Pattye Benson

Community Matters

Pattye Benson

Tredyffrin Resident Christine Johnson Says NO to SB 1 . . . Making your Voice Count!

April 5, 2011
2 Comments

There has been much discussed about the proposed school voucher bill, SB 1. But Tredyffrin resident Christine Johnson is doing more than just talking . . . she’s taking her voice and saying NO to SB 1. Christine adopted her ‘Resolution Opposing Senate Bill 1’ (below) and sent it to Senator Andy Dinniman and State Rep Warren Kampf. According to Christine, ” . . . they need our support in order to say ‘NO’ . . . “

Creating change starts with one person –I am proud of Christine and applaud her effort to show all that your voice can count! If you are interested in following Christine’s example, here are email addresses:

State Rep Warren Kampf: wkampf@pahousegop.com
State Sen Andy Dinniman: andy@pasenate.com

RESOLUTION OPPOSING SENATE BILL 1

By Christine E. Johnson
986 Mt. Pleasant Avenue
Wayne, PA 19087

WHEREAS, school districts in the Commonwealth have continued to make steady gains in academic achievement and create innovative and effective
programs and curricula for all public school students and Pennsylvania is the only state in the nation to have increased academic achievement in every subject, at all tested grade levels and for all ethnic, racial and
economic subgroups of students from 2002 through 2008; and

WHEREAS, the implementation of a tuition voucher program, over-expansion of any existing tax credit program or incentivizing a student’s transfer out of the public education system in any way takes financial resources away from traditional public schools and diminishes the great strides that have been made in those schools and increases the burden on property taxpayers and their resident school districts working toward greater academic successes; and

WHEREAS, unlike nonpublic and private schools, public school districts in the Commonwealth accept and educate children regardless of race,
ethnicity, gender, religion or academic talents, as opposed to those institutions that are able to reject applicants based on low academic performance, discipline issues or any number of other factors; and

WHEREAS, unlike nonpublic and private schools, public schools in the Commonwealth are held to strict accountability standards in an effort to
measure student achievement and academic progress, unlike private and parochial schools which are not required to give state assessments or
publish student achievement data; and

WHEREAS, there is no consistent evidence to demonstrate that students who utilize vouchers make any better academic progress in nonpublic or private schools than they did prior to transferring; and

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Christine E. Johnson opposes Senate Bill 1 and any other legislation or any effort by the General Assembly to implement a tuition voucher program in the Commonwealth or any other program that would have an effect similar to that of a tuition voucher program, and encourages its elected officials to oppose the same.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Christine E. Johnson directs her legislators to take immediate action about the need to oppose Senate Bill 1 and the negative consequences on the school district and the public education system at large and to provide a copy of this resolution to them.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Christine E. Johnson will encourage others, including parents, students and district taxpayers, to contact the
Pennsylvania General Assembly to convey the importance of supporting public education in the Commonwealth.

Adopted this 31st day of March 2011.

Signed,

Christine E. Johnson

PA State Senatorial Candidate Tom Houghton has Questions for Pileggi and Corbett . . . Tredyffrin Needs to Ask the Same Questions of Kampf and Dinniman

April 4, 2011
4 Comments

Tom Houghton, former State Representative for Chester County’s 13th House District and a recently declared Democratic Pennsylvania State Senate candidate, released the following editorial, ‘Right to Know’ Stance on Budget’. In the 2012 senatorial race, Houghton will be opposing Senate majority leader, Senator Dominic Pileggi (R), who represents the 9th Senatorial District in Chester and Delaware counties.

Although Tredyffrin Township is not included in the 9th Senatorial District, Houghton’s remarks on issues are equally apropos for our community. As a resident from southern Chester County, Houghton is calling on his elected officials to answer questions regarding school budget deficits, Marcellus shale natural gas severance tax and Gov. Corbett’s proposed budget cuts to public education funding. I support Houghton’s ‘Right to Know’ request for those that serve his community.

Taxpayer accountability from all elected officials is a right that we should all expect, and that includes State Rep Warren Kampf and State Sen Andy Dinniman. Houghton’s concerns and questions to leadership, echo those that we need to ask here in Tredyffrin Township. I urge Kamp and Dinniman to provide answers to us, the taxpayers. In Houghton’s words, “. . . Constituents deserve nothing less. We deserve the ‘Right to Know’.”

‘Right To Know’ Stance on Budget

For a legislator who passed the ‘Right to Know’ law, Senator Pileggi certainly always seems to keep his constituents in the dark.

