Pattye Benson

Community Matters

How Will T/E School District Close the $5.3 Million 2011-12 Budget Gap?

February 13, 2011
40 Comments

The Finance Committee meeting is Monday, February 14, 7:30 PM at the T/E Administration Office, West Valley Business Center, 940 West Valley Road, Suite 1700, Wayne. Click here for the meeting agenda and 2011-12 Budget Development Plan.

At the onset of this 2011-12 budget discussion, I want to give tremendous credit to the school board members who serve on the Finance Committee – Chair Kevin Mahoney, Debbie Bookstaber, Jim Bruce and Kevin Buraks. Their task is overwhelming and the 148-page 2011-12 budget document attests to their hard work, especially given the challenging economic situation of school districts. As a taxpayer, I am grateful and thank them for their diligence on our behalf.

Increased pension costs are the biggest hurdle in the coming years to school districts across the state. The challenge is how to balance the defined benefit plan of the teachers with the rising costs to maintain. How will school districts fund the pension plans, provide the same quality of education and not place the burden on the taxpayer . . . ?

Although I took time to review the budget documents provided for Monday’s meeting, I admit that my eyes glazed over on some of the details. If any of my assumptions are incorrect or if I have misinterpreted the information, here is hoping that someone will provide clarification.

As presented, the 2011-12 budget has projected revenue of $107M, which includes $1.2M revenue from Act 1 tax increase (1.4%) and $2.4M revenue from Act 1 exceptions (2.8%). Projected expenses are $112M, which leaves an imbalance of (-$5.3M). Without the $1.2M revenue from Act 1 tax increase and the $2.4M in revenue from Act 1 exceptions, the imbalance would be (-$8.9M) versus the (-$5.3M).

Although the 2011-12 budget gap is narrowed with the Act 1 tax increase and the Act 1 exception; there remains a deficit in the 2011-12 budget of (-$5.3M). If all strategies of Level 1 are instituted (as outlined on pg. 107 of the budget development plan), the deficit is reduced by $1M and the imbalance drops to (-$4.3). Under this plan, the remaining $4.3M of the budget deficit is to come from the district’s fund balance. The school district has a Moody’s AAA bond rating . . . is that rating jeopardized by using $4.3M in fund balance dollars for the 2011-12 budget? Understanding that the fund balance is taxpayers money; how much reserve is required to maintain the district’s bond rating?

All Level 1 strategies suggested under this budget development plan appear straightforward and practical ways to cut expenses. I did note two secretarial positions to be eliminated at a combined cost savings of $135K are included on the Level 1 list.

The more interesting and/or surprising strategy suggestions are included in Level 2 and Level 3. Level 3 requires attrition for implementation. It is interesting to note that the Level 2 strategies, should they all be implemented, would provide a cost savings to the district of $6.7M +. I would expect the dollar amount savings from Level 2 strategies would be substantially greater than $6.7M, probably closer to $10M, maybe more. Why? Because Level 2 includes the selling of TESD property including (1) the 16 acres on Jefferson Lane in Chesterbrook (earlier discussion on Community Matters questioned the feasibility of selling that property); (2) 738 First Ave, Berwyn; this is a 10 acre parcel where the ECS building sits. (As an aside, it was my understanding that the ESC building was contracted for demolition but it is still standing) and (3) 945 Conestoga Road, 0.33 acre of residential property next to Teamer Field.

In further review of Level 2 strategies, a few suggestions caught my attention; such as outsourcing of custodial services . . . could result in a savings of $950K. I believe that the custodians (along with the bus drivers, lunchroom staff and possibly some secretarial employees) are unionized which could make the change to outsourcing more difficult. However, with nearly a million dollar savings involved in custodial outsourcing, it could be worth further exploration.

On the Level 2 list, is a suggested $2M savings to the school district with the elimination of all non-mandated student transportation. The remaining transportation would be what is required by the state. Combining the outsourcing of custodial services and the elimination of the non-mandated bus transport, would provide almost $3M in savings.

Another Level 2 strategy that has an associated savings tag of $1.5M, (but a suggestion that probably is not practical and should be removed from consideration) is to require athletic and extra-curricular activities to become completely self-supporting. Families would be required to underwrite the cost of student participation or if unable financially, seek help from FLITE.

Contained in the Level 3 list are several staff reductions, many of which would affect the elementary grades. Here are those specific strategies and associated savings:

  • Eliminate Literacy Intervention Program $111,000
  • Eliminate Elementary Math Support Positions $350,000
  • Eliminate Four Elementary Reading Specialist Positions $300,000
  • Eliminate Elementary Strings Specialist Position $75,000
  • Eliminate Middle School Reading Specialists $300,000
  • Eliminate Middle School Math Support Positions $125,000
  • Reduce each High School Department by One Teacher $375,000
  • Eliminate Elementary Applied Tech Program $300,000

If my math is correct, the above listed eight cost-savings equate to approximately $2M. However, I have to believe that some of these staff reductions could directly influence the quality of TESD education. Remember, these are Level 3 strategies not Level 1. However, just the fact that they appear on any list, makes them a possibility.

