Community Matters Archives - Page 4 of 52

Community Matters

Looks like Mother Nature has dug her heels in this winter … with 8 or 9 inches of snow on the ground and the weather forecasters claiming there is more on the way tonight, it’s hard to ‘Think Spring’. Further bad news came on Sunday with Goundhog Punxsutawney Phil forecasting six more weeks of what already has felt like a brutally long and cold winter.

But today is one of those sunny days- where the air is crisp and you can feel the promise of spring hidden somewhere away in the barren branches of the trees. In the midst of the cold temperatures, snow and ice, you may have missed last week’s announcement that the Phase II section of the Chester Valley Trail opened in Tredyffrin.

Phase I which opened in 2010, is a 4-mile section from Exton Park to Route 29 at Wegmans in Malvern. The Phase II section extends the trail an additional 5.8 miles from Uptown Worthington to Old Eagle School Road for a total of 9.8 miles. I contacted Tim Lander, president of the Friends of Chester Valley Trail, for a comment about the opening and about resident parking in Tredyffrin.

According to Tim, there is no county-owned parking in Tredyffrin for trail use but offered a couple of suggestions. Penn Medicine has agreed to allow weekend-only parking at their lot on Chesterbrook Boulevard and you can park at Cedar Hollow Park. Cedar Hollow Park is a small township park on Cedar Hollow Road close to the Vanguard campus. Many people use the parking at Uptown Worthington for Phase I and since Wegmans is the pick-up point for Phase II, that’s another option. Tim mentioned that the County is speaking to various commercial landlords in Tredyffrin, hoping to establish additional parking facilities close to the trail.

Tim’s reaction to the recent opening of Phase II …

It’s very exciting to have the Chester Valley Trail open in Tredyffrin. Having watched years of discussion, planning, and construction it’s great to be able to use the trail at last. I’ve spoken with many local residents who feel the same way, some of whom took advantage of the favorable weather on the first weekend in February to get out for a walk or bike ride. There were walkers, joggers, and cyclists of all ages; a great cross-section of our community. I have also heard from several people who plan to commute via the trail, and are encouraged to know that the County will keep the trail plowed during winter months.

The Friends of the Chester Valley Trail expects to work closely with County staff to plan volunteer activities that encourage community involvement with the trail. In addition, the Friends will hold a public meeting at the Tredyffrin Township Building in March. All are welcome to attend. Keep an eye on our website – www.chestervalleytrail.org – for details as they unfold.

Tim Lander, President, Friends of the Chester Valley Trail

The Friends of Chester Valley Trail is a non-profit 501(c)3 organization whose mission is to assist the Chester County Parks and Recreation Department promote trail activities, plan for future programs, facilities and improvements, alert staff to trail conditions, assist in reducing maintenance costs, and provide other assistance to the public as may be requested.

With the opening of the Tredyffrin section of the Chester Valley Trail, let’s support the Friends of Chester Valley Trail with a 2014 membership. Membership — $15 Individual, $25 Family and $100 Sponsor. To download the membership form, click here.

To the Board of Friends of Chester Valley Trail – Tim Lander, Steve Warren, Mike Broennle, Bob Cochlin, Phil Hoke, Bob O’Leary and Gail Lipstein , Chester County employees and County Commissioners Ryan Costello, Kathi Cozzone and Terence Farrell – thank you for your dedication and hard work to make the trail a reality in Tredyffrin! To read Chester County press release, click here.

From Friends of Chester County Trail website

Hundreds of Patch employees laid off via phone today!

January 29, 2014

4 Comments

Unfortunately, the ax has come down at Patch locations across the country today. Our own Bob Byrne at TE Patch was on the AOL call this morning along with hundreds of others including Sam Strike at Radnor Patch as they were told today would be their last day. From what I understand, the layoffs were focused mainly around editorial staffing and heard estimates of between two-thirds and one-half the Patch workforce lost their jobs. This is the second major round of layoffs in six months – last August 400 Patch employees lost their jobs.

AOL sold a major stake in its hyperlocal news outlet to Hale Global on January 15^th with AOL retaining a minority state. Initially at the the time of the announcement, Hale Global had assured the Patch employees they would continue to have jobs. However, two weeks later, there was an abrupt change in plans.

Hearing you are laid off with hundreds of others on a conference call is not anyway to treat employees. Patch employees were told to call in this morning so that they could hear the following:

Hi everyone, it’s [Patch COO] Leigh Zarelli Lewis. Patch is being restructured in connection with the creation of the joint venture with Hale Global. Hale Global has decided which Patch employees will receive an offer of employment to move forward in accordance with their vision for Patch and which will not. Unfortunately, your role has been eliminated and you will no longer have a role at Patch and today will be your last day of employment with the company. …Thank you again and best of luck.

The above is a transcript, listen at https://soundcloud.com/jim-romenesko/sounds-from-wednesday-morning

The call went on to say that, effected employees would receive their yearly AOl bonuses, a payout for accrued vacation time and two months’ severance. By taking the severance package, the employees are agreeing not to sue AOL. Employees were told that their Patch email address would work until 5 PM today and the use of technology (phones, computers) until Friday and that their severance package will arrive within 48 hours.

