Pattye Benson

Community Matters

Tredyffrin Township

Proposed 2010-11 School District Budget . . . Ray Clarke’s Comments on School Board Meeting

Last night was TESD School Board meeting with discussion of the proposed 2010-11 district budget as the major agenda item. I was attending a DuPortail House Board meeting and as always, I thank my friend Ray Clarke for attending the School Board meeting and then for sharing his notes with us. For Ray and any other who attended – I am curious what was the resident turnout like last night? Staff, teachers, parents in attendance? Many comments from the audience members?

It looks like the unfunded pension program (PSERS) problem is looming ever closer on the horizon . . . wonder if there is time before the Primary next week to have a statement from the local candidates on their proposed solution to the problem? If not before the Primary Election, I do think that we need to have public dialogue before the November General Election and know where the candidates stand on this important economic issue facing the Commonwealth.

Update from the School Board meeting budget discussion

First, a quick appreciation for District Business Manager Art McDonnell. His presentation tonight was very clear. He always seems to be on top of the details, and the budget process has chewed through a lot of those details.

The proposed budget passed with one change: removal of the $80,000 of revenue estimate for the Activity Fee. The consensus being that there is not enough time to sort through and socialize all the details for the upcoming year, but that such a fee should be considered for 2011/12. The lost $80,000 will come from the fund balance.

Board members Brake and Bookstaber proposed amendments that would slightly lower the non-contract compensation increase (to 2%) and the property tax increase (to 2.5%), but received no other votes. I’m not sure that I buy the arguments against the former, but I can see how the $7 million deficit for 2011/12 would weigh on the decision to tax at the Act 1 index. That shows how important it was for the Board to vote not to apply for exceptions back in January, forcing the expense reductions.

The good news is that Moodys affirmed the district’s AAA rating, even considering the dire financial outlook for 2011/12 and especially beyond. Now seems to be a good time to borrow what we can to assure funding to keep the facilities going, while the District tries to figure out how to offset the remaining contracted salary increases and benefits entitlements. Beyond that, hopefully new contracts will reflect the community’s own compensation experience and ability to pay. The notion of above-inflation compounded annual salary level and tenure increases is – to use a word popularized at the meeting – unsustainable.

Those actions will not address the retirement plan problem, though – a net $6 million contribution increase in 2012/13 and another $3 million on top of that in 2013/14 – by which time the fund balance would be wiped out, even with inflation-linked tax increases.

This leads to one of the most critical questions for our prospective state representatives: what – specifically – would you propose to address the unfunded pension liability? What changes in benefits? What changes in contributions, employer and employee? What aid to school districts, and from what source? Let’s hear from them.

Public Invited . . . Tredyffrin Township Police Department’s Annual Memorial Service on Wednesday

The public is invited to attend the Tredyffrin Township Police Department’s annual memorial service for fallen officers on Wednesday, May 12 at 12 Noon. The ceremony will take place in Keene Hall in the township building. This year’s keynote speaker will is Walt Hunter, a reporter for CBS3 and a volunteer firefighter.

The program will include a “roll call” of officers killed in Chester County while attempting to protect their communities as well as the announcement of Tredyffrin’s Officer of the Year. For more information, call 610-644-1400.

Reminder: School Board to Vote on 2010-11 Proposed Final Budget on Monday, May 10

This is a reminder that the T/E School Board will be voting on the 2010-11 proposed final budget at its regular meeting this Monday, May 10 at 7:30 PM, Conestoga HS; here is the agenda. The T/E School Board Finance Committee met on May 3 to discuss the 2010-11 budget. After discussing the tax rate and selected budget strategies, the Committee recommended a preliminary budget that included a tax increase of 2.9%, which results in $2.5 million in revenue, $5.3 million in expense reductions and $1.3 million in fund balance contribution to address the $9.25 million gap between revenues and expenditures. This meeting is one of the few remaining opportunities for the public to weigh in on the mix of program cuts, tax increase, expense increases and reductions, user fee increases and fund balance use that are being proposed to balance the 2010-11 budget. The proposed tax increase is 0.5 mills, and cost the homeowner an average of $128. The final adoption of the budget will be on June 14.

I hate to be repetitive, but much like Tredyffrin Township’s 2010 budget, the 2010-11 TESD budget will squeak by, with minimal effect to the taxpayer. The greater, more significant problem will occur with the township’s 2011 budget and the school district’s 2011-12 budget. During the next 6 months, it is doubtful that the economic climate in the country will dramatically improve, so hard decisions await.