The last Level 3 strategy listed is interesting and apparently was discussed at Friday’s Facilities Committee meeting – the redistricting of the elementary schools. According to district enrollment patterns predicted for the next 5 years, there is a need to consider redistricting. Devon Elementary is at 100% capacity and has become the largest elementary school. The savings is ‘to be determined’ because it is possible that redistricting could keep eliminate the need for additional space at Devon Elementary. However, this would impact those families living on the redistricted streets.

Ray Clarke attended the Facilities Committee meeting on Friday and offered the following notes from the meeting. It would seem that storage and maintenance facilities continues to be discussed but with no clear solution. I know that the ECS building was slated for demolition but would it be possible (at a far lesser cost) that the ECS building could be retrofitted as a storage facility – not for use by staff or students which could be affected by the building’s environmental issues – but for use as storage. It is obviously too simplistic a solution so there must be a reason that it is not possible.

Ray Clarke’s Notes from Facilities Committee meeting, 2/11/11

Some interesting and worthwhile discussions at the TESD Facilities Committee meeting on Friday, with many financial implications that are likely to be further explored on Monday’s Finance Committee. It’s good to report that the tone is very cost conscious – almost as if all the money that the Committee is spending is its own!

The first hour or more was consumed with a couple of items relating to use of the district sports facilities. (Perhaps these could/should have actually been on the published Agenda?). An adult soccer league would like to use Teamer Field; that would require a change in district policy and reversal of an understanding given to neighbors when the field was built. The revenue being discussed is material, and I believe that this warrants thorough consideration on Monday in the context of revenue strategies. A travel softball team has offered to redo the barely used and poor condition baseball field at the ESC site (one of four fields there) at their own expense. They have already done this for a field at Devon Elementary, and there seems to be no downside. The Committee was just about able to make a decision on this one! (Subject to a final check with the school athletics people). Larger issues that arose: a) the amounts the district charges seem to be low (another revenue strategy) and b) maybe as use gets more widespread the district will need to improve the scheduling system to ensure fairness and utilization.

The Committee revisited the issue of facilities for storage and maintenance, starting with the question: what do we actually need? The discussion was a little disjointed and difficult to follow, but it seems to boil down to: we need warm storage for snow clearing equipment (so it works on cold mornings!) that doesn’t involve sharing space with the carpentry shop, plus we need at the least to fix maintenance issues with the current building. The architect had come back with new plans for spending $2 million, taking about $0.75 million out of the first draft from a month ago. However, Dr Motel did not let the Committee even get to those plans. The majority of the Committee seems very conscious of the need to rigorously question all spending, although Betsy Fadem spoke for this project being part of the original plan for the non-educational facilities (but not the budget??). There is a good opportunity here to consider the full cost of in-house functions: for example, loading the carpentry shop with an incremental facilities cost changes the out-sourcing equation considerably. The administration is to come back at the next meeting with a full costing out of the options, from Do Nothing (but essential maintenance), through Add Temporary Space, Build New Facilities, to Restructure (some?) Operations. (It would be great if at least one of the Committee could have an on site review of the facilities and issues). Another topic relating to budget strategies at the Finance Committee.

Perhaps a good time to make the point that Bond Money is still Taxpayer Money. Bondholders are just not giving their money to the district because they like to see us have nice facilities! Although there may be no short run impact on the millage rate or the operating budget, and we can perhaps keep on borrowing, that money has to be repaid in the long run. The latest bond has to be spent on capital within a certain period, but there seems to be no problem with that! Again, relevant to Monday’s discussion.

Finally, interesting early data from just one week of kindergarten registration. Four of the five elementary schools are at an average of 75% of projected kindergarten enrollment, but Devon is already at 100% of the projection – and already enrolls over 100 students more than the average of the others (522 vs 420). The district as a whole has plenty of elementary capacity, but Devon is an exception. There is a facilities plan if an extra class is needed there next year, but the longer term may require other solutions.

Despite the Agenda, no discussion of the IT plan – the consultant had a sudden conflict.

Share or Like:
        
 

Teachers’ Unions Set ‘Blocking School Vouchers’ as Priority

February 11, 2011
27 Comments

Two sides to every coin . . . supporters call school vouchers a right; a matter of choice. Opponents believe that the proposed voucher program is unconstitutional and will further erode the state’s lowest-performing schools.

The teacher union opposition to school vouchers became clearer this week when representatives from the two major unions brought their case to the state’s House Education Committee. Representatives from Pennsylvania State Education Association (PSEA) and American Federation of Teachers of Pennsylvania (AFT-PA) told the Education Committee that the teacher unions were focusing on two major priorities for 2011 – budgetary assistance and blocking the proposed school voucher legislation.