Last week I attended an Avon Grove School Board meeting along with a few hundred anxious parents. The school board was courageous in calling the meeting to break the news to the community that they not only were considering raising property taxes by 5.9 percent but were seriously weighing cutting the middle school athletics program, mostly due to the brutal state education funding cuts being proposed by Governor Tom Corbett. They even reached out to the newspapers in the area to inform the community of their budget situation.

The Board has already cut millions of dollars from their budget and are essentially informing the community that it would be nearly impossible to solely cut their way out of this shortfall in state funding.

Gov. Corbett announced a 200 million dollar corporate tax giveaway just days before proposing these draconian education cuts to K-12, state and state-related universities.

As a community, all of us deserve an explanation from our elected state officials as to their position on the proposed state budget.

Senator Dominic Pileggi should hold forums around his district to explain the budget process and where he stands on the proposed cuts. Reaching out to his constituents through the area newspapers would also be helpful.

He needs to answer questions like:

– Does he support the 200 million dollar corporate tax break, especially when college students and every resident paying property taxes is being asked to sacrifice?

– Will he fight for a Marcellus shale natural gas severance tax to gain revenue to help avoid or greatly reduce these education cuts?

– Why are we the only state in the nation that does not levy this severance tax (even Texas and West VA has a severance tax)?

– Why did the Senate, under his leadership, break the deal with us House Democrats, to pass a severance tax by October of 2010?

– Why does he not support finding alternative means of funding our schools other than property taxes, especially now when cutting state education funding only forces school boards to raise property taxes?

– Why does he not support legislation I introduced last term that calls for our casinos to surrender $250 million dollars they use for promotional giveaways – to the property tax relief fund?

These are just some of the questions that need to be answered. Why is Senator Pileggi refusing to face his constituents or inform us of what’s going on with the proposed state budget?

As your state senator, as I did as a state representative, I will be in constant communication with residents through the press and will hold forums to explain what is going on in Harrisburg and where I stand on important issues. Constituents deserve nothing less. We deserve the ‘Right to Know’.

Tom Houghton,
Former State Rep. and candidate for State Senate – 2012 Election
London Grove Township

Sidewalks on Tredyffrin’s Supervisors Meeting Agenda: Translation . . . Does St. Davids Golf Club Build its Sidewalks?

April 4, 2011
Comments

The agenda for tonight’s supervisors meeting in Tredyffrin will include a presentation by PennDOT and the PA Turnpike regarding the start of 202 construction and the Rt. 29 slip ramp construction. The slip ramp construction got underway last week so I look forward to a review of the time for that project and for 202.

The agenda lists the scheduling of two public hearings, (1) an ordinance to create new regulations for historic preservation and (2) to consider amendments to sidewalk requirements in subdivision and land development plans.

Members of the township HARB and Planning Commission have worked on creating an ordinance to protect historic properties in the township for two years. In reviewing my HARB minutes, there was discussion as early as March 2009 recognizing the need. Much discussion and many joint meetings has taken place between HARB, Planning Commission and township staff. I am thrilled to see the work of many community volunteers now move forward.

Scheduling of the other public hearing – amendments to sidewalk ordinance. It’s fascinating that 16 months post-BAWG report and St. Davids Golf Club, the mention of sidewalks in Tredyffrin reminds us of the open St. Davids sidewalk issue. Recalling the history, the land development agreement between St. Davids Golf Club and the township requires the building of sidewalks. Rather than enforce the land development requirement, the supervisors decided last year to create a sidewalk subcommittee to examine the needs and interest in sidewalks in Tredyffrin.

Fast forward to April 2011 and where does the township stand on sidewalks and the open issues surrounding the land development agreement with St. Davids Golf Club to build sidewalks? Last month, the sidewalk subcommittee presented their results, which included an overwhelming resident interest in sidewalks, trails and bike paths in the township. The sidewalks subcommittee confirmed the Green Routes Network plan included sidewalks at St. Davids Golf Club. The results of last month’s public hearing to consider changing final land development authority from the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors included a supervisors vote for the Planning Commission to retain this authority. So where does the township stand on St. Davids Golf Club sidewalk requirement? What really has changed in the last 16 months?

