Old Business, New Business...and Open For Business

The beginning of every New Year – especially after a local election cycle – isn’t complete without the reshuffling of municipal boards and commissions. In LP, on our Board of Supervisors, we saw the end of the (second) Rick Brown era, as he opted not to stand for re-election.  Brown made no secret of the fact that he’s been suffering from multiple myeloma for the past few years and presumably that weighed in his decision not to run again.

 

While Brown originally came into office in the late 70’s / early 80’s on the strength of his work fighting the Moyer’s landfill, and his early days as a supervisor were positive, in recent years he’d become more of a divisive factor politically, particularly as he ran up a high legal spend championing special interests at the expense of all LP taxpayers, which ultimately benefitted his longtime friends, attorneys Richard Sheehan, and Michael Sheridan of the  firm Fox, Differ, Callahan, Sheridan & McDevitt, by appointing them as solicitors. Some of that divisiveness spilled out publicly at the end of the year as the Board tried over several contentious meetings to get a 2014 budget (with tax hike) approved.   Sheehan/Sheridan are now gone as well. 

But, 2014 is a new year, and with it comes new leadership.  Monday night saw the swearing-in of new supervisor Patrick Duffy (after a painful, 15-minute delay in which former vice-chair Don Thomas neglected to make sure the judge had arrived for the ceremony before starting the meeting and then awkwardly had to try to fill those long, silent minutes), and the selection of Colleen Eckman as our new chairman and Jason Sorgini as our new vice-chair. I’ve been impressed with how both of these individuals have grown in their positions since their election, their work ethic, and that both appear to do their homework and ask good questions, so I am confident they will do an effective job. This, together with the selection of supervisor Lisa Mossie across the bridge in Upper Providence as their chairman, marks the first time in a very long time, if ever, that both sister municipalities have been led by women.  

The fact that people merely showed up and were sworn in shouldn’t be a big deal, but consider this: In Trappe, as new borough commissioners were sworn in, one of those left in the minority faction chose to quit on the spot rather than contend with the winners. Over in Royersford, two borough council  members who won in November apparently moved – or perhaps weren’t residents at the time of their election at all, since the timing of their evident relocation is unknown – and didn’t bother to tell anyone that they would not show up to be sworn in,  or serving. That mystery is still being unraveled.  While there’s often been no shortage of drama in LP politics, at least we’ve never had those issues.  
 

I had an opportunity to connect with Jason Sorgini about the possibilities this new page in LP government could represent and to determine what they see as their most urgent priorities, obstacles, and what was behind their unexpected selection of solicitor.  Sorgini’s excitement and eagerness to roll up his sleeves and get to work was evident. 

Sorgini said that while it’s ‘not a flashy thing’, he identified ‘getting a handle on our transportation and infrastructure – our roads and bridges’ as Priority 1, because it has a ‘big impact on our quality of life’.  In addition to obvious pain points like the closure of the Arcola Road Bridge, he noted that we also have to manage the long-term resurfacing and maintenance of our roads and how to pay for that. He mentioned the recent study they’d commissioned to research and identify the condition of all our roads and to look beyond immediate needs to develop a road improvement rotation plan for the next 5-10 years.

Of course, this goal ties in with an obstacle we (and most municipalities) face, which is that revenues are down and state and federal aid for many programs has been slashed. However, recent legislation passed by the state reverses that a bit. “The last loan in which the Township borrowed against our annual liquid fuels payments from PA ends in 2016, which frees up that debt payment for road improvements and, coupled with the increase in liquid fuels monies we’ve been told we can expect as a result of the recently approved state transportation bill, means that in a couple of years we could potentially see 60% more income from that source to help pay for our road and infrastructure needs."

The second immediate priority,  Sorgini said, is to “continue to attract business and development".   In fact, it was this issue he came across as the most passionate about. At the same time this is a goal, it’s also an obstacle.  “You know, perception is reality, and the perception out there is, rightly or wrongly, that we’re not interested. It’s frustrating to see all the new construction going on in Upper Providence and Upper Merion, while we have empty buildings at all the entrances into the Township”.  Sorgini stated that “We would like to let developers know that LP is willing to hear what they have to say and to work with them to bring in business that is meaningful and worthwhile for the residents”.