Pennsylvania is loosing federal stimulus money, which will create a shortfall of $1 billion in education funding. According to Gov. Corbett, the state is facing a $4 billion deficit in next year’s budget so education-spending cuts are expected. If you recall, Corbett and Democratic state senator Anthony Williams of Philadelphia (one of school voucher bill SB1 originators) supported school vouchers in their individual campaigns last year. At this point, we do not know how steep the cuts in education spending will be and no one may know for sure until Corbett unveils his preliminary budget, which is expected to be delivered sometime in March.

Although the school voucher bill will have several hearings in the state House during the next couple of months, Corbett’s budget address in March may see the proposed legislation moving forward. As the proposed SB1 now stands, it would direct over $50 million to the neediest families in the lowest-performing schools in the state. The estimated cost of the program is less than 1% of the current education subsidy.

Besides the school voucher program, the other major education issue that must be addressed by the state is the funding of the Public School Employee Retirement System (PSERS). PSERS as currently designed is not sustainable and threatens to break the budget of school districts across the state. Although the State Legislature recognized the significance of the PSERS funding problem last year, a long-term solution is needed.

Anticipating a major battle ahead over the proposed school voucher legislation, the PSEA union, which represents 190,000+ teachers in Pennsylvania, has announced an 11% increase in dues for its members.

Share or Like:
        
 

No cryptic-coded text messaging this Valentine’s Day . . . Give a keepsake for the heart; a handwritten love letter

February 10, 2011
1 Comment

Do you remember the last handwritten note you received? Even more, do you remember the last handwritten note you sent?

With our technologically enhanced communications – e-mail, text messaging, voicemail, Facebook status updates, Twitter tweets . . . it is just so convenient to e-mail people, or to leave one-way voice messages for them, isn’t it?

The trend in text messaging continues to increase . . . it’s quick and it’s fast. The same thing is true with e-mail. You get one and can instantly send a reply. Your answer is quick, to the point and you feel that you have communicated. It might be a short reply to answer an e-mailer or simply an acknowledgement that you received the text or the email.

Hidden behind text-written sentences are cryptic codes and abbreviations. Just look at the endless choices . . . IM, SMS, cell phones, iPhones, Blackberries, Andoids . . . equipment to deliver our messages that seemingly changes daily. It is no longer only teenagers using the mysterious language of acronyms and this “shorthand and online jargon” in their communication. Haven’t we all received “emotions” expressed within e-mails, you know the smiley face emoticons or what about “shouting” that gets expressed by typing in ALL CAPS, perhaps followed by a frowning face.

The handwritten note has been around for hundreds of years yet it is still the most powerful tool of expression. Deciding to write someone by hand is a decision to connect with a person in a unique way. The handwritten note, among the form letters, magazines, invoices and solicitations, announces to your reader that he or she matters to you. The handwritten note is unique. It is private; addressed and received only to the person intended. The handwritten note can be saved and re-read forever.

Because it is not routinely sent, the handwritten note stands out and touches the reader in a way no other form of communication does. It doesn’t interrupt the reader at an inopportune time. We can decide to read it immediately or put it aside to enjoy when it’s convenient.

For those that are holiday-challenged, the most romantic day of the year, Valentine’s Day is around the corner, coming up on Monday. Think romance with a handwritten note. Online messages, e-mails and Facebook posts really are most unromantic. Can you imagine Robert Browning sending text love messages to Elizabeth Barrett Browning when he became interested in her poems? What if Robert had texted his ‘love you forever and ever’ sentiment in abbreviated cryptic code? I wonder if their relationship would have progressed into one of the most famous courtships in literature history.

A handwritten love letter is a keepsake for the heart, a treat for the senses. When was the last time you penned a sweet love letter? In the age of emoticons and e-mails, the personal touch has all but disappeared.

Put the romance back in Valentine’s Day and avoid the traps of an over-priced and over-hyped experience. Make this romantic holiday different this year, set aside the keyboard and use the pen and paper. Instead of the dozen red roses, a box of Godiva’s or the little blue box from Tiffany’s . . . rediscover the thoughtful, handwritten love letter this Valentine’s Day! Don’t be surprised if it is read over and over and saved for years in the desk drawer.

Share or Like:
        
 

Tredyffrin’s Interim Supervisor Vacancy No More . . . Mike Heaberg Appointed

February 8, 2011
20 Comments

Attending last night’s Board of Supervisors meeting was much like attending a wedding. Entering Keene Hall, I found members on the bride’s side of the aisle there to support Republican Kristen Mayock as the interim supervisor. Left of the aisle, the groom’s side contained those gathered to support Republican Mike Heaberg. Representatives from both sides promised that their candidate was the right one to lead the township.

The audience heard from supporters of Mayock and Heaberg, as well as for the Democrat candidate Eamon Brazunas. Friends and political allies praised Mayock for her personal, business and civic achievements. Some of the words used to describe her were skilled negotiator, creative as well as committed and very intelligent. A former Republican committee member and fellow attorney at her law firm, Scott Reidenbach spoke eloquently of Mayock . . . describing her as someone who ‘gets it’ and that she, “understands people and understands this township”.