This morning, I was copied on a public email from John Petersen to township solicitor Tom Hogan (which also copied the Board of Supervisors and Mimi Gleason) inquiring on the “status of St. Davids”. Petersen’s email included the following:

“ . . . St. David’s has always had the obligation to build the sidewalks. At best, over the past year, there has been a forbearance on that obligation. It would appear that the status quo is firmly in place. By that, I mean that the sidewalk plan as promulgated in the master plan is still in effect. Second, the PC [Planning Commission] has retained full land development authority. That said, the St. David’s obligation was always in place. i.e., it was pre-existing contract. Therefore, no matter what was done on a prospective basis, it would have no effect on the St. David’s obligation. The same conclusion would have applied a year ago. . . St. David’s has two choices. 1 – build the sidewalks per their land development obligation. 2 – pay the township the full cost to build the sidewalks as per the land development obligation . . . So again I ask, what is the BOS going to do?”

I am curious to see if the elephant in the room (St. Davids land development agreement) is discussed at the supervisors meeting tonight. As much as some people would like the sidewalk issue at St. Davids Golf to just ‘go away’, unless there is a decision, the issue remains open. Will our elected officials enforce the land development agreement with St. Davids and require the sidewalks to be built . . . ? As Petersen says, “. . . What is the BOS going to do?”

The community needs closure on the St. Davids sidewalk issue; will that happen at tonight’s supervisors meeting? Stay tuned.

Berwyn Banter . . . Ray Hoffman’s Remarks on Homosexuality Evoke Strong Response from Local Residents

April 2, 2011
20 Comments

In reading the Letters to the Editor in the Main Line Media News, there were several references to Ray Hoffman’s Berwyn Banter column from March 24, 2011, which before writing this post, I had not read.

In the past, Hoffman’s columns have generally focused on local community events such as restaurant opening and closings, funerals, sports and school events, the Fire Company, etc. His remarks can be informational and are often times laced with his opinion on local politics and people. Occasionally, Berwyn Banter has provided personal opinions on other topics, including an obvious disdain for online news sources, including blogs. Unfortunately, on several instances, Hoffman has referenced both me as a political candidate and Community Matters in a very negative, disrespectful manner.

Unlike the dialogue that Community Matters topics often evoke, Hoffman’s Berwyn Banter columns rarely produce any comments. I choose rather than responding directly to his criticisms, to simply ignore his rancor, preferring to believe in the mantra ‘what goes around comes around’. Apparently, for Mr. Hoffman, that concept may have hit home for him; his last Berwyn Banter column which referenced his moral outrage over the Catholic Church priests has received negative response from local residents.

To be clear, I too am outraged over any child who has suffered abuse at the hands of Catholic priests (or any adult). However, for Hoffman to suggest in his column that pedophilia and homosexuality are synonymous; and “the work of evil incarnate and therefore unforgivable”, has taken his opinion, to a very difficult and hard to understand place. One can describe pedophiles who prey on innocent children as evil and their behavior unforgivable but it saddens me greatly to read that Hoffman imposes the same standard in his description of homosexuals. Growing up gay in America and facing religious intolerance and persecution can prove a challenge for many of today’s youth as they struggle to fit in and to ‘belong’. Hoffman’s words are painful to read.

My concern for Hoffman’s apparent intolerance of homosexuality is echoed in one of this week’s letters to the editor from Liz Young of Wayne. She writes . . .

“ . . . The biggest misunderstanding many people have is that pedophilia and homosexuality are one and the same. But to say that all homosexuals are pedophiles, or that all pedophiles are homosexual, is like comparing apples to rat poison. . .

Statements like those of Mr. Hoffman inspire hate crimes. In many parts of the world, including our own country, we have made strides in tolerance and acceptance. Do we really want to go backward to a world where members of disliked minority groups were stereotyped as representing a danger to the majority’s most vulnerable members? For example, Jews in the Middle Ages were accused of murdering Christian babies in ritual sacrifices. Black men in the United States were often lynched after being falsely accused of raping white women. . . “

I note that there is not a Berwyn Banter column in this week’s edition of the newspaper. I emailed Ray Hoffman but have not received a response, perhaps he is on vacation. [update: Ray Hoffman responded to my email, confirming that will he continue to write his column for the paper. He also corrected me that the column changed from ‘Berwyn Banter’ to Main Line Banter’ two years. ] The following is an excerpt from Ray Hoffman’s Berwyn Banter column of March 24, 2011. To read the entire column, click here.

Moral Outrage over Catholic Scandal . . .