Is this any way to treat people … gather up hundreds of employees on a massive phone call to tell them “today’s your last day of work”. Wow.

Bob Byrne is one of the good guys and AOL was lucky to have this hardworking, dedicated employee. In my opinion, they lost a real gem! Best wishes for the future Bob and may this only be a momentary bump in the road!

Preserving History Matters: Watershed Moment for Tredyffrin Township, Chester County

January 29, 2014

5 Comments

With the recent demolition of the Ann Pugh Farm and as president of Tredyffrin Historic Preservation Trust, chair of the Annual Historic House Tour and owner of one of the oldest houses in the township, I feel a responsibility to speak out on the state of historic preservation in Tredyffrin Township .

After a review of the history of preservation in Tredyffrin and the demolition requirements, the following editorial was written and appears in this week’s Main Line Suburban newspaper and and online. As I say in the article, the people who purchased the 250-year old Ann Pugh house and then immediately demolished it did not break any laws. There were no ordinances in Tredyffrin Township to protect the 18^th century house and there are no ordinances to protect the other 350+ historic properties in this community from a similar fate.

Preserving History Matters: Watershed Moment for Tredyffrin Township

Historic buildings play a special role in creating the distinctive character of each community. Historic preservation is about protecting, promoting, and using historic places. It is also about the power of place, places that matter because they help tell the story of our community, of who we are and where we come from. As suburban sprawl and roadside development make more and more places look the same, it becomes important for communities to keep their identities intact.

In January, we mourned the loss of the 18^th century Ann Pugh house on Pugh Road in Wayne. The demolition of this beautifully restored historic treasure illustrates the plight of America’s old homes. Historic homes are on demolition lists all over America but many of us hoped that it would never happen in Tredyffrin. As president of Tredyffrin Historic Preservation Trust, whose mission is to “preserve and protect historic and cultural resources in Tredyffrin Township”, chair of the Annual Historic House Tour and owner of one of the oldest houses in the Township, I feel it is my duty to speak out.

Typically, historic houses that have been badly neglected over the years, and are in such a state of disrepair that they are considered eyesores, are the ones targeted for demolition. However, the Ann Pugh house was neither neglected or in a state of disrepair. The stunning Georgian stone farmhouse on Pugh Road with its manicured landscaping and guest barn, springhouse and swimming pool had been meticulously restored and maintained. The real estate company described the Ann Pugh Farm as the “quintessential Pennsylvania farmhouse – a Main Line Classic”, a family home with five bedrooms, four bathrooms and five fireplaces.

The 2.2-acre property was sold on December 12, 2013 for $1.4 million; a demolition application followed two weeks later. According to township staff, the demolition application was approved within 48 hours of its submission with no notification to adjourning property owners required. Aside from the fact that the house demolished was historic, I found the lack of notification to neighbors concerning, especially given its location next to New Eagle Elementary School.

Mindful of private property rights, what can the township do, and what should it do (if anything) through its zoning and land use ordinances to stop the demolition of historic buildings? The issue of historic building regulation, and land use regulations, versus the rights of individual property owners has seen much debate over the years in Tredyffrin with little agreement.

Although preservation issues facing Tredyffrin Township are similar to those faced by other communities, it is interesting that municipalities like Willistown, Lower Merion and Radnor have managed to balance the rights of individual property owners with the protection of historic properties. For instance, in Lower Merion, a demolition permit for a property on their Historic Resource Inventory list requires the recommendation of their Historic Commission plus approval from the Board of Commissioners. The demolition process requires similar review in Willistown and Radnor townships. No such requirement for review of demolition applications exists in Tredyffrin Township. No ordinance protects the demolition of any historic building nor does a demolition permit require the review of any township board or commission or the approval of the Board of Supervisors.

Since its founding by Welsh settlers in 1707, Tredyffrin Township has enjoyed a rich inventory of historic resources. In the 1960’s Tredyffrin Township was the first municipality in Pennsylvania to establish a Historic Architectural Review Board (HARB) and they had authority over a Historic Site List of 29 historic properties. Unlike the conventional historic society, the HARB is a regulatory body with the legal authority to recommend approval to the Board of Supervisors for building permit applications that involved the reconstruction, alteration or demolition of these 29 properties. Some of the historic properties on the list included the one-room Diamond Rock Octagonal School, Old Eagle School, Great Valley Mill, Wharton Esherick Museum, Baptist Church in the Great Valley, Lee & Bradford Quarters (Picket Post Swim Club), Van Leer Cabin next to Conestoga HS, Strafford Train Station)

In 2003, an award-winning Historic Resource Survey, recognized by the Pennsylvania Historic Museum Commission, was completed for the Township. The study provided a detailed inventory of 356 important historic resources in the Township. A database and Geographical Information System (GIS) were included to link the historic resources to the Township’s existing GIS tax parcel data.