Others rose to the microphone to extol Heaberg’s virtues, describing him as smart, talented, community-minded . . . the “ultimate selfless person who is seeking public office for all the right reasons”. Sandy Gorman, a fellow FLITE board member and friend, said three words described Heaberg . . . integrity, reliability and thoroughness.

There is a part in a traditional wedding ceremony, when the officiant says, ‘if anyone objects . . . let him speak now or forever hold his peace.” Like those words in a wedding ceremony, chair of the Tredyffrin Democrats, Dariel Jamieson took the microphone to make a case for the all-Republican Board of Supervisors to choose a Democrat candidate to fill the vacated Republican seat. Supporting interim supervisor candidate Eamon Brazunas, Jamieson described the volunteer firefighter as committed to service and to the community; as someone we trust with our lives. In her support of Brazunas, Jamieson explained that Brazunas had run twice before for the Board of Supervisors and represented broad appeal to both parties, having only lost the last election by 71 votes.

Jamieson offered that 45% of the residents of Tredyffrin are registered Republicans and that the other 55% of the township population is not, so perhaps a Democrat should be appointed to add balance to the board. Unfortunately, Chairman Lamina’s partisan response to Jamieson was far from satisfactory; telling her that he could never vote for someone unless they were a Republican.

Elected to serve all the people . . . Republicans, Democrats, Independents . . . I found Lamina’s remark, particularly as chair of the Board of Supervisors, to be both inappropriate and offensive. This kind of remark has the potential to continue to push the political wedge between members of this community. And for what purpose . . . for what political gain? Tonight Lamina formally announced that he would not be seeking re-election; so why not try, in the last remaining 10 months of your term, to bring people together rather than continuing to separate and divide.

The five members of the Board of Supervisors (Paul Olson was on vacation) took a vote on the interim supervisor appointment. As some expected, DiBuonaventuro supported Mayock and the other four voted in favor of Heaberg. Mike Heaberg was elected 4-1 to fill the interim supervisor position and will be sworn in at the next Board of Supervisors meeting.

The supervisor appointment is over; but are the hard feelings between the Republican Committee people still there? Will the two opposing factions come together to support and work with the newly appointed Mike Heaberg? Can the badly split Republican Committee manage reconciliation for the sake of the ‘party’? On the other hand, if the fences cannot be mended, does this now create a permanent party divide?

Looking ahead, will Brazunas challenge Heaberg in the Special Election? Will the Republican Committee endorse both Heaberg and Mayock as the two at-large candidates for the May Primary? Will Brazunas enter his third bid for election to the Board of Supervisors?

Summing of the Board of Supervisors meeting . . . as someone who believes in ‘people’ and ‘issues’ and not partisan politics, I found the meeting disturbing. As possibly the lone ‘Independent’ in a room filled with political stakeholders, the talk of Republicans and Democrats was both uncomfortable and unsettling. And I cringe that our elected officials are discussing party politics from the dais. Appoint the right ‘person’ and leave the party politics at the door. And once elected, we want them to set aside their ‘R’ or their ‘D’ and simply govern and serve us all.

Share or Like:
        
 

Should T/E School District Join Others in Increasing Public Meeting Security?

February 7, 2011
13 Comments

In December, I think we all watched with disbelief the footage of Clay Duke, the disgruntled husband of a former school employee who opened fire on school board members in Panama City, Florida. Duke’s wife had been fired from her special ed teaching job in the Florida school district. The school board video showed Duke complaining about taxes and his wife’s firing before shooting at close range as the superintendent begged, “Please don’t.” There were several rounds exchanged with a school security officer, who wounded him, before he took his own life. Amazingly, no one else was injured during the shooting.

The Florida shooting was a wake-up call for many school districts around the country; many of which are considering increasing security at public meetings. Various security options considered include security guards, police presence, or requiring all meeting attendees to pass through some type metal detector or the use of a handheld detector. Protection at school board meetings is not just for the elected officials. As the discussion on our school district’s budget deficits increases, with discussion of property tax increases, programming cuts and possible staff reductions, there are more parents, teachers, staff, citizens, press, and sometimes students attending the meetings. As schools nationwide face this financial education crunch, heated moments and frustrated community members cannot be far behind.

Unlike Tredyffrin’s township meetings, which are held in the same building as the township police department, the T/E School Board meetings are held at the high school or the school district office. The Downingtown School District has made the decision to increase security at their school board meetings. Their decision to have security at regularly scheduled school board meetings was based on the Florida school board shooting as well as the recent shooting in Tucson, Arizona of Rep. Gabrielle Gifford. Starting this week, Downingtown School District has contracted with their police department for security at their meetings.

Although I am certain that T/E School District has an emergency management plan, I wonder if there is anything specific to public board meetings. You cannot predict or prepare for random acts of violence. However, circumstances that have happened nationwide in recent memory and given the time of which we live, unfortunately require this type of discussion.

