates. A public forum to discuss school district issues is important. When I questioned why there was no school board candidate forum scheduled as in prior years, I was told that the League of Women Voters did not have availability on their calendar. Based on the information that the League of Women Voters was unable to schedule such an event (and having been approached by two school board candidates, a ‘D’ and an ‘R’), I moved forward to make the necessary arrangements for such a forum.

It has now come to my attention that the League of Women Voters is available for Saturday, October 26 to host the forum/debate for the school board candidates. To those candidates that contacted me either with a commitment to participate in the forum or a willingness to rearrange their personal schedules, thank you and your responses were most appreciated. Please know that as a community member and as a registered Independent, my only intention in scheduling a school district candidate forum was to engage more residents in our important school district issues and to allow candidates an opportunity to express their views on these issues. There was no personal agenda on my part.

The location, day and time for the school board candidate forum has been reserved for Saturday, October 26, 2-4 at the Tredyffrin Township Building. If you were interested in pursuing this opportunity with the League of Women Voters, I would encourage you to contact your local Republican and Democratic Party representatives.

Please accept my apologies for any confusion and best wishes for a successful campaign.

Pattye Benson

The moderator and committee members that I had contacted to help received the same update as the candidates. I thank these five volunteers for their support and willingness to help. So … where does the school board candidate situation now stand? It is my understanding that the leadership of the political parties is working with the League of Women Voters to organize a debate. The last update I received was that the plan was to schedule the school board candidate debate prior to the Tredyffrin Township supervisor debate on Saturday, October 19 at the township building. I look forward to hearing a confirmation on the date and time.

It remains unclear why the local Democratic and Republican parties scheduled the supervisor candidate debate with the League of Women Voters and did not do the same for the school board candidates. However, I am hopeful that the school board candidate forum will occur; that important school district issues will be discussed and that candidates can have the opportunity to present their view.

In closing, the last ten days has taught me one thing, … whether it’s elected officials in Washington or our local political parties, I recognize that I am no fan of the partisan sandbox. For me, it’s about understanding the issues and then supporting the candidate that best represents my views.

Four weeks and counting until Election Day

October 7, 2013

Comments

Election Day 2013 is 4 weeks from tomorrow, Tuesday, November 5. If you are not registered, today is the last day to register to vote in the Municipal Election. Applications from Pennsylvanians registering for the first time, those changing their address or changing their party affiliation must be postmarked or delivered to Chester County’s board of elections by the close of business today, October 7. Chester County’s board of elections is located at Government Services Center, 601 Westtown Rd., Suite 150, West Chester, PA 19380. Their phone number: 610-344-6410. Office hours: 8:30 AM – 4:30 PM.

Do you know the candidates for the Board of Supervisor or the Tredyffrin Easttown School Board? What issues facing the township and school district are important to you – do the candidates share your concerns, your opinions? How likely are you to vote on November 5?

If you are a voter in Tredyffrin Township, you will have an opportunity to learn more about the Board of Supervisors candidates. The League of Women Voters is holding a supervisor debate on Saturday, October 19, 2-4 PM at the Tredyffrin Township Building. There are three contested seats on the Board – two for supervisor-at-large and a district supervisor for the middle district. Seeking one of the two at-large supervisor seats is incumbent Michelle Kichline (R), Trip Lukens (R), Murph Wysocki (D) and Mark Freed (D). Current at-large supervisor E.J. Richter (R) is opposing Laurie Elliott (D) for the middle district seat.

In recent years, the League of Women Voters also has held a debate for the TE School Board candidates. Unfortunately, the volunteer organization will not hold a similar debate this year for the school board candidates. This is an important time to know your candidates – what are their backgrounds and experience, where do they stand on issues, etc. etc. So … why no debate for the school board candidates? Do you know who the school board candidates are?

On the Tredyffrin side of the school district, we have Democrat incumbent Kevin Buraks being challenged by Republican Pete Connors in Region I. In Region II, Scott Dorsey (D) opposes incumbent Rich Brake (R).