The survey listed and classified historic properties into three categories – Class I, Class II, and Class III. The recently demolished Ann Pugh house was listed as a Class II property in the Township survey with an additional recommendation for potential listing on the National Register of Historic Places. As an aside, National Historic Register properties are not protected from demolition in Tredyffrin Township. The Federal government recognizes historically and architecturally important properties but leaves their regulation to local municipal government.

After the completion of the Historic Resource Survey in 2003 and the updated Comprehensive Plan and Historic Preservation Plan in 2009, there was discussion about adding historic properties to the list of 29 protected properties. It was determined that the easiest way to add to the list would be to replace the HARB with a Historical Commission which occurred in June 2011. Unfortunately, a list of protected properties in Tredyffrin Township no longer exists and the protection for the original 29 properties is gone.

Over a decade ago, Tredyffrin Township’s elected officials acknowledged the importance of our historic buildings, hired a consulting company to catalogue, and document them for the Historic Resource Survey. However, other than receiving accolades from Harrisburg … nothing further was done with the survey results. If the Township had used the Historic Resource Survey as a tool to protect historic properties, the Ann Pugh house would probably still be standing.

Tredyffrin Township is always mentioned when discussing Philadelphia’s Main Line historic suburbs. In fact, the Township has the distinction of the highest number of historic properties of all municipalities in Chester County. Seven years ago, the Township celebrated its first three hundred years of history (Tredyffrin 300), the same year that it received Preserve America designation for “protecting and celebrating its heritage”.

For historic preservationists, the destruction of any historic property is difficult but is compounded when it occurs in your own backyard. What makes Tredyffrin Township truly unique is its rich architectural heritage: the old homes and buildings that tell the story of the community’s past, that continue to bring pleasure in the present, and will, if properly cared for, inform and inspire the future.

To be clear, the people who purchased the 250-year old Ann Pugh house and then immediately demolished it did not break any laws. There were no ordinances in Tredyffrin Township to protect the 18^th century house and there are no ordinances to protect the other 350+ historic properties in this community from a similar fate.

For historic preservation to matter, and for our local history to be meaningful, it needs to be supported. A watershed moment for historic preservation in Tredyffrin Township, will the loss of the Ann Pugh house serve as the needed impetus for change. Or, will it send the message that Tredyffrin Township values individual property rights and development at all costs and allow the destruction of our historic buildings to continue.

We understand that change will occur as the future unfolds, but this does not have to happen at the expense of our community’s historic properties. A community that respects its history respects itself.

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

TESD Public Information Committee meeting tonight!

January 23, 2014

5 Comments

Tonight at 6:30 PM at the TESD Administration Building, is the first meeting of the T/E School District Public Information Committee, chaired by school board member Scott Dorsey — click here for the agenda. Dorsey is committed to improving communication with the public and encouraging open dialogue between the Board and residents.

Unfortunately, I am unable to attend tonight’s meeting but I have a personal ‘wish list’ for the Public Information Committee to consider and will send a copy to Mr. Dorsey for his consideration.

Change how residents ask questions at school board meetings. Residents should be able to ask their question and receive an answer not have to wait until all the questions are asked before receiving an answer.
Televise the School Board meetings live, as is down with the Board of Supervisors meetings. I advocate for Finance Committee meetings to be televised.
Coordinate regular School Board meetings and Board of Supervisors monthly meetings == too often they fall on the same Monday nights.
Encourage open dialogue between the residents and the School Board – an example took place at last week’s Finance Committee meeting where residents were encourage to ask questions and participate. Questions were answered immediately with no standing in line. I would like to see that refreshing relationship continue at regular school board meetings.
Provide sufficient details and supporting documentation on the financials and budget so the public understands where the numbers come from – too often, the public is not provided with the necessary background for the numbers to make any sense.
Many school districts, including Unionville Chadds Ford School District have the email address of school board members listed on their website. We don’t need to have their ‘personal’ emails, (like UCFSD) but I think that there should be a way for the public to communicate directly with the Board. Currently all emails to the school board are filtered through Art McDonnell. Why is Art McDonnell, the business manager, the filter for resident’s emails to the school board? This does not seem like an appropriate use of time by one of the highest compensated TESD employees.
I would like to see the end to the consent agenda. Too many non-routine items ended up on the consent agenda – as examples in 2013, included on the consent agenda was the hiring of Andy Chambers and salary increase to the administrators. Other school districts (including UCFSD) do not use the consent agenda for that reason.
Respect and civility is a two-way street. The Board members (plus District solicitor and staff) should be encouraged to respect the residents at meetings as should the residents to to the Board.

Ann Pugh Farm … an 18th century Tredyffrin Township historic treasure lost to demolition

January 17, 2014

30 Comments

Demolition of Ann Pugh farmhouse

For historic preservationists, the destruction of any historic property is difficult but is compounded when it occurs in your own backyard. What makes Tredyffrin Township truly unique is its rich architectural heritage: the old homes and buildings that tell the story of the community’s past, that continue to bring pleasure in the present, and will, if properly cared for, inform and inspire the future.

In 2003, Tredyffrin Township’s Historic Architectural Review Board (HARB) undertook what would become an extensive award-winning architectural survey, identifying more than 350 historic resources in the township. As a member of HARB, I was involved in the review and cataloging of the township’s historic buildings for this project.