Lamina Can Play in his Sandbox by Himself

Since Lamina’s letter was published in this week’s paper I have received many phone calls and emails from residents, and also some from neighboring townships. I think Lamina might be surprised to learn that many in this community do not share his ‘bully tactics from his bully pulpit’ partisan style of governing. (And to think that I initially offered excuses for Lamina’s behavior and missteps.)

Friends and family members have come to my defense against Lamina’s personal attacks and have wondered why I have not been more outraged. Simply put, Lamina isn’t worth it! I have always been a big believer in the mantra, what goes around, comes around, and I think eventually Lamina will get his due. In my world, everyone eventually pays a price for their bad deeds. If an elected official is determined to be a bully, misrepresent the facts and cover-up their actions . . . there’s no point in getting upset.

Lamina might be sadly mistaken if he thinks his words at the Board of Supervisors meeting or his outrageous diatribe in the paper have somehow improved his standing in the community. No, I would suggest just the opposite. An elected official who degrades its residents and refers to those who disagree as ‘gnats’ cannot be respected. A wise friend once told me (when I was upset about something a stranger said about me) – – – isn’t it more important what those closest to you think about you than a complete stranger? I think this friend was right, . . . Lamina can play in his sandbox by himself.

Here is a new response to Lamina’s letter, which appears in the Main Line Suburban Life, which I found interesting:

diamondgrl wrote on May 6, 2010 5:38 PM:

” In MR. Lamina’s world, black is white and citizens’ questions about the appearance of pay-to-play politics have only ONE motivation – partisan mudslinging.

Also Mr Lamina seems to adhere to the same thinking as a former president who insisted, “You’re either with us or you’re against us.” According to Lamina, those of us who don’t accept his storybook version of unprecedented generosity from township businesses and individuals – including $5000 from a single supervisor, are a danger to the community and had better “put politics aside for the good of the community” – that is, keep our mouths shut.

But there are many in Tredyffrin who believe adequate dedicated funding for fire/EMT services is essential going forward and should be paid for by all who benefit – that is, all residents and businesses located in the township. Funding should never again be dependent on “holiday firefighter fund drives” solicited by public/private officials, or the whims of tax-averse supervisors, one of whom is running for election on a platform of no new taxes.

As for Mr. Lamina’s laughable attempts to politic on behalf of his friend Warren Kampf and throw darts at individuals and groups who have opposed their votes and conduct – even suggesting we are “gnats” nipping at their heels -well, he is nothing more than a buffoon and a bully. He has lost the respect of many former supporters, and should seriously consider taking his own advice : put politics aside “for the sake of the community” and stop putting in jeopardy one of our township’s… ACTUAL cherished qualities… -our strong sense of community – REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL AFFILIATION. “

East Goshen Township’s Handling of Canada Geese Problem

Have you heard about some of the local companies hiring trained dogs and their handlers to chase Canada Geese from their properties? I don’t know how often the dogs are on the properties and whether it is successful. My husband’s employer Unisys routinely hires a company, ‘Geese Police’ but, according to Jeff, these policing dogs have not proven to be entirely successful. From the Geese Police website, “. . . “Policing” geese takes time, patience, and the help of some very talented canine assistants: our working Border Collies. This breed of dog is both hardworking and extremely intelligent, and exhibits a natural instinct to herd. While other breeds need the gratification of catching their prey, working Border Collies are satisfied by the mere opportunity to stalk. . . “

I know that Canada Geese are a problem in Tredyffrin; in fact, it is amazing how many times I see them stop traffic on Rt. 252 as they slowly walk across the 4 lane road. Also I see the geese quite often by the township building, on Chesterbrook Boulevard and in Wilson Farm Park. Apparently, the geese gravitate to areas with ponds or standing water.

I found it interesting that East Goshen Township this week decided on their own action plan to deal with the Canada Geese problem. East Goshen has signed an agreement with the US Department of Agriculture. The federal government will come in to the township and remove 50% of the geese, or up to 300 birds from the open space. The birds will be killed and the meat donated to charity. Unclear how the killing will take place, ugh . . . perhaps it is better that I not know.