On the Easttown side of the school district, there are two seats available in Region III. For personal reasons, neither Betsy Fadem (R) nor Anne Crowley (D) is seeking re-election. I attend almost every school board meeting and I have not met any of the four candidates vying for the two open Region III seats. The candidates are Republicans Doug Carlson and Virginia Lastner and Democrats Maryann Piccioni and Jean Kim.

School board candidates Pete Connors and Scott Dorsey have each stated that they want the opportunity to discuss school district issues and are interested in pursuing a debate forum with the other school board candidates — Neither knows why a debate was not scheduled as in prior years. Because of my discussion with Connors and Dorsey (and the interest from the public in learning about the school board candidates), several options are being explored. However, with only 4 weeks remaining until Election Day 2013, it does not leave much time to organize a ‘meet your school board candidate’ forum.

If the past is any indication, the political war for control will rear its ugly head over the next 30 days with school board and supervisor candidates door knocking, campaign mail pieces hitting our houses and the robo-calls that invariably come at dinnertime. Voters need a reason to go the polls on November 5 – they need to know the issues and which candidates support their views. Everyone should be interested in the election because the future of the township, the school district and the community are dependent upon strong, issue-focused leadership. The issues are complex and the School Board (and the Board of Supervisors) must work as a team united (with the community) to find effective solutions.

The Wait is Almost Over — 5th Annual Paoli Blues Fest Tomorrow!

October 4, 2013

Comments

WARM-UP: 11:15 AM

NOON – 6 PM

I know where I’ll be tomorrow, do you? Last year we had 15,000 visitors for the Bllues Fest and we’re expecting an even bigger crowd this year! We’ve got great blues bands (check the website, wwwpaolibluesfest.com for details), lots of great activities in the kids, including face painting, moon bounce, etc in KidsZone, a Beer (and wine) Garden serving up Yuengling and Octoberfest beers and 4 kinds of wine from Black Walnut Winery and over 125 street vendors selling everything from jewelry to hotdogs and … lots of free parking!

The 5th annual Paoli Blues Fest is a day to celebrate community and enjoy some great blues music! And with temperatures expected in the 80’s tomorrow, here’s to good times in Paoli!

Over 15,000 visitors attended last year — we’re expecting an even bigger crowd tomorrow!

TE School Board & TENIG reach new 3-year contract deal — No outsourcing!

October 3, 2013

52 Comments

What a difference a week makes! At last Monday’s September 23rd T/E School Board meeting, several TESD residents including Peggy Layden, Neal Colligan and Scott Dorsey questioned the Board about the status of the TENIG negotiations. The public was told by Board President Kevin Buraks that contract discussions were moving along and that the Board would report on the process when there was information to report. And Betsy Fadem volunteered that once the responses from the TENIG RFP were received (and reviewed) there would be public discussion in January. The current TENIG contract as well as the TEEA (teacher) contract run through June 30, 2014. When questioned on public communication and transparency issues, Buraks was very specific that the public would be informed of the process although it was not clear how much notice there would be for public review of any proposed contracts.

Buraks (and Fadem) responses to residents was counter to the rumblings that some of us had heard regarding the ‘early bird’ contract discussions. Nonetheless, because there was an overt attempt by several Board members to suppress any resident complaints on lack of transparency or public discussion, it was my expectation that the Board leadership would make certain that the public was kept informed.

This evening I had a phone call from Mary Minicozzi, the TENIG president. (She agreed that her name could be used and that the information was public). Mary wanted me to hear the TENIG contract details directly from her so that the facts would be correct. According to Mary, TENIG presented a contract proposal to the school board 2 weeks ago and that sometime since that point (she was not certain of the exact date), the Board ‘voted’ to accept the proposal. At today’s TENIG meeting, members voted to ratify with 83 members accepting the contract and 5 members rejecting the contract.

This news surprised the heck out of me because at last week’s TESD meeting, President Buraks and Betsy Fadem were talking about keeping the public informed on the progress of negotiations – had they already accepted the TENIG contract offer?