 

He cited the example of the Children's Hospital surgical and specialty care annex that is being built in Upper Merion as something they would love to have been able to bring to LP,  in no small part because of the ancillary businesses it would also attract and the high-end jobs associated with them.  “When I found out that CHOP was looking to build a new facility to replace the current facility near the mall in King of Prussia, I had asked Rich [Gestrich] to reach out to them to let them know about all that Lower Providence has to offer. Unfortunately, they were already well into working with Upper Merion to put the facility near the Wegmans. Despite the fact that we were unable to get CHOP in Lower Providence, I remain hopeful that a similar medical facility will realize that Lower Providence is the place to be!”     

Sorgini also cited continuing to build on the 85% occupancy rate of the township’s industrial park, Park Pointe at Lower Providence, as part of this effort and gave high praise to Township staff, especially  Director of Special Projects & Technology Bill Roth (who serves as the Township’s business manager for Park Pointe at Lower Providence), for their hard work not only in getting occupancy to this level but for continuing to beat the bushes with existing Township businesses such as Kimco to find ways to fill vacancies such as  the former Eagleville Genuardi’s shopping center. 

 

For their third priority, Sorgini identified “Continued fiscal responsibility”and mentioned that although the Board came “dangerously close to a tax increase to fund debt service”, they were able to avoid that (the approved budget had a small (5.89%) tax increase earmarked for the operating budget and library services). “We really struggled with that and recognize that the residents will be affected by the tax increases in the new state transportation bill, but also realized it would be irresponsible to continue to kick the can down the road any longer”, observed Sorgini.  

“In addition, there are major employment contracts coming up for renegotiation – police and non-uniformed personnel – and we need to be positioned to be able to be fair to them while balancing that with what’s fair to residents cost-wise to pay for those contracts.” I pointed out that in 2015 my understanding is that we will also need to replace our police chief, as he expects to retire soon, and Sorgini confirmed that LP Police Chief Francis “Bud” Carroll is in the DROP program and that in conjunction with those negotiations  ‘we will also need to replace a long-standing, well-respected police chief’.  

Continuing with obstacles, Sorgini said that “we need to live within our means with limited resources…there is so much to do.  We need to change the perception of Lower Providence with developers.“  He also cited “the reality that it’s impossible to please everyone” and that some issues “become very personal things…the Y(MCA) is a good example of that. Some things are more complicated than you think and you try to explain that to people…" (this was something I found frustrating in my various positions with LP as well, so I share in that observation…not much is as cut-and-dried as it looks on the surface).  
  

He said “I think of myself not as a politician, but as a public servant, especially because of my  job [as an elementary school principal]…and because I want to know what people think, I do look online at comments to see what people are writing. I prefer to listen to what people are saying and take the emotions out of it”.  

One of this board’s decisions that so far has left many people scratching their heads was the new board’s selection of solicitor. The appointment of John Rice of the firm Grim Biehn and Thatcher in Bucks County (“GB&T”) left some folks I spoke to puzzled as to why no one from LP was selected (keeping the business in the township) or at least a firm that is familiar with the players, issues and histories of businesses and properties within our boundaries.

I presumed that township manager Richard Gestrich, who spent many years working for Upper Makefield and Middletown Townships in Bucks County as their manager, was familiar with GB&T and thus made the recommendation, but Gestrich stated that the board made this selection ‘on their own’ and that he only found out about it when Sorgini called to advise him that Rice would be submitting a letter of interest. GB&T doesn’t do much municipal business in Montco, currently listing only that they hold the solicitorship of Lower Moreland Township. Locally, the next closest proximity they have is an appointment as solicitor to Radnor Township in Delaware County. Still, by all accounts they are well respected and experienced in general municipal affairs.