Should school boards assess and appropriately upgrade awareness, along with security and preparedness measures, for their board meetings? Certainly. School districts need to be proactive (rather than reactive) in examining prevention, security and preparedness practices. We understand that no school district has a blank check for security or any other support service. School districts everywhere are under unprecedented financial crunches. But it is during a time when society is under intense economic pressure that violence and related security risks will likely increase.

I am curious, has T/E School District reviewed its public meeting security policies?

Share or Like:
        
 

Continuing Tuition Voucher Discussion . . . What’s the next step for SB1?

February 6, 2011
10 Comments

Continuing the discussion of the tuition voucher program, a Community Matters asked for a list of the 144 low-performing schools cited in the proposed SB1 legislation. The plan would allow the parents of a needy child to take the state subsidy that would have been directed to their home school district and apply it to the public, private or parochial school of their choice. For the Harrisburg School District, for example, that amount would equal approx. $9,000/yr. Here is a link to the schools; listed in the order of performance, #1 is the lowest performing school.

The five lowest-performing schools in Pennsylvania are:

#1: Learning Academy North, Philadelphia City School District (0.00)
#2: University City High School, Philadelphia City School District (5.12)
#3: Washington Education Center, Ephrata Area School District ((7.69)
#4: West Philadelphia High School, Philadelphia City High School (9.64)
#5: Simon Gratz High School, Philadelphia City High School (10.54)

The number in parenthesis following the school represents the combined reading and math proficiency level in percentages. There is no other explanation but I read this to mean that Simon Gratz HS averages 10.54% of students performing at the required reading/math level. Assuming that the ‘0.00’ attributed to Learning Academy North is not a misprint, and if I understand the statistic correctly, it would seem as though no students at this school are effectively performing at the required reading/math level. Could this be possible? It would seem unbelievable . . . where is the accountability?

I decided to see if I could find any information about Learning Academy North, the lowest-performing school in Pennsylvania. It is a new school, only opened its doors 4 years ago. The district-run high school is small with only approximately 100 students and is a “nurturing alternative for expelled students” according to one article I read. Learning Academy North is located on N. Front St., in Philadelphia and is listed as one of the eight ‘Philadelphia Accelerated Schools’ (thought that an interesting category, given it’s english/math proficiency level). These specific schools offer full-time academic programs, for students, ages 16-21, who have earned fewer than 8 high school credits and who wish to return to school.

The school accommodates students who have been expelled from the District or are waiting for their expulsion hearing. Students at Learning Academy North can earn an official Student District diploma. In theory, this type of school looks like a good alternative for the older, returning students. However, based on the performance level, that does not appear to the case.

The Pennsylvania School Board Association (PSBA) is mounting a major anti-voucher campaign to oppose any tuition voucher plan and is asking public school officials to join the effort by contact their legislators. No doubt caving to public requests, the PSBA has now added the survey charts from Opinion Research to their website. The summary presents the findings of a survey of 805 Pennsylvania adults conducted Aug. 25 – Sept. 24, 2010. Ten questions were asked in the survey (click here for survey questions and responses).

The Berks-Mont newspaper (www.berksmontnews.com) reviewed the survey and offered the following observations on January 31:

  • About two out of three Pennsylvanians (67%) oppose giving public money to parents so they can send their children to a private school. Only a small minority (13.7%) of Pennsylvanians strongly favor taxpayer-funded tuition vouchers. Most older Pennsylvanians, aged 55 or older, oppose taxpayer-funded tuition vouchers and, in fact, 51% strongly oppose them. Over 70% of individuals surveyed under the age of 34, strongly or somewhat oppose tuition vouchers, more so than any other respondent age group.
  • For respondents declaring a political affiliation, a majority of both Democrats and Republicans indicate opposition to taxpayer-funded tuition vouchers. Democrats more so than Republicans, however, oppose taxpayer-funded tuition vouchers 69% to 58%, respectively. Independents also do not embrace tuition vouchers with 68% of them indicating that they either somewhat or strongly oppose them.
  • Regardless of zip code, opposition to tuition vouchers is universally held across all Pennsylvania regions. More than two-thirds of Pennsylvanians oppose tuition vouchers in all areas of the state except in the northeast (61% oppose tuition vouchers) and the southwest (64% oppose tuition vouchers).
  • Strong opposition to tuition vouchers is almost equally shared by whites and non-whites alike. More than two-thirds (69%) of non-white individuals indicated that they somewhat or strongly oppose taxpayer-funded tuition vouchers. This is slightly more than whites where 66% said the same. Only 10% of non-white respondents said they strongly favor taxpayer-funded tuition vouchers.
  • Two-thirds of Pennsylvanians (66%) oppose state law that requires school districts to pay the tuition of students attending privately operated charter and cyber charter schools. Like the issue of vouchers, Pennsylvanians hold very strong opinions on charter school tuition. Respondents holding opinions of strong opposition against charter tuition payment by school districts (44%) is almost four times greater than those strongly favoring tuition payments to charters by districts (11%).

The PSBA conducted a call-in program on Feb. 3 about taxpayer-funded tuition vouchers. Click here for the link to the 47 PowerPoint slides that were used during the call to PSBA members.