According to this historic resource survey, the William Pugh Farm (also called Ann Pugh Farm and A. Glass Farm) received a historic survey Class II structure rating. The primary architectural style was listed as Georgian and identified the structural system as stone with shake roof. In the report on the Pugh farmhouse, the surveyor comments include, “recommendation for potential individual listing on the National Register of Historic Places”.

The township’s historic survey description of the property states that the original owner, William C. Pugh, made iron augers in his blacksmith shop at this farm in 1873 and is responsible for the road’s name. A 1980 survey date suggests that the Pugh farmhouse lists a date of 1750 for the first section and 1830 for the later wing. This date associates with the date stone of the springhouse of 1832 and that of the barn showing 1839 (see photos below). According to the historic survey records, “the blacksmith shop was extant in 1980 close to the road, but appears to have been demolished. Pugh’s property was sold by 1883 to A. Glass, who held 20 acres in 1887. The complex is distinctive as a combined farmstead with a farmer blacksmith shop and barn.”

When completed, Tredyffrin Township’s award-winning historic resource survey received statewide attention with the 2007 Preservation Award from Preservation Pennsylvania. At the December 2004 Board of Supervisors meeting, former State Representative Carole Rubley presented the Government Initiative Award on behalf of the Commonwealth to Jim Garrison, who was the Chairman of the Historical Architectural Review Board at that time. In the minutes of that BOS meeting, Rubley stated that the survey “will be a planning tool for preservation practices in the Township. Mrs. Rubley congratulated the HARB for this great honor, and said it made her proud of the Township.” A longtime supporter of historic preservation in Tredyffrin Township, I don’t know that the demolition of the 18^th century Ann Pugh Farm would make her proud.

In 2009, the township staff, representatives of the Planning Commission and HARB and members of the community took on the arduous task of updating the Comprehensive Plan & Historic Preservation Plan. At that time, I was a member of HARB and served on the citizens committee that helped create the revised planning tool.

In the description of purpose for the Historic Preservation Plan, the document states, “…the Township recognizes the importance of its existing historic resources and the role they play in contributing to the Township’s character. The Historic Preservation Plan will assist the Township and its residents in appreciating the importance of preserving and protecting historic resources.”

Given the township’s stated support of historic preservation, then I must believe that something went terribly wrong regarding the Ann Pugh Farm, insofar as there were no red flags raised before granting the demolition permit on this property. According to Bill Martin, the township manager, the permit was applied for and reviewed by township staff. In an email he stated, “Unless the home is protected, the code department has no ability to deny or delay these applications.”

The township has the historic resource survey book that documents, by street address, the 350+ historic properties, with descriptions and photographs. When the township staff receives a demolition permit request, it would only take a couple of minutes to check whether the property is included in the historic resource survey. The property was only purchased last month, how is it possible that a demolition permit can go through the township in less than 30 days? It’s too late to make a difference for the 18^th century Pugh Road house but going forward, something needs to change.

Unless the process changes regarding notification of demolition applications, there’s nothing to keep this from happening over and over. Although I am no longer a member of the Historic Commission, I continue to serve as the president of Tredyffrin Historic Preservation Trust and chair of the Annual Historic House Tour. I was disheartened to read on that township website that starting in 2014, the Historic Commission is no longer holding monthly meetings but has instead decreased its meeting schedule to quarterly. And unfortunately, the township no longer has a HARB which may have helped protect this historic property from demolition.

For historic preservation to matter, and for our local history to be meaningful, it needs to be supported.

In 2007, I had the pleasure of co-chairing the township’s Tredyffrin 300 celebration with my friend Judy DiFilippo. The community came together that year to celebrate our three hundred years of history. Our history was important when the township was founded in 1707, it was important when we celebrated the 300^th year of its founding in 2007, and … its history and its historic resources should be important to preserve in 2014.

In the words of early preservationist William Morris, “These old buildings do not belong to us only, they belong to our forefathers and they will belong to our descendants unless we play them false. They are not in any sense our own property to do with as we like with them. We are only trustees for those that come after us.”

———————————————————————————————————

Remembering the Ann Pugh Farm, circa 1792 with a few photos — a loss of an 18th century historic treasure

Ann Pugh Farmhouse, circa 1792

Barn and swimming pool

Barn date stone

Great room of guest barn

Beautiful 18th c dining room

Pugh farmhouse kitchen

Living room at Ann Pugh farmhouse

Ann Pugh farmhouse bedroom

Beautiful 18th Century House is Demolished in Tredyffrin Township — Why?

January 17, 2014

30 Comments

When I was looking for houses for the 9th Annual Historic House Tour last year, there was a beautiful 18th century home at 523 Pugh Road in Wayne that was for sale. The stately home, known as the Ann Pugh Farm, has its early roots in the 1700’s. The stone farm house, garage, barn and springhouse were all wonderfully restored and and 2.2 acres of beautifully landscaped lawn.

Described in the real estate brochure as a a “historic estate property with stately farmhouse”, the stone house was fully restored with five fireplaces, a ‘guest’ barn, swimming pool with spa, 5 bedrooms, 4 1/2 baths, library, 4500 square feet and all the modern amenities for the 21st century family.