The vendor bids were not due back to the District until October 11 so how could the Board know what the expected savings to the District would be. How would TENIG know how much they needed to ‘give back’? Was this not the point of sending the RFPs out to the vendors? In addition, this reasoning lined up with Betsy Fadem’s remark that the discussion would take place in January 2014 (allowing for adequate review of the vendor bids and public input). According to Mary, there were a number of vendors lined up to provide bids to the District – 13 vendors for janitorial, 3 vendors for security, 8 vendors for maintenance, 3 vendors for secretarial and 5 vendors for the cafeteria. Presumably, now the vendors will be immediately notified that the District has cancelled the RFP and has settled the contract.

The good news is that the 3-year TENIG contract, July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2017, has no outsourcing of TENIG employees and no discussion of outsourcing to occur during the length of the contract. Any new employees hired will be part of the District (and TENIG) – those positions will not be outsourced. However, there will be wage restructuring for all new TENIG hires, equating to an average of $3/hr. less than current employees in that position.

All TENIG employees received a 4-1/2% raise for the final year of their current contract (which is July 1, 2013 – June 30, 2014). In the new 3-year contract, the custodians will receive a 2% salary reduction and additionally will give back 1 week of their vacation. (The rationale is that the District has to hire subs when the custodians are on vacation). The other members of TENIG (security, kitchen, maintenance, and cafeteria) will receive a 4% salary reduction in the new contract but their vacation benefit remains intact.

On the benefit side, Mary explained that TENIG currently receives the best healthcare benefits of all District employees – paying an average of $300/yr. for a family health insurance plan. Under the new contract, TENIG member’s health insurance will be on par with TEEA (teachers) members. In the new contract, the TENIG employees will contribute approximately 6% for their health care benefits. For year 2 and 3 of the 3-year contract, TENIG employees receive a freeze on their salary.

As an incentive for current employees to leave the District, there is an interesting caveat in the new contract. If any TENIG employee with 15 or more years of District service, voluntarily resigns prior to end of the first year of the contract (by June 30, 2015), they will receive a buyout bonus of 15% of their salary, up to $7K. The idea is to replace some of the higher-paid District employees with new lesser-paid employees, thus decreasing overhead budget costs.

So, how much is the new 3-year TENIG contract saving the District? The contract savings includes $400K from the healthcare benefit component, $207K with the employee salary reduction and $207K from the custodian 1-week vacation giveback for a grand total savings of $719K to the District.

Although Mary stated that the Board had voted to accept the TENIG proposed 3-year contract and that the TENIG membership ratified the contract, I believe that the contract still has to be officially ‘voted on’ in public, doesn’t it? According to Mary, the Board will sign the contract at a special Board meeting that will be held in conjunction with the Finance Committee meeting. Looking at the upcoming District meetings, the Finance Committee is scheduled for Monday, October 14 – which interestingly is Columbus Day. (The offices in Tredyffrin Twp are closed on Columbus Day, but I guess not for TESD).

I want to be clear about something – I am pleased for the TENIG employees; glad they will not be outsourced and that they will not have to worry about outsourcing for the duration of their 3-year contract. However, last week’s School Board meeting has me troubled. After several residents asked for greater public input and communication, the public was assured that the Board was transparent, and that contract updates would be provided, and that simultaneously to early bird negotiations with TENIG that the Board would also review the results from the RFP. With agreement from the Board and TENIG on the new contract, there will be no vendor bids.

Preservation Matters as evidenced by 9th Annual Historic House Tour turnout — thanks to all!

October 3, 2013

Comments

The Tredyffrin Historic Preservation Trust’s 9th Annual Historic House Tour was held this past Saturday, September 28. It was a wonderful day with beautiful historic homes, supportive sponsors, enthusastic volunteers, perfect weather and a record number of house tour guests — thanks to all who helped make this a successful event!