What is the next step for the tuition voucher plan . . . proposed SB1 legislation will be subject of a public hearing in the Senate Education Committee on Feb. 16. PSBA will present testimony at that meeting. Gov. Corbett’s budget proposal on March 8 will probably include the voucher plan. Following the budget address, the General Assembly will recess for a few weeks in order for the Appropriations Committees in the Senate and House to hold hearings and discuss various components of Corbett’s budget. The voucher bill will not move until mid to late spring.

Share or Like:
        
 

Remembering our 40th President . . . President Ronald Reagan Would be 100 Years Old Today

February 6, 2011
1 Comment

Today, February 6, 2011 marks what would have been former President Ronald Reagan’s 100th birthday. Falling on the same day as America’s mega-event, Super Bowl Sunday, a tribute to the 40th president will be displayed on the massive jumbotron at Cowboys Stadium in Texas just before kickoff.

Whether you considered yourself a Reaganite or were opposed to his conservative principles, you always knew that President Reagan loved his country and his presidency was filled with eloquence and passion.

In 1976, then President Reagan offered these words, “Today the majority of Americans want what those first Americans wanted: a better life for themselves and their children; a minimum of government authority. Very simply, they want to be left alone in peace and safety to take care of the family by earning an honest dollar and putting away some savings . . .

“This may not sound too exciting, but there is something magnificent about it. On the farm, on the street corner, in the factory and in the kitchen, millions of us ask nothing more, but certainly nothing less, than to live our own lives according to our values – at peace with ourselves, our neighbors and the world.”

Reagan’s words are as important today as they were thirty-five years ago. Is not this what we all want, to “live our own lives according to our values – at peace with ourselves, our neighbors and the world”?

Reagan often spoke of the “shining city on a hill,” a phrase coined by John Winthrop, a pilgrim who arrived in America in search of freedom. Describing his own vision in his 1989 farewell address, Reagan said “it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and heart to get here.”

It makes you wonder what President Reagan would have to say about our world in 2011. A couple of days ago, I found this interesting essay by Ken Blackwell, What Would Reagan Do about Egypt? Although I may not have agreed with all of President Reagan’s values, he left an indelible mark on American history. Reading this thoughtful essay, reminded me of the why we need to remember our 40th president. Happy Birthday Ronald Reagan!

What Would Reagan Do About Egypt?
By Ken Blackwell, Fellow of the National Academy of Public Administration & the Family Research Council

We’re about to celebrate the 100th anniversary of Ronald Reagan’s birth. As much as I would like to praise that great and good man, I have to wonder what he would do about Egypt?

Would he shepherd Egypt along the path to democracy — as he did successfully with South Korea and the Philippines? Or would he maintain a “constructive engagement” policy with Mubarak as he attempted with the apartheid regime in South Africa? That policy frankly failed, and we had to await F.W. de Klerk moves to release Nelson Mandela and allow the African National Congress to compete in democratic elections.

Reagan’s greatest success — of course — was in pressing for reforms behind the Iron Curtain, and for publicly demanding that Soviet ruler Mikhail Gorbachev “tear down this wall.” A key part of Reagan’s success was his recognition that religious liberty was central to ending Communist totalitarianism.

As a candidate for president, Reagan had watched, as indeed the world watched, in awe as the Polish Pope John Paul II celebrated an outdoor Mass in Warsaw. One million Poles cried out “We Want God!” Reagan, unashamed, teared up. “I want to work with him,” he said. And how he did.

As president, Ronald Reagan ordered his CIA Director William Casey to make sure that Poland’s Solidarity union got fax machines and copiers — surreptitiously via the Vatican’s Washington embassy. Reagan would not allow Solidarity to be crushed by Poland’s Communist puppet regime.

Reagan publicly confronted the Soviet dictators, and loudly demanded they keep the agreements they made on human rights in the Helsinki Accords. Deep in the Gulag, Natan Scharansky heard of Reagan’s calling the USSR an “evil empire.” He tapped out the words to fellow prisoners — zeks — on the plumbing pipes. It gave them all such great heart.

Reagan understood the importance of religion behind the Iron Curtain. He kept a list of Jewish refuseniks in his suit coat pocket and would press Mikhail Gorbachev to release them from the Gulag at every meeting. He worked behind the scenes, as well, to gain the free emigration of the Siberian Seven, a family of Russian Pentecostals who had taken refuge in the U.S. Embassy in Moscow.

When he went to West Berlin in 1987, President Reagan rejected the advice of virtually all of his counselors to take that ringing phrase — Tear Down This Wall! — out of his speech. Romesh Ratnesar, an editor for TIME Magazine recognized these four words as the short, sharp hammer strokes they were.

Reagan also spoke of the radio tower built by the East German Communist regime on their side of the Wall. It was intended to overshadow all the old church steeples in that captive city. Reagan noted a “defect” in the sphere atop the tower. The Communists sought to paint it out, to blot it with acid, even to sandblast it, but the defect remained. When the sun struck that sphere, Reagan said, it made the sign of the cross.