Often, Board members lean toward a selection, usually someone they have developed a working relationship with and in whom they have a level of trust, whose advice and perspectives they’ve come to value. Thus, many insiders fully expected Joe McGrory of the firm Hamburg, Rubin, Mullin, Maxwell and Lupin (and allegedly a relative of one of the supervisors) to get the nod. I was initially told by a political source who wants to remain anonymous that ‘no one could count to three [votes] for their choice, so they went in a different direction’ but according to Gestrich, it played out otherwise. 

When I asked if he knew what the selection criteria had been, Gestrich stated that ‘they were looking for someone who had no ties to local developers and contractors’.  If true, I’m not sure which past solicitor(s) that may have been intended as an indictment of, but read into it what you will. If we ever had a solicitor that also had such interests as clients and said client ever had reason to appear before the BOS, the solicitor would have had to step aside on that issue in lieu of conflict counsel, and I don’t recall that ever happening at the BOS level in LP. Then again, maybe they’re just trying to be careful.    
 

Sorgini essentially validated Gestrich’s version. He said they interviewed seven different firms, including then-current solicitors Fox, Differ, Callahan, Sheridan & McDevitt, and that GB&T was selected for their specialization in municipal law and that they ‘don’t represent developers’. While he noted that GB&T doesn’t have as much experience in Montco as more local firms “there’s something to be said for that. When I hear from [solicitor] John Rice, he has no skin in the game, he’ll be a straight shooter. He has over 25 years of practice in municipal law and I look forward to learning from their expertise”.
 

Playing devil’s advocate, a non-attorney friend of mine, an official in another Montco municipality, weighed in with  “The downside of having a solicitor with ties to your township and county is outweighed tremendously by the upside. All of these Montco attorneys know each other and their network is second only to law enforcement's. If you want to see something coming before it runs you over, there's nothing better than a connected Montco lawyer. And the firms are all big enough that you can avoid conflicts of interest. It sounds like a "principle stand".  
 

Whatever it is, I hope it means that our apparent past policy of litigation as a first resort is history and that GB&T won’t be putting kids through college on our legal spend. I’d like to welcome GB&T to the Lower Providence community and hope that their tenure here is uneventful. 

Over at Methacton, they readjusted their Board late last year. Joyce Petrauskas was replaced by Christian Nascimento as president, and newcomer Brenda Hackett was sworn in, as were the incumbents who won reelection in November. Now they are focused on upcoming teacher contract negotiations and getting an ever-increasing capital improvement budget passed to facilitate the addition of lights and turf fields. As always, campaign promises to the contrary, it looks like Worcester Township is standing in their way, dragging out the ordinance adoption, advertising and approval processes as much as possible. What started out as an approximate $3M proposal has ballooned into a version containing all the bells and whistles, standing at approximately $5.5M, and the school district is considering taking on debt to pay for it (translation: hold onto your wallet).

 

 

I'm not sure I understand why such a high cost for turf fields and lights, a project which largely has no building construction costs included (with the exception of the option that includes building a new restroom facility outside the high school building), out of what is now a staggering 22 separate variations of options we could go with.   I'll explore this more in a future post and hope that Methacton manages to remain scandal-free for the foreseeable future. There are several court cases involving Methacton that are due to go to trial this year (if they don't settle), so I'll visit whatever comes out of those in the future as well.                 
 

 

 

Just Go To The Y-M-C-A!

The 80’s group Village People’s enthusiasm for the YMCA as expressed in their famous song isn’t exactly shared by some Lower Providence residents, as evidenced by comments from several residents at a recent public meeting and in an online petition regarding the proposed heath club/swimming facility in our Township.

As one of  West Norriton's Markley Farms’ longtime patrons, I was naturally disappointed when it closed its doors and ceased operation.  From the time I was about 12, we’d either get dropped off by my parents or ride our bikes over to swim on sweltering summer days. We’d stay as late as possible, usually til closing. Often it would be practically dark by the time my parents could drag us out of the pool, wrap us in towels, purple lips chattering, and take us home. I have many fond memories of the friends we made, the occasions we celebrated, the games of ‘Marco Polo’ we played, and the cute lifeguards we tried to impress.  Not only that, each summer was a family reunion of sorts as you’d see and interact with the same local families from the surrounding townships year after year.  It was truly a vibrant hub of the community, and is very much missed.