Nobody asked me but I think that there needs to be another level of defined sin in the Roman Catholic Church. Mortal and venial sin each has a long litany of offenses identified over the centuries, and one might think that this multitude of imperfections and separation from God covered it all. Not so fast, my friends. A few short years ago, the white-hot spotlight of front-page press illuminated pedophilia among priests throughout the United States. Child abuse by priests was amok, even affecting legions of faithful families along the Main Line. As if this evil plague of child abuse were not enough in itself, the heinous cover-up by the church hierarchy of priests abusing innocent and trusting children was equally disgraceful. The world continues today to be further appalled by and mourns this unthinkable parasitical pestilence on a daily basis. As the incidences of child abuse grow in number and location, the question could well be asked: where and when does this stop?

Last week fellow columnist Henry Briggs joined a clamoring contingent of lamenting and lambasting journalists in the cry: “Enough!” Which brings me to my suggestion that there should be another level of defined sin within the Catholic Church: unforgivable sin. No ifs, ands and buts! Just unforgivable! I know that the basis of many organized religions is that God is a forgiving Creator and Father. But it is difficult for me to believe that my God would not have a hard time forgiving men who have prostrated themselves before him, vowing that they would do his will, and to have those men shatter the sanctity of young and innocent children who have been entrusted to their care and spiritual upbringing. What is even viler is that many of these offending pedophiles are also homosexuals. Pedophilia and homosexual behavior is more than mortal (deadly) sin. It is the work of evil incarnate and therefore unforgivable. . .

Dry Weather Forecast for Open Land Conservancy’s Vine Day Tomorrow, Saturday 2 . . . Last Vine Day of the Season, Can you Spare a Couple of Hours?

April 1, 2011
Comments

Has this winter left you suffering from cabin fever and a need to get outside for some fresh air? There’s a perfect opportunity tomorrow, Saturday, April 2 to help the community and celebrate the end of winter!

The Open Land Conservancy of Chester County will be holding its last Vine Day of the season on Saturday at George Lorimer Preserve, 9 AM – 12 Noon. Vines will be cut back so you will need to wear appropriate gloves and protective clothing. Volunteers are asked to bring tools if they have them — prunners, saws, clippers. But not to worry, the volunteers from Open Land Conservancy will have extra tools.

Lorimer Preserve is 88 acres of meadows, woods, ponds, stream, and extensive trail system are managed to provide a variety of habitats for wildlife in a beautiful rural setting.

Directions: head north on North Valley Road across Valley Creek, to entrance and parking lot on right. For further information on Vine Day and Open Land Conservancy, click here. Any questions, contact Ray Clarke at 610-578-0358.

Looking at this photo from the last Vine Day of Harold Sheinbach and Mac Wilson, it is obvious that these vines could use some attention! You can make a difference with a couple of hours of your time tomorrow. . . it’s the last Vine Day of the season.

Looks like Harrisburg Wants Local School Districts to solve their Own Budget Problems

March 30, 2011
33 Comments

Following-up on my post from yesterday concerning T/E School District’s financial outlook and the ongoing debate on how to close the $3.5 million+ budget gap, I don’t know how much help we can expect from Harrisburg.

Yesterday, at a Senate Appropriations Committee meeting, the Acting Education Secretary, Ronald Tomalis took a hard-line when it came to school district budgets, suggesting among other things, that they should have planned better with the federal stimulus money. He stood firm in his defense of Corbett’s proposed $1.2 billion buts to public and higher education.

Tomalis attitude towards successful public school education mirrored some of those that have commented on Community Matters. He suggests that success is not measured by how much school districts spend but rather there are other significant factors . . . quality of teachers, class size, etc. that make a difference. More money spent does not necessarily correlate to better education.

In reviewing the state’s public education funding in prior years, Tomalis noted that the budget has more than doubled over the last 10 years but that enrollment has dropped by 50,000 students, which translates to a higher per student cost. Interestingly, he suggests that the improvement in academic achievement has not increased as more money has been spent. Rather than looking at the money spent per child to educate as a tool to measure success, Tomalis’ theory is that graduation rates and test scores present a more accurate picture of individual school district success.

In looking at what has driven the upward spiral of spending in public education, Tomalis directed criticism at school district spending habits in recent years. He noted that $1.1 billion has gone toward teacher and administration raises rather than educational programming since the recession began in 2008, citing labor costs are determined at the local level. According to Tomalis, Corbett’s suggestion of a one-year salary freeze for public education employees was an attempt to help the school districts with their budget problems. In addition to saving school districts an estimated $400 million with this one-year freeze, Tomalis believes that as many as 4,000 public school jobs could be saved as a result of the salary freeze.