No other American president in 200 years had publicly invoked the Sign of the Cross. And when, shortly thereafter, the Wall came down, the Iron Curtain was cast away, TIME Magazine editors, of course, named Mikhail Gorbachev their Man of the Decade.

What we learned from Ronald Reagan can guide us as we deal with Egypt. Obviously, Mubarak must go. But can we find a partner with whom we can do business in Cairo?

Early indications are not favorable. The Muslim Brotherhood murdered Mubarak’s predecessor, Anwar Sadat. Any government that includes the Muslim Brotherhood will be hostile to human rights, repudiate Egypt’s treaty with Israel, and threaten us.

There is even a deeper concern. Although high percentages of Egypt’s people say they want democracy, 84% of them also say you should be killed if you leave Islam. Believing that, they will never be a democracy. The first human right is the right to life. Next must come the right to worship God as your conscience dictates. This right was eloquently championed for Americans by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. These great Founders knew that human rights are endowed by our Creator.

State Department careerists — the folks who tried to get President Reagan to scrap Tear Down This Wall — often fail to defend religious freedom. They forget that Jefferson and Madison were not only great advocates for religious liberty, they were also skilled diplomats. Madison knew that defending religious liberty could only add to “the lustre of our country.” Ronald Reagan knew that, too.

Share or Like:
        
 

Chester County Commission Political Buzz

February 4, 2011
12 Comments

Gosh, things are buzzing at the Chester County Commission this week! There was the application deadline for the interim County Commissioner position vacated by Carol Aichele, who left for a job in Gov. Corbett’s administration. The deadline was Monday, January 30 at 12 noon – but at the close of business on Friday, there were zero applications received at the Common Pleas Court of Judges.

An article appeared in the Sunday edition of the Daily Local advertising the fact that there were no applications. Apparently, the notice did the trick and created a last-minute crush of interest! By the 12 noon deadline on Monday, there were 39 applications received for the vacancy! Upon review, six were removed from consideration because the applicants were Democrats and the appointment will go to a Republican. Although the judges hope to shorten the list, it looks like the interview process is going to be quite the undertaking!

Another item out of the County Commissioner’s Office. . . there is some unsettling news circulating about Republican Commissioner Terrance Farrell’s re-election campaign. This past November, he held a kick-off fundraiser, “A Pint of Chester County” for his campaign. The emailed invitation encouraged recipients to become sponsors with a suggested donation range of $250 – $2,500. When I received Farrell’s invitation, I found it curious that I was on his email list. Never having donated to Farrell and not knowing how they had my address, I emailed Farrell’s campaign but never received a response.

Today, I learned that my receiving Farrell’s email invitation was not an anomaly and some people are none too pleased, including State Sen. Andy Dinniman (D-Chester). Farrell’s fundraising email invitation was sent to government and personal email addresses, including Sen. Dinniman. Farrell emailed the fundraiser invitation to Sen. Dinniman’s district office.

Senator Dinniman’s staff sent Mr. Farrell’s campaign a letter stating that he was allowed to send political mail to a state senate office. Dinniman reported that his office received complaints by at least three other individuals, all Democrats complaining that Farrell had sent them the fundraising invitation to personal email accounts. Farrell’s response to accusations of misusing emails for his re-election campaign — he was just keeping his constituents informed. Whoops!

Things are really getting interesting for county races . . . from DA candidates to the Common Pleas Judge candidates and now the news about the County Commissioner candidates. It will be curious how the hyperbole plays out at the County Republican Convention on February 15.

Speaking of politics . . . so, you think you know where you stand, politically speaking? Think again. A friend sent me this short test and the results may surprise and give you food for thought. You will be asked just 10 questions, and it instantly tells you where you stand politically.

The results will show your position as a red dot on a “political map” so you will see exactly where you score. The most interesting thing about the quiz is that it beyond the Democrat, Republican, and Independent.

The Quiz has gotten a lot of praise . . . The Washington Post said it has “gained respect as a valid measure of a person’s political leanings.” The Fraser Institute said it’s a “fast, fun and accurate assessment of a person’s overall political views”. Suite University said it is the “most concise and accurate
political quiz out there.”

I took the test and was not surprised to score a ‘Centrist’ label for my efforts. According to the Quiz website, . . . “a Centrist prefer a ‘middle ground’ regarding government control of the economy and personal behavior. Depending on the issue, they sometimes favor government intervention and sometimes support individual freedom of choice. Centrists pride themselves on keeping an open mind, tend to oppose “political extremes,” and emphasize what they describe as “practical” solutions to problems”.

Take the Quiz — it’s fun and will not take you more than 5 min. It would be great if you would share your results! Here is the link for the Quiz:
http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz

Share or Like:
        
 

Religious Freedom or Child Abuse . . . You be the judge!

February 3, 2011
7 Comments

Risking a volatile outburst from some Community Matters readers, there is troubling news from the Philadelphia courts. I have been following this story from January 2009 and the case had its day in court yesterday. Although the verdict was guilty, I am far from satisfied by the sentencing. If you are not aware of this specific case, here is the background.