Markley's post close, 2012

Markley's, August 2012

I was even more disappointed when what I felt was the Freedom Valley YMCA’s solid plan for the Markley property, land already functioning as a recreational facility, was turned down by the West Norriton Township Supervisors, largely due to a few nearby residents’ objections – much of it NIMBY in nature. Unfortunately, that rendered it very unlikely that the Markley property will be used for anything other than residential development, which has its own traffic impacts, as well as additional impacts upon the community. I ran into co-owner Scott Markley in May, and he indicated that unless he can find someone who is interested in running the facility ‘as is’ for them, it will probably sit empty unless they can sell to a residential developer…and in this economy, nobody is building. That’s a shame, not only for the community that has lost the use of their wonderful pools and swim teams, but for West Norriton Township which is now generating less revenue from it as it sits empty, not selling memberships or snack bar food.

People in our and surrounding communities often bemoan the fact that there is so little for our kids to do (especially teens) other than hanging out at the mall, so I felt at the time that it would be fantastic if Lower Providence could figure out a way to bring the project here and make it viable for people of all ages to enjoy. Thus, I attended the presentation by George Marks of architects Kramer Marks outlining the YMCA’s proposal to place the project at the former General Washington Golf Club (now the Club at Shannondell) with great interest. 

Ironically, the YMCA originally took a look at Lower Providence in approximately 2010 in an effort to potentially build a full-scale facility here,and Township officials toured the Spring Ford facility at the time to get an idea of a typical operation. Ultimately, YMCA officials opted to try to locate at the Markely Farms facility when it became available. After being shot down by West Norriton earlier this year, they are again looking to LP for a solution.

The plan details appear on the Township’s website and have been well documented in the press already, so I won’t spell it out again here. In summary, the plan proposes to co-locate the new YMCA facility next to the existing Chadwick’s restaurant and pool facility already in existence and to keep 9 of the 18 holes of golf. The new facility would go on land which currently contains the other 9 holes of the golf course. It would include three outdoor and three indoor pools, two indoor basketball courts, a second-floor running track, a driving range, mini golf course, and room for additional indoor facilities and amenities. Between 500 and 600 parking spaces would accommodate those using the facilities.

Club at Shannondell, front 9

Club at Shannondell, front 9

The Township’s 2005 Open Space Master Plan for Zone E, within which this parcel falls, indicated a need for more recreational park space in this segment of the Township which has limited options for the placement of such a use. This plan would go a long way toward fulfilling that need as this section of the Township does not have a large community-type Township park.

Aggressive Timeline

During the presentation, George Marks indicated the Y's hope for an aggressive approval and construction timeline; they’d ideally want to begin construction in fall (approximately November) of this year, start to sell memberships beginning in January 2013, and open in fall of 2013. For this to happen, an unlikely ‘alignment of the planets’ would need to occur, in some cases concurrently, where possible, and occur quickly:

·        All land development approvals would have to be essentially fast-tracked, and since those approvals and any waiver requests they encompass would also need to include time-consuming traffic studies and stormwater runoff plan reviews – processes that can take months themselves – this alone could take months.

·        The Township would need to draft, hold a public hearing on, and vote to approve some sort of zoning district overlay on the property to permit the use in the first place (or, pass a text amendment creating a new zoning district to be applied to the property, which may give rise to claims of spot zoning or an ordinance validity challenge),  AND

·         A township open space/purchase agreement with Montgomery County in the mid 1990's to purchase the golf course provided $1.1 million from the County as an open space contribution toward the total $3M purchase price. To move forward with the YMCA, the Township would have to either return the county's open space money, or find or create another suitably sized and/or valued Lower Providence open space parcel to swap in place of that open space.