East Goshen is enrolled in the government’s Resident Canada Geese Program which requires that the local authorities take steps to discourage the birds for at least three years. The USDA recommendations to East Goshen included addling the birds eggs — coating the eggs with oil to kill the embryo — installing temporary fencing around ponds, and using balloons and wood dog silhouettes to keep the geese from nesting. The township has been enrolled in the program for 4 years and may now legally ask for the removal of the birds.

East Goshen Township will be charged $6,111 for the Canada Geese removal and the wildlife agents will arrive in June. The geese are rounded up in June because geese molt in June and lose their ability to fly.

I didn’t understand why it took the federal government’s involvement to help with the Canada Geese problem so I did a bit of research. I discovered that Canada Geese are federally protected and can only be killed during duck hunting season. Canada Geese are protected under the Federal Migratory Bird Act of 1918. This Act makes it illegal to harm or injure a goose and damage or move its eggs and nest, without a Federal permit. Not complying with the Federal Act can result in fines ranging from $5,000 to $10,000 and this also applies to an untrained dog’s actions. This explains why the federal agency, USDA will be handling East Goshen’s Canada Geese problem.

Probably more information than you ever needed, but I was fascinated with the Canada Geese background . . . who knew that these geese have been protected since 1918 by Federal law? Amazing!

House Fire on Sullivan Road, Wayne — Family in need of assistance, can you help?

There was a house fire on Tuesday morning in the Shand Tract area – Sullivan Road, Wayne. Volunteer fire companies from Berwyn, Valley Forge, Radnor, King of Prussia, Paoli, Malvern and Lafayette Ambulance (Upper Merion Township) all assisted with getting the fire under control. Deputy Chief Wayne Riddle from the Berwyn Fire Company, arrived moments after receiving the call to find the single family home with heavy smoke showing from the front of the home. Nearly 50 firefighter volunteers were on the scene and working together were able to spare the house from a total fire loss.

Although the family was not at home at the time of the fire, their two dogs were in the house. Both dogs were successfully rescued but one of the pets suffered smoke inhalation and was transported to a local animal hospital. The Chester County Fire Marshal is investigating the cause of the blaze; I understood from a neighbor that early signs show that it may have been an electrical fire in the kitchen. There were no firefighter or civilian injuries reported. Crews from Newtown Square Company, Minquas Fire Company (Downingtown Borough), and Phoenixville Fire Department EMS stood by in Berwyn’s firehouse during the incident.

Thank you to the many volunteer firefighters who were on the scene so quickly which saved the house from a total loss. They were also able to keep the fire from spreading to adjoining properties. This story once again points to the importance of our local volunteer firefighters and we thank them!

As a community, we want to know how we can help Michael and Mary Bascome and their children. The family is a member of the Devon Strafford Little League (DSLL) family and this Saturday, May 8 the DSLL will be collecting financial contributions along with boy’s clothes sizes 4-5 and 7-8, small age appropriate toys, new toiletries, new kitchen items and any other essential items you feel would help the family. During the baseball games on Saturday, a table will be set up at New Eagle Elementary School for collection.

If you are unable to get to New Eagle Elementary School on Saturday (or would like to help immediately) you may leave donations on the porch of the Hunter’s, 435 Huntington Drive, Wayne, PA 19087. For financial contributions, please make checks payable to Michael Bascome.

Thank you for any help you can offer to this Tredyffrin family.

The Definition of a Poor Leader as provided by Tredyffrin Township . . . distrust, discontent, anger and partisan rancor

Since last Fall, the residents of Tredyffrin Township have endured seemingly endless examples of bad governing, including;

  • $50K St. Davids Golf Club sidewalk offer
  • Fire Funding 2010 budgeting (fireworks vs. fire funding)
  • Fire company politicization
  • Improper supervisor solicitation of funding (Comcast, etc.)
  • Home Rule Charter violations
  • Inconsistent ethics decisions (Tredyffrin Historic Preservation Trust vs. Fire Funding solicitation)
  • Political party grandstanding/campaigning (cardboard check presentation)
  • Public political party commentary

. . . all provided courtesy of our Board of Supervisors leadership, Warren Kampf as chairman in 2009 and Bob Lamina as current chair.

Most of us have an opinion on the definition of a great leader. It’s one of those concepts, in which everyone seems to have an opinion. Instead of defining a great leader, what about the definition of a Poor Leader? If you go to Webster’s Dictionary and see how they define these two words separately, here is what you get:

  • Leader – A Person or thing that leads
  • Poor – Deficient or lacking in something specified, lacking in skill, ability, or training, deficient in desirable ingredients, qualities

If you combine the two you get something like: Poor Leader A person in a leadership role that lacks the necessary skill, ability, and overall qualities to effectively lead.