The property was absolutely stunning and a perfect house for the annual historic house tour! I contacted the real estate agent in June to see if the owners would consider having the house on the tour in September. Occasionally there are houses for sale on the house tour and sometimes the ‘perfect buyer’ for the old house is on the tour. And with a location next to the elementary school, this home would be a real attraction as a family home and the house tour a perfect opportunity for more potential buyers to see it.

Although flattered to be asked, I was told by the real estate agent that the older couple who owned house declined the house tour offer, stating that they were very private people and were not interested. I was disappointed — neighboring Avonwood Farm (c.1750) also on Pugh Road was already scheduled to be on the 2013 house tour and the addition of the Ann Pugh Farm would have connected the histories of those two early farms.

The 9th Annual Historic House Tour occurred in September — with Avonwood Farm and without the Ann Pugh Farm, which was still for sale at that point. It sometimes can take longer for historic homes to sell so I assumed that the house was still on the market — that was until I learned otherwise yesterday! I was shocked when Tredyffrin Township resident Christine Johnson posted a demolition photo of this beautiful historic home on her Facebook page yesterday. It seems impossible to believe that this could happen here in Tredyffrin Township and no one cared enough to try and save it a piece of our local history!

According to Zillow, the Ann Pugh Farm was sold for $1.4 million on December 12th. Although less than the original asking price of $1.7 million, certainly a significant price tag. In less than a month after the purchase, the house is being demolished.

Doesn’t a demolition permit take longer than 30 days?
Where was the township’s Historic Commission and the Board of Supervisors?
Was there even a pause by anyone on the township staff before the permit was granted?

It would be one thing if this 18th century house had been neglected and in disrepair but that was not the case. The former owners purchased the house in 1982 for $230K. They lived in the house for thirty years, raised their family and lovingly restoring their historic treasure, down to every detail! With their children grown and out of the house, they decided to downsize and sell the family home.

I cannot imagine how the former owners must now feel knowing their beautiful historic home has been demolished. I wonder if they had any idea what the ‘new’ owners intended to do when they signed that sales agreement in December? Beyond the purchase price, the ‘new’ owners have the demolition and rebuilding costs of their new McMansion. It’s hard for me to understand why anyone would spend $1.4 million on a completely restored historic home, only to turn around and knock it down.

From the Tredyffrin Township website — “Few townships in Pennsylvania are as rich in history as Tredyffrin Township, which is located at the easternmost edge of Chester County, Pennsylvania … The Township had its beginning in 1682 when a group of Welsh Quakers went to William Penn in England and purchased, at a price of ten cents an acre, forty thousand acres of land in southeastern Pennsylvania. Penn promised the Quakers that here they could enjoy their customs and language in a little “barony” of their own…”

As president of Tredyffrin Historic Preservation Trust and chair of the annual historic house tour, the destruction of the Ann Pugh Road Farm is more than just a sad day for me; it’s a loss to the community. Historic buildings serve as reminders of the past. This is one of the reasons preserving historical buildings is important. Understanding the past and having reminders of the past allows people to understand there they are and where they are headed. When people understand what the community has gone through and have visual reminders of their past then they can feel more connected to the place. Preserving our past gives us more understanding and hope for the future.

The loss of the Pugh Road farmhouse is a loss of our local history … and represents a very sad commentary on the value of historic preservation in Tredyffrin Township.

Tredyffrin Twp Planning Commission agenda — Chesterbrook Shopping Center project & Plans for 250-unit multifamily building in Paoli!

January 15, 2014

12 Comments

The upcoming Planning Commission meeting on Thursday has a couple of major township redevelopment projects on the agenda for discussion – Chesterbrook Shopping Center and 250 unit multi-family building with structured parking in Paoli.

The applicant for the Chesterbrook Shopping Center project, 500 Chesterbrook Boulevard, LP is back in front of the Planning Commissioners regarding the proposed text amendments to the Town Center District (TCD). The proposed TCD changes included amending the standard for building height, sidewalks, parking, building façade and the steep slope regulation, to differentiate for manmade steep slopes. The Planning Commission originally approved the TCD zoning changes on November 21 and sent it to the Board of Supervisors for review at their December 16 meeting. However, after discussion and community input, the supervisors sent the proposed TCD text amendments back to the PC for further work that will happen at Thursday’s meeting.

One of the sticking points in the proposed zoning changes is in regards to steep slopes; the current TCD ordinance differentiates between natural and manmade slopes but makes no distinction from a regulatory standpoint – both have the same requirements. It is the suggestion of the applicant that if the slope is manmade because of a prior development (which is the case at the Chesterbrook Shopping Center), it should not need to be preserved – especially when considering that much of the development affected by this will be redevelopment. For those that don’t know, the backside of Chesterbrook Shopping Center (Wilson Farm Park side) is multi-story; the slope created as part of the original development plan when the center was constructed.