Many have commented on Community Matters that the fate of our local school district budget deficit needs to be addressed in Harrisburg but there seems an attitude from Tomalis that the problem rests squarely on the shoulders of local elected school board members. “We hire these leaders at the local levels to make the tough decisions,” Tomalis said. “And we don’t just hire them to lead in good budget times, but we hire them to lead in tough times, too”. Strong words from Harrisburg that sound a bit like a ‘you deal with it’ attitude towards the school boards. Interesting. I am hopeful that Tomalis’ remarks also include an expectation that local state representatives are to help their respective school districts manage their budget problems.

In discussing how school districts could find savings, Tomalis suggested that districts could share superintendents or share contracts for business operations. Another cost-saving suggestion was merging of school districts. There are currently 500 school districts in the state, and it is believed that state funding could be improved with fewer districts.

Much of the discussion at the committee meeting centered on what the state budget cuts will mean to the local school districts. How are the districts going to meet the demands of their budget? For many districts, the state funding cuts are going to force local property taxes to skyrocket. When questioned about the dramatic property tax increases for some residents violates Corbett’s pledge ‘not’ to raise taxes, Tomalis vehemently disagreed. I disagree with Tomalis disagreeing . . . if Pennsylvanians end up with a higher property tax bill because of state cuts in public education spending, that is a tax increase. I do not believe by pushing the increase down to the local level, removes the responsibility of the tax increase from our elected officials shoulders in Harrisburg. Is it fair for the governor’s budget to force school districts to raise property taxes?

Sen. Andy Dinniman questioned that some groups are saying there is potential that the budget cuts could destroy public education. Tomalis denied that there would be an impact to the quality of education with the budget cuts; suggesting that the federal stimulus money was the cause for the cuts. The stimulus money was an intended one-time use and now with that money gone, the state is left with a budget hole to fill. Accordingly, Tomalis blamed the school districts for not better planning for the end of stimulus money. “If you were told again and again that this is a funding cliff that is coming in two years, and you were advised not to make an expenditure that is going to lock in for five or 10 years down the road, it does matter,” said Tomalis.

In reading the transcript from the meeting, other education topics were discussed, including voucher program (Tomalis is a supporter), teacher furloughing, charter schools, etc. In addition there was discussion at the Senate Appropriations Committee meeting centered on higher education and the severe funding cuts to state universities and colleges. For the purposes of this post, I decided to focus my comments on the local school district funding issue.

Tomalis takes his education platform to the House Appropriations committee today.

T/E School District Budget Options . . . Pay Waiver, Demotion & Furlough Discussion

March 29, 2011
6 Comments

I attended the T/E marathon ‘Budget Workshop’ last night. For nearly 3 hours, the school board members and district administration waded through 30+ slides which contained so many charts and graphs, it was hard to take it all in. The slides and their detailed explanation took up the vast majority of the evening with probably the last 30 min. devoted to audience questions. The workshop included three new cost-saving ideas that were ‘new’ to me – a ‘pay waiver’, demotion and furlough.

There was a pivotal slide labeled ‘Options to Close Remaining Shortfall’ that grabbed my attention. Slide #26 indicates the remaining budget shortfall (after taking budget strategies) at $3,570,509. Two options listed to close the shortfall – (1) Outsourcing of custodial services $950K and (2) ‘Pay Waiver for remaining staff (TEEA and TENIG) $3,000,000. We understand the outsourcing option; an RFP has gone out with a return date of early April. An announcement detailing the results of the RFP should be available early May.

What is a ‘pay waiver’? If I understood it correctly, the school district would ask the teachers union not to take their contract guaranteed pay increase for 2011-12. This would be a one-time pay waiver (a give-back of sorts). Unlike a salary freeze that could be retroactive (as in the 6-month salary freeze in Radnor’s recent contract) or a salary freeze the first year but larger increases in the second year of a contract, a pay waiver would not be made up in a future contract. There was no indication that TEEA has been approached with this proposal. Although several school board members praised the teachers, they also suggested the reality and the severity of the economic times, call for a ‘shared sacrifice’ by the taxpayers, teachers, etc. This is a bold proposal and it will be interesting to see if there is any comment or discussion from TEEA.

The other ‘get my attention’ moment of the evening was Dr. Waters suggesting that the district would explore ‘demotion’ and ‘furlough’ as possible ways to close the shortfall. He cited PA School Code 1151 in regards to demotion. I did a bit of research and determined that Section 1151 of the School Code provides for the demotion of professional employees. While this section does not make mention of demotions for economic reasons, case law has established that school districts are permitted to demote professional employees for economic reasons, so long as such demotions are not arbitrary and capricious under the law. Expanding the provisions of Section 1124 would similarly allow school districts to furlough employees for economic reasons.