As a leader you are tasked with delivering results. The best leaders know that consistently delivering great results is not something that they can do in isolation. To get members of the community to support our local government, our elected leaders need to avoid the worst traits of poor leaders. In my experience these include:

  • Being arrogant
  • Unwillingness to learn
  • Bullying
  • Poor Communication
  • Incompetence
  • Lack of Accountability
  • Aggression
  • Insincerity
  • Deceitful
  • Ruling with an iron hand
  • Indecisiveness

This brings me to the purpose of this post. In this week’s edition of the Main Line Suburban Life, is a I See It’ article written by Tredyffrin Township Supervisor Chair Bob Lamina. Having attending this week’s Board of Supervisors meeting hoping for an apology for his aggressive, disrespectful behavior of the April 19 supervisors meeting, you can imagine my outrage over Lamina’s outrageous, arrogant words. Do you characterize Lamina and his style of governing as an example of a good leader or a poor leader . . . you be the judge!

Much has been written over the last few months in Main Line Suburban Life, Main Line Times, Daily Local and Community Matters in regards to the governing of Tredyffrin Township and its leaders. Since the April 19 Board of Supervisors Meeting, there have been several articles and commentary speaking directly to the leadership of Bob Lamina. Provided are some links in case you missed them:

Here is the article which appears in this week’s Main Line Suburban Life by Bob Lamina. Read the article and reflect on Lamina’s selective memory of the April 19 supervisors meeting. Fortunately my memory is better and I’m hoping that Tredyffrin’s residents share my recall. This comment already appears after Lamina’s article, ” . . . In your short tenure as the Chair of the Tredyffrin BOS, you have managed to set a record for the most missteps in the shortest period of time. Congratulations. Disgracing your position in record time is a legacy you can be proud of long after the much-anticipated expiration of your term.”

The politics of firefighting and other matters

Published: Tuesday, May 04, 2010

By Bob Lamina

In a recent editorial, a local resident who also happens to be a local firefighter pointed out some of the qualities in our community that make so many people look to Tredyffrin as a great place to employ and be employed, to educate our children, to worship, to raise a family, to run a business. In short the qualities that make our township such a wonderful place to live. These are qualities which have long constituted the character of this community – ones which hopefully will endure in the future.

One of the qualities I’ve also mentioned on a number of occasions as being one of our township’s most endearing, qualities I believe have been equally integral to the character of our community, has been the generous spirit of volunteerism – the spirit of giving, the spirit of shared sacrifice and the spirit of shared risk and reward – that makes up the very fiber and indeed the history of our township.

That is why last fall, in that same spirit of shared sacrifice, during what remains to this day to be extraordinarily challenging economic times, the Tredyffrin Township Board of Supervisors voted to adopt a 2010 budget that contained within it some very difficult but necessary decisions. Within our budget were the results of an earlier decision to reduce our township staff by 20 positions – 11 of those through layoffs, the rest through attrition. The budget froze most other township salaries with the exception of those required by collective-bargaining agreement, we instituted a hiring freeze and we reduced the police budget. All other general fund services, with the exception of the fire companies, were reduced by at least 14 percent.

By comparison fire-company service providers’ budgets were reduced a modest 5 percent. In so doing, we adopted I believe what the community wanted, a budget that was fair and balanced and contained no real-estate property-tax increase. Despite these good works, during our deliberations we continued to hear from many in the community who asked that we try and find a way to preserve funding sought by the local fire companies. Not unlike a former supervisor who often utilized the bully pulpit we sit on to urge citizens to give generously to the fire companies, it was in response to these requests, that Mr. Olson, Mr. Kampf and I – citizens who happen to be supervisors and public servants who are also citizens of this same community – worked hard to find a way.

And the good news we announced way back on Dec. 21 was that in a great example of private-public partnering – not unlike our much larger and equally successful Library Capital Campaign a few years ago – individuals, businesses both large and small, organizations and foundations generously came forward in response to our year-end holiday appeal on behalf of our local fire companies. As was also stated at the time, the most remarkable aspect of our ability to provide the sought-after funding was really the manner in which we accomplished it. In a little more than 10 days we were able to restore the funding not in the form of additional subsidies, spending and new or higher taxes during challenging times, but in the form of pledges by others in our community who by their generosity agreed to reach out and lend a hand during the holiday season.