Ever since Genuardi’s closed 3-1/2 years ago, the center has continued its spiral downward. Unlike the retail stores that may close along Rt. 252 or Lancaster Avenue, the Chesterbrook Shopping Center is the core of Chesterbrook – it’s their town center. The redevelopment of the Chesterbrook Shopping Center is very overdue – this project is going to be a win-win for the neighboring residents, the corporate employees working in Chesterbrook and other township residents, who like I drive through the area regularly. I hope that the 500 Chesterbrook Boulevard, LP developer can successfully maneuverer any remaining obstacles regarding the text amendment zoning changes and this exciting project can move forward!

I wish I could say that I was as positive about the proposed Paoli redevelopment project as I am about the Chesterbrook Shopping Center. The owner of Station Square (a group of dated office buildings at the corner of East Central and N. Valley Road), the Palmer Group is proposing a 250-unit multifamily building with structured parking plan at this site adjacent to the Paoli Train Station. Having just praised the plans for the Chesterbrook Shopping Center, my objection to the Station Square project has nothing to do with not supporting redevelopment.

There are so many issues surrounding the proposed Station Square project, it’s hard to know where to start. First off, for anyone that travels on North Valley Road or Central Avenue during either morning or afternoon rush hours, you know how much traffic already exists in this area of the township. Certainly, the employees working in the existing Station Square office buildings contribute to the traffic although a certain number probably use the convenient adjacent public transportation. However, any additional traffic from the Station Square office workers is Monday-Friday, 9 – 5 type of traffic. However, the addition of a 250 unit multifamily building in this location and the traffic is compounded – and it’s 24/7 traffic.

The residents of Valley Hills already face major morning and afternoon traffic challenges maneuvering from their community onto E. Central and N. Valley roads – I cannot imagine how the local roads will handle the traffic created by an additional 250 families or the quality of life effect on the neighbors.

I am certain that an argument to support this proposed project is that it is part of of the Paoli Transit Center and Paoli redevelopment vision. However, I have problems with the density of the development and the additional traffic issues such a project will cause. One of the arguments regularly used by residents opposing the Wayne Glen development project is the potential additional students into the T/E School District. The targeted audience for the proposed Wayne Glen townhouses and carriage homes and the new Chesterbrook townhouses is the 55+ buyer but that has not kept that argument from being made. However, my guess is the planned 250-unit multifamily building in Paoli is going to appeal to families with children and will provide a lower cost way to enjoy the benefits of the T/E schools. As an aside, it is clear from attending school board meetings that many of our schools are currently operating at near capacity and this proposed Station Square multifamily building could have a dramatic effect on the school district enrollment.

According to the Planning Commission agenda, the developer will provide a sketch plan of the Station Square project. This is the first opportunity for residents to hear about the concept and see the plans – I look forward to hearing how the developer plans to resolve the additional traffic issues and density concerns.

Affordable Care Act discussion at TE Special Board Meeting — More questions than answers!

January 7, 2014

30 Comments

Last night’s special school board meeting included discussion of the Affordable Care Act and how the federal mandate would affect the District and its employees. The District’s ACA experts were Rhonda Grubbs, Wisler Pearlstine attorney (who works in the office of Ken Roos, school district solicitor) and Art McDonnell, business manager for the District.

Several aspects of the ACA presentation and discussion troubled me. Although the agenda stated that Grubbs would make the presentation, it appeared that McDonnell was in charge of the discussion and for the most part, served as respondent to Board and resident questions with Grubbs there as back up. McDonnell went through his prepared slides on the ACA, which included the various options available to the District. One slide, labeled ‘Health Benefits’ provided the cost of offering health care to all employees working 30 hr./wk. or 130 hr./month not already covered. According to this slide, the cost to provide benefits would be $881K for single employees and $2.2M for family coverage. However, there is no indication as to how ‘many’ employees this dollar amount references. Many of us in the audience were wondering where McDonnell got these dollar amounts from – what is the exact number of additional employees the District is required to cover under the ACA. Why weren’t the number of employees indicated on the slide? Pete Motel asked McDonnell that specific question – with a bit of hesitation, McDonnell responds that the number of additional full-time employees that the District needs to cover is 106.

It then becomes clear why the number of employees does not appear on McDonnell’s slide — because the next question is what happened to the jobs of the rest of the full-time employees. If you recall last spring, I think there were about 178 District aides, paras and substitute teachers that were not covered by District health benefits. We know that about 40% of the aides and paras did not return for the 2013/14 school year but it is unclear how those positions were filled. It is believed that many of these positions were outsourced but there has never been any public statement to that affect.

The next logical question to McDonnell came from Scott Dorsey – and that question was what happened to the rest of these jobs. Dorsey wanted to know many aides and para positions are currently outsourced in the District. McDonnell states that he does not know and asks Sue Tiede, the District’s personal director to answer Dorsey’s question. Tiede says that she doesn’t know the answer either. How is it possible that two of the highest paid administrators in the TE School District are unable to answer this simple question?