In 2005, LP asked the county for  permission to remove 3.78 acres of the property from the county open space deed restriction (part of the 97 acres) to permit construction of the new pool and restaurant. This was approved but conditioned upon LP's acquisition of and deed restricting as open space, a 19-acre property along the Perkiomen Creek near Collegeville.

The 19-acre purchase and open space designation was executed before the Commissioners’ approval which allowed a change in the 3.78-acre open space deed restriction. LP then entered into a leasehold agreement with Audubon Land Development (ALD) to build the facilities there today plus, as Phase II, an additional 50,000 square foot banquet facility which has yet to be constructed. The value of all those buildings was in the $21 million range and those buildings are owned by the Township.  One option would be for the Township to possibly let ALD off the hook for Phase II and instead allow them to repay a portion of the money owed on the municipal bond.

Club at Shannondell, abutting Egypt Rd

Opposition?

While other local media reported that there were 30-40 people in the audience to hear this presentation, that’s not entirely accurate.  The YMCA pitch was shoehorned in on the night of the month normally reserved for Zoning Hearing Board meetings, and that evening’s ZHB meeting was pushed back an hour to make room for the Y to come in. There were four hearings scheduled to be heard by the Zoning Hearing Board. Of the 30-40 people in the audience, most of the people were either applicants with ZHB hearings on the agenda or their attorneys. I counted 10-12 people – including myself - who were there specifically to hear the Y’s proposal.

While only a dozen or so township residents came to the informational meeting specifically to hear the plan (and the rest of the approximately 26,000 residents did not), a petition opposed to the project has sprung up online. As of today, 3 weeks after the presentation, only 41 “residents” (some appeared to be from Norristown, Limerick and Upper Providence) have digitally signed it, and judging by comments on the petition and to other online articles, objections center around the location, expected traffic impact,  and concerns about the loss of open space. Again, LP currently has approximately 26,000 residents….you do the math as to what percentage actually oppose the plan.

One topic expressed by those objecting is that they love the project in concept but not the location. Sites in the corporate center bordered by Trooper, Audubon & Rittenhouse Roads (Park Pointe at Lower Providence) have been suggested as alternative locations, and at the meeting a couple individuals suggested the long-empty former Commodore Semiconductor site (which is being remediated for hazardous wastes and TCE, hardly a site I’d want children playing on…). In any event any development on that site must be cleared by DEP, another government agency not exactly famous for moving quickly, if the site is even anywhere near to being repurposed). 

While I agree that there are numerous empty lots or vacant buildings there, there is not enough space in common ownership to make such a purchase easily feasible (to the extent it even IS feasible). Not to mention, the money the Y has set aside is for project engineering and construction, and doesn’t include having to make a costly land purchase on top of those costs. 

No outcry from LP Concerned Citizens/Friends of Lower Providence

The chain of events revealed at the July 26 public meeting was that YMCA officials came to Audubon Land Development with their proposal, and together they reached agreement in principle enough to approach the Township about the possibility of their support in making this happen. So, at this point, no one has any idea what our supervisors individually or collectively think or whether any of them support it.  And, so far, neither of the above community groups – both of whom have officers who are largely BOS Chairman Rick Brown cronies – have officially weighed in. FLP has been largely dormant since CVS was built 6 or 7 years ago and LPCC, originally founded back in the 80’s by Rick Brown  – after many years of dormancy, was recently revived to fight the American Revolution Center and other issues.

I was particularly interested to see that some of the very same people – several of whom have recently been appointed to township boards by the current Board of Supervisors and thus may want to sit out public comment - who were so opposed to CVS/Commerce Bank back in 2005, and the American Revolution Center circa 2008, in no small part due to perceived traffic issues and the potential impact on Audubon roads and intersections, completely mute when it came time to voice opinions on this project. Some of them were in the audience that evening, or conspicuous by their absence. Hopefully these minions aren’t merely waiting for their puppetmaster to determine which way the public wind is blowing before taking a position, but if they ultimately come out supporting it, I wonder how they will justify doing a 180 degree flip in order to support the very same things they’ve fought relative to past projects in virtually the same area.