And that I suppose is why I was so compelled during our last public meeting to question the motivations of those few individuals who came forward to challenge what we successfully achieved nearly four-and-a-half months earlier. My fear is the continued rhetoric being displayed by those who for one reason or another still can’t comprehend the generosity of our community is in fact putting at risk some of these same qualities I believe are critical to our future and ones that we must maintain. Perhaps they didn’t believe that the funding we announced in the form of pledges would really ever be received. Well, we know now the facts are we’ve actually exceeded in charitable giving what was sought to be funded through tax dollars. We also know by earlier comments by a local blogger and former unsuccessful Democratic candidate for township supervisor that she and other similarly motivated individuals had a stronger preference to reach into our taxpayers’ pockets for funding, and that the notion of shared sacrifice for the greater good perhaps shouldn’t necessarily be shared by all. In my view this would have been to take the easier and I think incorrect road – one of increased taxpayer subsidies and spending.

So with that said, and with the political season in full swing, with the run-up to the Pennsylvania primary election on May 18, it’s always easy for those who clearly have a different point of view, or who are otherwise politically inclined, to throw around words like “conflict of interest,” “ethics” and “pay to play.” While I respect everyone’s First Amendment right to come forward at our meetings and speak their mind, those who know me best understand that I will also never shy away from expressing my own views. And in this instance, while I find that to make such politically charged and unfair assertions some four-and-a-half months later may help sell newspapers, it represents quite a ridiculous point of view with no basis in fact other than to dangerously put in jeopardy one of our township’s demonstrated and most cherished qualities – the spirit of charitable giving. Frankly the tone of some of the comments made near the end of our April 19 meeting was to somehow absurdly suggest that companies doing business in our township aren’t caring citizens too. That is just flat-out wrong, and to continue this type of rhetoric is in fact to tear at the fabric of what in part makes this community great. But, you know, in the end I think the political shots some of us have been receiving are nothing compared to the shots average citizens have taken in our community these past few years.

So while I’m not worried about the former, I do worry about making the right decisions for our community. The economic stress in our township is still very real. Revenue used to fund government services generated by transfer taxes on the sale of residential and commercial properties isn’t what it used to be, some folks have lost their jobs and their homes, and many have seen their retirement savings greatly depleted. So as I’ve stated, while it isn’t all that unusual in the heat of the political season for every gnat in the minority that’s ever nipped at our heels to want to take us on – or at least those of us who may happen to be running for one political office or another – I would challenge those who have differing views to put aside the rhetoric. I’m all too happy to have a spirited debate on the real issues facing our community. On public-safety matters like support for our firefighters, let’s put aside the politics. I hope that, for the sake of our community and the continuation of the qualities that make this community great, we can all agree on the positive nature of what was accomplished by bringing people of walks of life together in Tredyffrin to help the fire companies.

I’m committed to doing so if you are. But if there’s anyone who still wishes to draw a political lesson relative to my statement concerning my own character, please know this. I will continue to work for you in good times and bad, and not shy away from making the right and often hard decisions I believe are in the best interests for our community. And lastly, one of the qualities I neglected to mention that also makes this township so great is that we do have good government in Tredyffrin, from the guy who plows your streets to this elected board. We work hard to keep your taxes as low as we can, maintaining the services you have come to expect, while at the same time not making local government intrusive in your lives. So when you do go to the polls on May 18, as I’ve mentioned in these remarks, and like the citizen firefighter who expressed so eloquently the qualities that make this township such a special place, please consider what it’s going to take to continue to maintain these qualities in our community in the future. So whether you’re a citizen supervisor from our own township who aspires to higher public office, or any other candidate, know we’re not playing games here; we’re here doing what we believe is the people’s business.

Bob Lamina is chairman of the Tredyffrin Township Board of Supervisors and a former member of the Tredyffrin Township Republican Committee.

Final Countdown to TESD’s Proposed School Year 2010-11 Budget . . . Notes from Ray Clarke

Much appreciation to Ray Clarke for attending last night’s TESD Finance Committee and also for his thoughtful and well-written notes. I see that the EIT discussion continues . . . and also I’m glad to see that the Board is looking beyond the 2010-11 school year in their budget discussions. Here are Ray’s notes:

The TESD Finance Committee was a smooth affair tonight. Bottom line: the proposed 2010/11 budget to be taken to the full Board next Monday will call for a 2.9%, $2.5 million, property tax increase, $5.3 million of expense cuts/revenue programs, $1.4 million of fund balance contribution, plus a Contingency (which would if needed come from the Fund Balance) of $1.8 million. At $29 million, the year-end fund balance will be in good shape to support this.