What would this mean for the school district budget? Far less staff would be affected and programming would be maintained. It appears that by law, the school district superintendent would be empowered to review the entire school system as a whole to identify where reduction in staff could occur. Very interesting news. I sensed a real determination from Dr. Waters that he was doing everything in his power to help with this budget deficit. Although he certainly did not say that he would evoke demotion or furlough measures, there will be further discussion on the subject.

Although there was much other discussion in regards to cost-cutting measures, these particular suggestions were ‘new’ to me and caught my attention. I left the meeting last night with a real sense of the seriousness of the financial situation and of the battle to close the $3.5 million remaining shortfall.

I would strongly suggest that State Rep Warren Kampf and Sen Andy Dinniman need to play a role in our local school district issues – I’d like to see a public forum with their attendance. I believe that I recently read that Kampf attended a Phoenixville School Board meeting (or one of their subcommittee meetings?). If Kampf or one of his staff workers is reading Community Matters, I am making a public appeal that he attend a T/E School Board meeting. . . . aside from serving as our State Representative, Kampf lives in the T/E school district and I would like to see him personally involved in our school district’s budget issues.

Ray Clarke also attended the budget workshop and provided his editorial comments.. It is interesting to have both perspectives of the evening and I thank Ray for his notes below:

Tonight’s TESD “Budget Workshop” did not really live up to its title, but was nevertheless an informative, if a little selective, exposition of the underlying forces driving the district’s finances – and driving them to steep deficits.

  • The real estate-based gravy train has run off the rails – the tax base is declining and there’s no sign of recovery in transfer taxes
  • The state is exacerbating the problem – reduction in the social security reimbursement, flat special education funding despite increasing enrollment, and a tax increase formula that will limit property tax increases to around ~1% for at least the next couple of years. There’s even talk of eliminating “Exceptions” and reducing the PSERS match – but that last would just be insane.
  • As it is, PSERS will be the biggest expense increase – up $1 million each year for the next two years, $1.5 for each of the two years after that and $3.5 million in 2015/16
  • The district has reduced staff by 60 in the last two years, but the vagaries of grade and school specific demographics will require a staff increase next year despite likely flat enrollment.
  • New news: there are tools within the PA School Code that would allow for selective staff “demotions” to meet budget deficit situations. This may be a way to implement previously attrition-dependent changes such as the teaching period changes at the high school.
  • With all known realistic strategies and a 3.77% property tax increase including the now-approved exceptions, the 2011/12 deficit would still be $3.6 million
  • Other ideas continue to be studied: $400,000 of reasonably tangible and realistic notions, and maybe an equal amount of less tangible but possibly realistic ones. A few multi-million dollar ideas with profound impact on the culture and educational quality are further on the list, but seem likely only in extremis.
  • Which brings us to the big issues, laid out individually by the administration: outsource custodial services and obtain a “pay waiver” from both the TEEA and TENIG. There was no indication that the Board has received any proposal from the unions, much less one that would forgo (“until better times”) $3 million of pay increases. However, there was considerable emphasis on the need for shared sacrifice, and it is starkly apparent how such a move could bring the deficit somewhat back into range. There was no commentary from the TEEA – unlike from the TENIG representatives, who, as at previous meetings, appealed to emotion rather than the pocket book. As that process evolves, it would be great if TENIG could quantify the cost savings they claim they could bring to the district.

Bottom line: my view is that the district continues to make the best of the hand it has (including of course, the cards picked up from generous previous contracts and other decisions). The key question: what will the unions do to show that they can remain relevant, and be part of the solution, not part of the problem?

And even if the deficit can be reined back some, PSERS remains the issue.

There was an interesting chart that documented the Employer Contribution Rate from 1988 to now. The rate started out at 19%, declined for 13 or 14 years to 1% (thanks to a booming stock market), at which point the benefit multiplier was increased to 2.5, COLA rules changed and bubbles burst, whereupon the ECR started up again, to next year’s 8.65% and then 33.37% by 2015/16 and for the next decade, even after last year’s Harrisburg “fix”. Employee contributions have been consistently 7.5%.