Subsequently and to their credit, both Pete Motel and Doug Carlson tried to achieve an answer to the outsourcing question. Again stonewalling by McDonnell and Tiede – claiming they do not know how many positions have been outsourced. With combined salaries of nearly $350K/yr, it is impossible to believe that neither McDonnell or Tiede know how many jobs are outsourced in the TE School District. McDonnell manages the check register for the District – he knows how much money is paid to Delta T and Quest. Tiede manages the District’s personnel – she knows who is hired and/or outsourced.

This is clearly not a case of McDonnell and Tiede ‘not knowing’ the answer to the outsourcing question but instead their choosing not to answer the direct question of school board members. According to Buraks, the ACA will next be discussed at the Finance Committee meeting on Monday, January 13. The question for Art McDonnell and Sue Tiede is how many District jobs are outsourced to Delta T and how many District jobs are outsourced to Crest.

Following the ACA presentation and Board member questions to McDonnell and Grubbs, there was an opportunity for the residents to offer their comments and/or questions as stated in the agenda. However, what the agenda did not say, was that residents were not allowed to ask their questions directly to the ACA presenters. All residents questions must be directed to the school board president who ‘interprets’ the resident’s question and then re-asks it to Ms. Grubb. But wait, it gets worse as one District resident, Joanne Sonn, discovered.

Sonn has done her homework on the Affordable Care Act, understands it better than most of us and previously offered her findings to the Board last year. She has spoken to expert ACA consultants and they agree, (with the information currently available) that the District can be in ACA compliance by offering a ‘skinny plan’ to the aides and paras. At last night’s meeting, some of the information provided in the presentation did not agree with Sonn’s interpretation of the Affordable Care Act so during the resident comment/question period she questioned McDonnell and asked for legal clarification from Grubbs. In the midst of her questions, the District solicitor Ken Roos rudely interrupted Sonn and told her that residents are not allowed to ask Grubbs questions!

Sonn was asking the Affordable Care Act ‘expert’ for legal clarification. She was then required to re-state her questions directly to Buraks. But rather than asking Grubbs to respond to Sonn’s ACA questions, Buraks says that all residents must ask their questions before any will be answered! To be clear, it doesn’t matter if there are three people or 10 people in line at the microphone – residents at school board meetings must ask all their questions before anyone can receive an answer. I guess this delay gives the Board president time to decide which questions will be answered. This policy makes no sense and is extremely unsatisfactory. At Board of Supervisors meetings, when a resident asks a question, they receive an answer immediately – why don’t the school board meetings operate the same way.

How were the residents to know that they are not permitted to ask questions of the person making the public presentation – there was no indication in the agenda nor direction from the school board. I found Ken Roos outburst to a resident unnecessary and disrespectful. There’s much talk about civility at these meetings; shouldn’t that civility policy extend to the District solicitor. Although it is understood that Ken Roos does not work for the residents, our taxpayer dollars pay his legal fees.

The special meeting to discuss the Affordable Care Act was eye opening, to say the least. It wasn’t so much what Rhonda Grubbs and Art McDonnell said — it was more what they didn’t say (or chose not to say). It was obvious that Grubbs and McDonnell are working together with a shared goal. And unless the Board and the community offers push-back, I think the endgame is to see how many reasons they can come up with not to offer insurance to the District’s aides, paras and substitute teachers. Grubbs herself volunteered that she and McDonnell would be working together on the ACA issue. So much for unbiased third-party input and since when did the District’s business manager become an expert on the Affordable Care Act? Again, I ask – why doesn’t the District bring in insurance consultants/experts from the outside?

A special thanks to school board members Pete Motel, Doug Carlson and Scott Dorsey – they were asking the questions that the public wanted answered.

Budget and Affordable Care Act on TE Special Meeting agenda tonight … Is this the precursor to outsourcing?

January 6, 2014

2 Comments

There is a special TE School Board meeting scheduled for tonight for 7 PM at Conestoga HS. The two items for priority discussion on the agenda are (1) The Board will consider options to close the projected budget imbalance of approximately $3.1 M for the 2014/15 school year and (2) Presentation of the impact of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on the School District. Unfortunately, this important special school board meeting conflicts with both the Tredyffrin and Easttown Board of Supervisors organizational and regular meetings, which includes the swearing in of newly elected officials, previously scheduled for tonight.

In the District’s draft budget (included in the agenda), the base model for the 2014/15 school year indicates a $3.1M budget deficit – this model assumes no tax increase from the Act 1 Index or referendum exception (PSERS, Special Ed). In the projection model that includes the Act 1 index (2.1% tax increase) the District’s budget deficit is reduced to $1.2M. A third project model shows the budget deficit reduced to $141K if the District takes the referendum exception (1.1% tax increase) and the Act 1 index (2.1%). The $141K deficit project model would still requires the District to find other cost savings in addition to the 3.2% tax increase to the residents.

If the District imposes the 3.2% tax increase for 2014/15 school year, I think that would make the third year in a row they have imposed the maximum tax increase allowed by state law without a voter referendum. But here’s the disconnect for me – on one hand, the Board has voted to take the maximum tax increase but … for the last several years, the District has come up with multi-million dollar budget surpluses. As examples, the 2011/12 year saw the District in a surplus position of $3.9M and for the 2012/13 year, the surplus was nearly $5M. The budget surplus is not reflected in the District’s draft budget nor indicated in the next year’s budget. The multi-million budget surplus is added to the District’s fund balance and the taxes continue to rise.