The full board was present, but only the Finance Committee voted on the few issues teed up for debate. Debbie Bookstaber continued to be the greatest advocate for fiscal restraint, supporting a lower tax increase and no administration pay increases (the vote was for an increase of 2.9%), and also supporting administration proposals judged to improve the Special Education offering at lower cost – a point she won when the $300,000 cost was recommended only as an addition to the Contingency.

There was lively discussion on the pros and cons of activity fees. Kevin Buraks was a vocal supporter, citing as a benchmark the cost of non-school travel and other sports programs. I liked Ann Crowley’s idea of a all-student “Activity Fee”, along the lines of college activity fees. Participation in quality extra-curriculars is important, and a small fee which is spread across the student body can generate meaningful revenue, with no debate about what activities to include and with no direct link that would discourage participation, while users of the services will bear a small part of the cost. In the end, the administration was charged with coming up with $80,000 in fees, probably from the 1500 Middle and High Schoolers that participate in at least one sport, while perhaps the Crowley idea may be studied for future years..

I was pleased to see that there was full acknowledgment that this budget solves only the coming year’s problem. In the following year, the gap is back up to $7 million. Revenues will be flat – an assumed 1% assessed value increase offset by a decline in federal stimulus funds. So cost increases go straight to the deficit. $3 million in salaries, $2 million in benefits (net PSERS, and healthcare up 10-15%), $1 million (~5%) increases in other expenses and ~$1 million in property expense and fund balance transfers that I guess restore one time cuts from 2010/11. And that $7 million deficit is after an assumed $400,000 increase in investment earnings but no increase in debt service (capitalized interest?).

We might expect a similar plan of attack on the $7 million next year – program cuts, fund balance and taxes. Administration has proposed $2.7 million of program changes which are being studied under the Education Committee. As for taxes, maybe property owners will not be the only well to draw on. (I think I heard a comment that the Act 1 index will allow a property tax increase of only $1.7 million (2%) for 2011/12 (absent Exceptions)). The Committee handed out a draft timeline for discussion of an EIT that could reclaim taxes already paid and going outside T/E. On that, the first step for a July 2011 implementation would be a September 13, 2010 Finance Committee meeting.

All in all, it seems the Administration and Board are working diligently to maximize the value from the mix of cards in their hand and on the table

Board of Supervisors Meeting . . . wishful thinking that Lamina would apologize

I attended last night’s Board of Supervisors Meeting which turned out to be uneventful. Although it was my understanding that Chairman Lamina was out-of-town and that Paul Olson (as Vice Chair) would fill in, Lamina returned in time to attend. Wishful thinking on my part but I hoped that Lamina would feel compelled to make amends with an apology for his behavior from the last BOS meeting. Always believing in the ‘half-glass full approach’ to life, I thought that Mr. Lamina might have reconsidered his inappropriate political party and resident motive remarks from the last meeting and offered some kind of apology. Like I said, . . . wishful thinking on my part!

There was one interesting appointment which was a bit confusing. During the New Matters from supervisors section, Kampf stated that he an appointment that he should have made during the liaison reporting — I thought he said that he was the liaison to the Historical Architectural Review Board and was making an appointment of Jean Sauer to the HARB Board. If that was the statement from Mr. Kampf it was incorrect; the appointment of Jean Sauer was to the Trust (Tredyffrin Historic Preservation Trust). Mr. Kampf is the liaison to the HARB but the Trust is not a Board of the township and we do not have a supervisor liaison (we are a separate non-profit 501c3 organization). When the Trust was created, the charter does require 2 appointments from the township; currently serving in that capacity is Trish Kreek and Judy DiFilippo. Due to term limits, Judy’s term was ending this month (however, she remains on the Trust as a Board member, but not a township appointee) The Trust Board is thrilled to have Jean Sauer join us, I just want to set the record straight that there is no supervisor liaison to the Trust and that Jean will be on the Tredyffrin Historic Preservation Trust Board not the HARB.

Community Matters © 2025 Frontier Theme