In January 2009, 2-year old Kent Schaible of the Rhawnhurst section of Philadelphia became sick. His parents, Herbert Schaible, 42 and Catherine Schaible, 41 are members of the First Century Gospel Church of Juniata Park, which teaches healing through prayer. For 10 days, the couple remained in this Northeast home praying over their son, believing their son’s symptoms, including a sore throat, chest congestion, diarrhea and trouble swallowing and sleeping were signs of the flu or of a cold. The parents did not seek medical treatment for their son. Following the fundamental teachings of their church, they believe that the sick can be healed by praying to God, not by turning to doctors or medicine.

Kent died of bacterial pneumonia on January 24, 2009. When the Schaibles discovered that Kent was dead, they called the church’s pastor who came to the house. He joined the parents in prayer and then called a funeral director. The Philadelphia medical examiner ruled the death a homicide but noted that it could have been prevented with basic medical care. Herbert and Catherine Schaible were arrested in April 2009 and charged with involuntary manslaughter and related counts.

The trial began late last year and at one point Herbert read a statement to the jury, which included “We tried to fight the devil, but in the end the devil won” as part of their defense. I supported the Schaible’s conviction in December of involuntary manslaughter but was shocked by yesterday’s sentence. The sentence for the death of their 2-year old son was 10 years probation, as imposed by Common Pleas Court Judge Carolyn Temin!

Why no prison term for the couple? Temin decided against prison for the couple because they had no prior criminal record and they have seven other children, now ages 1 to 15, and they needed their parents. Temin says that she made it clear that the parents must get the children regular medical exams. Do we really think that is going to happen . . . ? Commenting on the sentence, Herbert’s attorney, Bobby Hoof, commented there is a clear message that “religious freedom is trumped by the safety of children.”

As an aside, Mr. Schaible teaches at the school that is attached to their church, the fundamentalist First Century Gospel Church, of which they are members. Mrs. Schaible’s father is principal of this school. How can the Schaible’s support the doctrines of the church and school and have regular check-up and medical care? The church and school teachings believe that all medical treatment is a sin.

The couple could have received 5-10 years in prison for involuntary manslaughter and 3 ½ -7 years for endangering the welfare of a child. In handing down the probation sentence, Judge Temin said that if the Schaible’s violate the terms (which means seeking medical care and regular check-ups for their other children they will be sent to jail. What happens if their violation of medical treatment causes another death of a child? How can these people be allowed to retain custody of their children?

When it comes to religious beliefs, I support the rights of an individual. However, I draw the line when a religious belief causes harm or worse, . . . death. Maybe I am going out on a limb on this, but I view The Schaible’s actions as a form of religious child abuse. The fundamental teachings of their church, directs those that seek medical attention are to be shunned . . . so how is that this couple is going to remain members of the church, teach in the school and follow the terms of the sentence in the raising of their seven children? Not possible.

Here is an interesting thought . . . would the proposed school voucher plan work for parents wishing to send their children to the fundamental First Century Gospel Church School? Good possibility that this church school located in Juniata Park could be located close to one of the 144 low-performing public schools and therefore would qualify to receive a student with a voucher. Isn’t that a scary thought?

Share or Like:
        
 

Another Store Closing in Tredyffrin . . . A Suggestion for a Business Task Force

February 3, 2011
48 Comments

Another store closing and leaving Tredyffrin. I received a tip from a local resident that yesterday was to be Tuesday Morning’s last day and I paid them a visit. Yes, after 7 years at the Swedesford Road (Rt. 252) location in Devon, the doors closed at 7 PM last night. In discussion with one of the sales people, I was told that the 10 employees plus the store manager only received 2 weeks notice of the closing. The discount chain itself is not closing (only the Tredyffrin location) but unfortunately, these employees were not offered positions elsewhere. The older clerk was very upset; she had been with the store since its opening and was not encouraged about employment options in Tredyffrin.

I was told that Tuesday Morning did not renew its lease at the Tredyffrin location because the township was not friendly toward business. Not sure if the remark was intended toward the township officials or toward the shoppers? Regardless of the remarks intent, it got me to thinking. When I attended the interim supervisor interviews, the three supervisors who conducted the interviews (Bob Lamina, Michele Kichline and Phil Donahue) were asked by the candidates what ‘they’ viewed were some of the challenges facing the township.

In light of the many empty storefronts in the township, the supervisors listed attracting new businesses at the top of the challenge list. I agree that encouraging new business growth is essential but equally important, is how can we support the businesses that we have?

I wonder if a township business task force would help . . . a volunteer group of local retired executives, small business owners, and corporate representatives. The group would meeting monthly with a mission to spearhead ways to improve existing relationships and provide assistance and a resource for township businesses. This important support group for the business community could provide regular updates and suggestions to the Board of Supervisors. Just an idea . . .

Share or Like:
        
 
Community Matters © 2025 Frontier Theme