So, how to fix this (and the related SERS for state employees)? Any solution will likely have to be approved by taxpayers. If the problem is dumped in the local lap, the increases are fundamentally unaffordable without a referendum: be it for, say, 10% property tax increases or an equivalent EIT. Even if Harrisburg rose to the occasion, that might also involve a courageous appeal to voters: for a change in the Constitution (“Any unilateral substantial change in public employee pension benefits that constitutes a “net detriment” to the employees is a constitutionally impermissable impairment of the employment contract”), or for issuing a Pension Bond to deal with the unfunded liability.

Now there’s something to write to Dinniman and Kampf about!

In a Show of Union Solidarity – Pennsylvania Teachers Unions Joining Forces with AFL-CIO

March 28, 2011
1 Comment

We have watched the Governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker and his battles with state employees over legislation to take away collective bargaining rights. Walker’s actions hit a cord across the country; public employees are drawing the battleground in Ohio, Florida, from coast to coast. Now we see it in Pennsylvania.

The proposed $1 billion budget cut to public education by Gov. Tom Corbett has driven three teachers unions in the Lehigh Valley area to organize. Because of school district budget deficits and state funding cuts, hundreds of teacher jobs are on the chopping block in the Lehigh Valley . . . the teacher unions are fighting back. In a show of solidarity, 3,500 teachers in the Allentown, Bethlehem Area and Easton Area school districts have voted to unite with union members from the Lehigh Valley Labor Council and Pennsylvania AFL-CIO. The teachers are joining forces with their brothers and sisters in the manufacturing, building and service unions to fight Harrisburg. The AFL-CIO membership in Pennsylvania has 900,000 union workers. Together, the unions believe they need to take a stand for the working middle class family in Pennsylvania.

With organized labor getting behind the teachers, one could guess that means additional financial support to help fight Harrisburg. Union members believing that Corbett’s budget is an attempt to balance the budgets on the backs of the working class, these 1.1 million voices are saying ‘no’ to the Governor and his proposed budget cuts for public education.

Exactly what these ‘voices’ have in mind for Harrisburg is yet to be seen. And I wonder if the TESD teachers will decide on a similar path to the Lehigh Valley teachers as the school board works to balance the district budget and as the calendar moves closer to contract negotiations.

Property Values are Falling & Real Estate Taxes are Soaring Across the US . . . What’s the answer?

March 26, 2011
57 Comments

Here’s an interesting read in Bloomberg Business Week – thanks to a reader for supplying the link.

The article, “Property Taxes Reach the Breaking Point . . . Local governments are raising property taxes to plug budget gaps as home values fall – and voters are getting sick of it” discusses rising property taxes and decreasing real estate values throughout the country. According to the article, because about one in four of residents mortgages are ‘under water’ across the country, many local governments and school districts are forced into increasing property taxes to meet budget deficits. However, the problem as we are acutely aware is that much of the country’s home values have fallen dramatically.

Historically, local governments have depended on property taxes as a stable revenue source. Nationally, approximately 50% of property tax revenue goes to fund school districts. How does a school district provide adequate school funding without raising property taxes beyond the scope of an individual’s ability to pay? The article looked at specific states and their property taxes – and how local governments are balancing the needs of school budgets (and deficits) with the increase in property taxes issues.

In 2010, New Jersey residents received the distinction of paying the highest average property tax in the US – an average of $7.576 (an increase of 78.7% since 1999!). Surveying all 3,100 counties in the US, residents in Hunterdon County, New Jersey paid the highest median real estate taxes per year — $8,216. As a direct result of increasing property taxes, in 2010, New Jersey capped the property tax increase by local governments at 2 percent.

Can you guess which county in Pennsylvania has the highest median real taxes paid by its residents . . . Chester County! Below is the real estate property tax information provided from Business Week for Pennsylvania:

  • Most property tax paid in Pennsylvania: Chester County
  • Median Property Taxes Paid on Homes: $4,011
  • Median Home Value: $328,900
  • Taxes as Percent of Income: 4.12%

The property tax problem is interrelated with the local school districts and includes an inequity and inadequacy inherent in real estate property taxing; and therefore filters into the problems funding public education. And today funding public education is the central problem. For years, property tax has provided the major funding source for public education but is that the solution for the 21st century?

Is a property tax capable of adequately or fairly funding the school districts, especially given the current declining real estate values? To offset Corbett’s proposed budget, which includes major funding to public education, what is going to be the answer? The bottom lines for budget deficits require school districts to either lower expenses (or rely on fund balance) or continue to raise property taxes. And as we read in the BusinessWeek article, Chester County currently has the distinction of the highest property taxes of all counties in Pennsylvania.