One who did speak out against the project as proposed was Tom Borai, current vice chair of the Zoning Hearing Board. It is not inconceivable that if the Township elects to move forward and places an overlay district on the property, it may be challenged in a validity hearing at some point by residents who object to the project, a hearing which would take place in front of the Zoning Hearing Board. Given Mr. Borai’s past outspoken viewpoint – mostly directed at me relative to the American Revolution Center – that sitting board members shouldn’t express any viewpoint on issues that have not yet, but may, in the future, come in front of them via a hearing for which an impartial decision would have to be rendered – I was surprised to see him publicly come out against it at this meeting (part of his comments can be found here). Perhaps with Tom it’s “do as I say, not as I do”.

Budget Woes May Drive Need for Increased Revenues From This Property / History of the Property 

Late last year I attended the 2012 budget review & planning meetings wherein it was revealed that even though this property brings in $100,000 a year to the Township in the form of lease payments, the Board wanted to explore ways to potentially obtain more funds from it somehow. 

At a recent Lower Providence Republican Committee meeting I attended, Colleen Eckman (a Republican committeewoman as well as a current supervisor)  mentioned, essentially, that this property costs the township $250,000 a year but only brings in $100,000 - that the debt service on the bond exeeds the money that the Township receives from the Club at Shannondell, so there’s a $150,000 deficit.  She was basing this on an assertion that the municipal bond used for the project was bundled with other things such as road repairs.  However, that's not entirely true. I'm not blaming Ms. Eckman; I suspect she's not getting the whole nine yards from those who know it.

And local news sources reported that the property currently pays in $50,000 a year to the Township, which is incorrect. Per the Township's own 2012 budget, the annual lease payment is $100,000.

In actuality, there were two bond issues pertaining to this property. The first, in 1994, when the property was originally acquired by the Township (supervisors at the time were Brown, Ralston, McFarland, Fornal and Gaugler, along with solicitor Dick Sheehan), also included funds for the library and road improvements. The millage (for tax collection) was never adjusted to cover the entire bond issue and the property, with its golf course in poor condition and original, aging buildings needing constant repair (including an ice rink that leaked coolant so much it was frequently closed to the public), consistently lost money for the Township.  

Later, in approximately 2004, the Township (under a completely different set of Township supervisors) issued a second bond regarding the property, for capital improvements to the golf course facility. Those improvements included construction of the golf course, club house, pro shop etc. and entered into an operating lease with Lower Providence Recreational Partners ("LPRP") to manage the facililty and pay the Township $100,000 in annual rent.

Originally, this second financing was done as a municipal bond issue,. At the time of this financing, current LP BOS solicitor (and solicitor of the Municipal Authority at the time) Mike Sheridan, as Municipal Authority Solicitor, advised the BOS at the time that because of the bond class used, applicable laws dictated how much money the Township could legally derive in revenue (ie accept in rent payments) in order to maintain tax-exempt status of the bond, so the LP could not accept more than $100,000 in rent payments or else they would be in default of the bond terms and the bond investors could file claims against the Township.

In the 2009-2010 time frame the Township refinanced this second bond into a loan with the Delaware Valley Investment Trust, thus removing the limitations on how much rent could be accepted.

  

Bottom line, the bond/loan for capital improvements at the Club at Shannondell was not bundled with anything else and the lease payments made by Lower Providence Recreation Partners was never intended to finance the 1994 bond issue. 

Now, in 2012,this difference in what the property brings into the Township financially versus the total cost of the 2 bonds (one of which has since been repackaged as a loan) has effectively become a 'can kicked down the road' in time. This first bond could and should have been paid off long ago, but is instead now coming out of the General Fund and is a significant reason why we are talking about potentially laying employees off, not replacing departing employees, and making the across-the-board budget cuts discussed and approved at the June 25, 2012 special budget meeting [details here].


Understandably, the Township's  desire to explore ways to increase the amount of money earned from the property is likely the only reason the Township is even entertaining discussions with the YMCA - in an effort to raise money for the Township without having to resort to raising taxes on residents in the worst recession since the Great Depression.