The House Tour raised nearly $20,000 for the final phase of the rebuilding effort of the Jones Log Barn as the ‘Living History Center at Duportail’ (www.tredyffrinhistory.org) with 400 tickets purchases and the support of many individual and corporate sponsors! Here’s my letter to the editor published in today’s Main Line Suburban. The next time you see one of these sponsors, please thank them for supporting historic preservaton in our own backyard … local history and preservation does matter!

Thank you historic homeowners for taking part in Historic House Tour
Published: Thursday, October 03, 2013
By Pattye Benson,

Preservation Matters: Thank you historic homeowners for opening your doors for Trust’s 9th Annual Historic House tour!

The mission of the Tredyffrin Historic Preservation Trust is to help preserve and protect historic and cultural resources and to educate the public about the preservation and protection of historic and cultural settings. As President of the Trust and Chair of the annual Historic House Tour, I would like to thank the special historic homeowners. These homeowners graciously opened their doors for the 9th Annual Historic House Tour held this past Saturday, September 28 so others can enjoy and learn about the architecture and history of their homes.

What a truly delightful group of old house owners on this year’s tour – the effort and time spent on details by each homeowner was remarkable. Old house owners are very special people and this year’s house tour participants were no exception. In addition to the private homes on the 2013 tour, the beautiful First Church of Christ, Scientist (c.1886) in Berwyn was a featured stop. For those guests who stopped at the church, they were treated to a special musical performance by church organist Dr. James Sullivan. It is wonderful to live in a community that has people who cherish their historic properties and then allow others the opportunity to enjoy them!

As one of the Trust’s most anticipated annual events, the Board of Directors is extremely grateful to our historic homeowners who by sharing their extraordinary homes allow us to better understand the significant and unique history of our community. The annual house tour provides an opportunity for our historic community to showcase their neighborhood architectural heritage and demonstrate how historic homes can be a perfect fit for our modern lives. Opening their doors to hundreds of guests, the 9th Annual Historic House Tour raised close to $20,000 to benefit the Trust’s Capital Campaign to complete the rebuilding effort of the Jones Log Barn as the ‘Living History Center at Duportail’ in Chesterbrook.

The Board wishes to thank the many individuals, corporate sponsors and elected officials who appreciate historic preservation and understand its importance in the community including Penn Medicine, Arcadia Land Company, Heckendorn Shiles Architects, Lamb McErlane PC, Paul and Andrea Olson, Period Architecture, Murph and Lois Wysocki, Golden Valley Farms Coffee Roasters, Michael and Corinne Ackerman, Ann Ledger Architect, Axiom Asset Management, Chester County Commissioner Ryan Costello, Duportail House, Gardner/Fox, James Garrison, AIA, Tm Hogan and Victoria Silbey, Janiczek Homes, PA State Representative Warren Kampf, Glenna LaSalle Keene, Michael and Michelle Kichline, Dr. and Mrs. Gerald Long, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP, Brad Tiffany – Kistler Tiffany Benefits, Urban Engineers, Maurice Weintraub Architect, Carla Zambelli, Main Line Media News, Daily Local News, Chester County Times, Around Main Line and TE Patch.

Thank you to the Trust Board members and the many community volunteers who offered their time and talents to make this another successful Trust event. And a special thank you to the house tour visitors who through their ticket purchase showed their support for historic preservation in the community.

I have received many emails and calls from guests who enjoyed the house tour. A Bryn Mawr realtor wrote, “Thank you and your committee for an incredibly enjoyable day. I have been selling real estate on the Main Line for over 20 years and on this house tour I heard historical anecdotes and discovered hidden treasures. What a treat!” Upon exiting the 18th century Lenape Farm (also known as the ‘Churchill House’), a house tour visitor remarked, “These houses have souls of the past. They’re more than a house. They are part of the history of the neighborhood.”

Pattye Benson
President, Tredyffrin Historic Preservation Trust
Chair, 9th Annual Historic House Tour

← Older Posts

Newer Posts →

Pattye Benson

Community Matters