Discussions on the T/E School District budget will continue on Monday, March 28, 7:30 PM at Conestoga HS. The Budget Workshop will update on the current status of the 2011-12 school district budget. The meeting will focus on the budget process and discuss remaining potential budget strategies to close the budget deficit. Click here for the agenda.

Former Employee Files $2.1 Million Civil Lawsuit against Tredyffrin Township Board of Supervisors, claiming Defamation of Character & Gross Negligence . . . has the statute of limitations run out?

March 25, 2011
7 Comments

This week former Assistant Finance Director for Tredyffrin Township (2000-03) John Yeager filed a $2.1 million civil lawsuit against the Board of Supervisors of Tredyffrin Township. The lawsuit was filed on Monday, March 21, 2011 at the Chester County Court of Pleas. To read the 5-page legal document, click here – provides for an interesting walk down memory lane. (If you click on the link to the lawsuit, when the box opens up, click on the link in the top of the box and the document will open).

In his lawsuit, John Yeager is claiming defamation of character and gross negligence charges against Tredyffrin Township Board of Supervisors in regards to his hiring (and ultimate firing) by Harry Marrone, the municipality’s former Finance Director.

Talk about a name from the past – Harry Marrone! Anyone remember Tredyffrin’s Finance Director pre-Dave Brill . . . Harry Marrone.

Here is a brief history lesson on Harry Marrone. Harry Marrone was the township’s Finance Director, serving from 1992 – 2005. In February 2005, Marrone was arrested, charged and convicted of diverting $75K of township money to his personal bank account. (I believe that Marrone subsequently made full restitution to the township). Unbeknown to the township at the time of Marrone’s hiring in 1992, he was a convicted felon. It turns out that in 1996, while on a stated 5-month medical leave from his township job; Marrone was actually serving time at Minnesota Federal Prison for embezzling $843K from a former employer. You might wonder how was it possible that the township was unaware of Marrone’s criminal record at the time of his hiring in 1992.

At the time of Marrone’s hiring, the township did not have policy and procedures for background investigation for prospective employees in place. However, as a direct result of Marrone’s criminal action against the township, a policy for thorough background investigation of all employees was approved. A similar situation could not occur today as a result of these employment policy changes.

Fast forward to March 21, 2011; John Yeager has filed a lawsuit seeking $2.1 million in damages from Tredyffrin Township. Yeager is claiming that he would never have sought employment with Tredyffrin Township had he known that Marrone was a convicted felon. He believes that his inability to secure employment by other municipalities is due to his relationship with Marrone and the subsequent negative publicity of the case. He was the Assistant Finance Director and Marrone was the Finance Director during Yeager’s employment with the township.

Yeager believes that he has suffered defamation of character; claiming that by association with Tredyffrin Township and Marrone, his personal reputation has been harmed. In his lawsuit, Yeager accuses the township of gross negligence through their hiring of a convicted felon (Marrone) and by not having a background investigation required for all prospective employees.

I have done some research on the statute of limitations on this type of civil action. The critical aspect of filing a civil action rests with remaining in compliance with the state’s statute of limitations. This is important because once the statute of limitations expires, the deadline for filing a lawsuit has passed. I do not claim to be any legal wiz, but it appears that an individual does not have a lot of time to file a ‘defamation lawsuit’ in Pennsylvania. According to what I have read, Pennsylvania has a one-year statute of limitation for defamation lawsuits. Negligence lawsuits appear to have a two-year statute of limitations in Pennsylvania.

If I understand the statute of limitations correctly on defamation and negligence counts, Yeager’s lawsuit is not valid in Pennsylvania. I have spoken to four attorneys in regards to Yeager’s lawsuit. Only one attorney suggested there may be substance if Yeager can prove there has been an ongoing inability for employment due to his association with the township; therefore extending the statute of limitations in this situation.

I have tried unsuccessfully to contact Yeager. I wanted to ask him ‘why’ he waited so long to file the lawsuit and curious as to what was the stated reason that he was fired. I was also curious about the $2.1 million lawsuit price tag . . . wonder where that number came from?

If nothing else, the contents of the lawsuit provide us a walk down memory lane in regards to Harry Marrone. My assumption is that the lawsuit will now pass to the hands of the township’s insurance company. It would be curious to know how many of these types of lawsuits are regularly filed against municipalities and/or their elected officials.

Community Matters © 2024 Frontier Theme