Since the multi-million dollar budget surplus is taxpayer dollars, wouldn’t it be great if the taxpayers had a say regarding the surplus? Here’s an idea — Rather than adding additional millions of taxpayer dollars to the fund balance, what about using some of the budget surplus dollars for health insurance benefits to that all TESD employees as covered as required by the Affordable Care Act. Afterall, the District lists ACA and the TEEA teacher contract as the two items to impact the 2014/15 budget.

Following the District’s 2014/15 budget discussion tonight, is an ACA overview by attorney Rhonda Grubbs. Her presentation will discuss how the federal law will affect TESD and its employees. Grubbs is an associate at Wisler Pearlstine, the law firm of Ken Roos, the District’s solicitor. You may recall that Grubbs offered her legal opinion on the ACA at a TE school board meeting last spring in response to the District’s aide, para and substitute teacher outsourcing debate. Don’t get me wrong; I think a legal presentation on the ACA and how it will affect the District and its employees is important. However, in my opinion, residents and employees would have been better served by a third-party legal expert versus a representative from the District’s contracted law firm. And what about an insurance expert – I’m certain that there is any number of local insurance consultants/experts who would make a presentation to the District (and I’m guessing would do so, free of charge).

Under the ACA, employers will be required to provide employees who work more than 30 hours per week with health care benefits. The federal mandate will go into effect for school districts in the 2014/15 school year. Currently T/E aides, paras and substitute teachers do not receive health coverage. For the record, T/E is the only school district in the area that does not provide health insurance for their employees – Great Valley, Radnor and Lower Merion school districts all offer healthcare coverage to all their employees.

The District lists the following ACA compliance options:

1. Health Benefits:

Provide health coverage for employees working 30 hours/week or 130 hours/month

2. Contracted Services:

Outsource the jobs of aides, paras and substitute teachers

3. Reduce Hours:

Reduce hours of aides/paras to 27.5 hours/week and hire additional aides/paras to cover the reduced hours
Limit substitute teachers to 3.5 days/week
Reduce hours of aides/paras to 27.5 hours/week while increasing the hourly rate to make the reduction in hours neutral to the employee income
Reduce hours of aides/paras to 27.5 hours/week while increasing the hourly rate to all aides/paras

4. Incur IRS Penalty

After much debate, the Board decided not to outsource the aides, paras and substitute teachers for the 2013/14 school year. It is my understanding that 40% of the District’s aides/paras did not return for the current school year. Although neither the school board nor the administration has confirmed it – I was told that the positions of non-returning aides/paras who worked 30 hours or more were outsourced. If this is true, than the number of District employees that need to be covered by the ACA has dropped since this issue was debated last year.

As follow-up, how has the outsourcing of the aides/paras worked out for the District? For the record, several parents, aides and paras have told me that the result has been less than satisfactory — it would be interesting to know if the administration and Board are pleased with the job performance of these contracted employees.

I cannot help but think that the administration and the school board may have already made up their minds about the ACA situation. Were it not for the pushback they received last year, I believe that the administration would have already outsourced the jobs of aides, paras and substitute teachers working 30 or more hours per week. Clearly, the handwriting was on the wall in 2013 for the District’s aides, paras and substitute teachers and the 2013/14 school year may prove to be only a one-year reprieve for these employees.

Some have described tonight’s planned Affordable Care Act presentation by the District’s law firm representative as nothing more than a PR move but … I remain hopeful that some of our school board members will show their support of the District’s aides, paras and substitute teachers and fight for them to keep their jobs (and their hours).

A New Year … Take time to look at the stars!

January 1, 2014

Comments

“Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn’t do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover. ” ~ Mark Twain

Armed with hope, we tackle a new year . . .

Oscar Wilde, the great 19th century literary figure, wrote, “We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.” And so, just as we began 2013, so we begin 2014 – with a long list of hopes and dreams for the New Year. Yes, that time of the year is upon us again.

‘Tis the season to reflect on the year gone by and make resolutions and wishes for a better 2014. We resolve to be especially good to ourselves. We’ll eat healthier, we’ll make our lifestyles more sustainable, we’ll turn over that proverbial new leaf that pops up every year around this time . . .

We will wish good thoughts for the New Year. We will hope that our elected officials in Washington, Harrisburg and yes, in Tredyffrin Township always put the people’s best interests ahead of their own.

The year 2014 certainly won’t be a carefree one, but there’s no reason it can’t be a happy one. Happy new years don’t happen automatically. They require a lot of work, a lot of planning, and more than a little bit of luck. There’s not much anyone can do about number three, but those first two factors are something members of this community understand and are good at.

Happy new years are never guaranteed. But as they arrive, they offer the chance for all of us to find our footing and focus and resolve — an opportunity to learn from past mistakes and move forward.

Here’s to a happy 2014 and remembering to take time for “looking at the stars”.

← Older Posts

Newer Posts →

Pattye Benson

Community Matters