Seal of Disapproval

One of the things modern parents teach their children these days is that what one posts online can come back to haunt you in the future. Pre-internet, that wasn't a problem, but it sure is now. 

Last week’s scandal, wherein an endorsed Republican candidate for Methacton School Board, Scott Misus, posted offensive comments on a public social media site, became a cautionary tale and living example of this important lesson. The Misus situation has made what one posts online relevant, and in an era of lazy and low-information voters, vividly illustrates how unwillingness to do one’s own research on candidates and to allow others to do your thinking for you can have serious consequences.

Political parties have their own agendas and tend to be run by people who like to play kingmaker for their own reasons, and since most people aren’t privy to insider info about the personalities, alliances and agendas, reliance on their opinions should be viewed as no more than a starting point; a guideline, not gospel.

And don't bank on the press to do meaningful vetting for you, either. The days of investigative reporters are largely gone, and very small budgets at most media outlets means they primarily publish little more than press releases.

Misus, who was jointly endorsed by the two Republican committees in Methacton School District (LP and Worcester; school board candidates cross file, and evidently the LP Dems decided not to endorse at all), has been dealt with by party leadership and officially stripped of his endorsement.  While it’s too late to have his name removed from voting machines, he will not be advocated as a candidate on Election Day. At considerable expense, party sample ballots were pulled and reprinted without his name on them. His name was painstakingly removed from yard signs on which he appeared.  The viewpoints he expressed are not shared by the members of the local party or the other endorsed candidates.

Absolutely, I think we should have done a better job of vetting our candidates. Court records were scrutinized but we should have gone further. All candidates were asked at the endorsement meeting whether there was any information about themselves that could embarrass the party, and Misus either forgot about these Facebook posts or didn’t see a problem with them, as they were not mentioned.

But that’s typical and not a good way to vet candidates unless you already know the answer and are verifying a candidate’s honesty. Candidates often lie or mislead. They forget, hedge, hide, engage in wishful thinking, and understandably try to put the best face on things. A good vetting process is systematic and ideally discovers both the strengths and weaknesses of candidates before offering them assistance or support. You can’t rely only on what a candidate tells you.

However, even when one DOES know of adverse information that defies explanation, sometimes parties move forward with a candidate anyway. That’s when doing your own research is most valuable.

This is not just an indictment of the GOP. The local Democrat party has had their missteps too.

For example, back in 2009 one of my coworkers was a LP Democrat committeeman who excitedly bragged to me one day that his party was going to put up as a township supervisor candidate a 'dynamic woman who was new to Lower Providence but not new to politics’.

I was intrigued because I was working on a campaign to elect the then-incumbent supervisor, so as soon I learned the name, I researched this woman and discovered that she was a notorious con artist who had been at the heart of a 2002-2003 scandal in Philadelphia wherein she pretended to be an heiress descended from a Revolutionary war hero, ingratiated herself into Philly high society, and used this persona to swindle a wealthy Philadelphia real estate broker out of more than $80,000 in cash and thousands more in the form of goods and services from others. She was so notorious that a couple of crime shows had done episodes about her. (See a good summary, here; this woman, who has since remarried, moved out of Lower Providence last year as the result of a foreclosure, so apparently her money management problems continue to this day. She still has an active court docket with Montgomery County as she's still paying restitution).

Anyway, I passed this information onto county GOP party leadership, who took it to Democrat party leadership, who then presented it to the candidate and asked her whether this information was true. She quietly withdrew and nobody was publicly embarrassed. 

Perhaps, like the “CARE” parents, we should have just shopped the story around to the local news media for maximum exposure and humiliation instead of handling it in a gentlemanly manner and giving the party the opportunity to address it first.  

The lesson is, if a party doesn’t do a good job vetting candidates these days, when it’s easier than ever via the Internet, the opposition (and/or public) most certainly will.  It’s not called ‘opposition research’ for nothing.

While the Worcester Republican Committee (via Worcesterpapolitics.com) apparently was quick to blame Lower Providence’s Republican Party for the Misus debacle, the offensive Facebook posts were never presented by their municipal leader, Wini Hayes, during the leadup to the joint school board endorsement meeting (or at the actual meeting) as a reason why we should not endorse Mr. Misus, even though Ms. Hayes took the lead on questioning candidates and asked each of them about the existence of unflattering or adverse information.

Given how WRC has positioned themselves (via their friends at Worcesterpapolitics.com) as somehow innocent in this, you can imagine how surprised I was to discover something that apparently escaped WRC six years ago when it endorsed current supervisor Susan Caughlan, and earlier this year when they re-endorsed her for re-election.

Ms. Caughlan (also known as Mrs. David Brooks, whom I’ve written about previously), an attorney, wrote and published an article for the William and Mary Law Review  in 1987 that defended the in-home possession and viewing of child pornography as a protected First Amendment right [you can read her argument yourself here].  This was not a random class assignment she was forced to write, it was an analysis she chose to make, write and publish.

I’m not sure how one can defend the creation or mere existence of, let alone the private possession, viewing and sharing of, child pornography anywhere, anyplace, anytime, but this woman evidently feels the framers of the Constitution envisioned this as a protected, God-given right more than two hundred years ago - as long as it occurs in the privacy of your home, of course, if I read this correctly - and attached her name to this garbage. As a Republican, as an American, as a parent, as a human, it disgusts me that WRC would hold up someone with these reprehensible views and endorse them as some sort of exemplary representative of our values, no matter when she wrote it.

In the event that Caughlan belatedly defends writing this as some sort of youth-inspired insanity, it gets worse. In the “You can tell a lot about a person by the company they keep” department, I’m told she’s had a long friendship and association with recently convicted child porn purveyor (and Worcester Twp resident) John Harris. This friendship is shady especially when you consider that he has reportedly endorsed her in the past, donated money to her campaign, and records show she voted  to spend in the neighborhood of $200,000 of Worcester Township taxpayer dollars protecting his emails from discovery in a Right-To-Know case (Worcester didn't have an email system of their own at the time and now, of course, we know what kind of things were lurking in his email). And, incidentally, she’s also voted to spend taxpayer resources to battle Methacton School District in efforts to delay and restrict the installation of field lights at Methacton’s football field in an effort to prevent them from impacting nearby residents, which includes and benefits Harris, among other things.  

This friendship/association is common knowledge in and around Worcester, so why, again, was she ever endorsed? Was SHE vetted? As I mentioned above, WRC chair Wini Hayes asked Methacton school board candidates seeking a party endorsement this year if there was anything negative about themselves that they needed to explain; did she ask Caughlan the same thing at their meeting to endorse a supervisor candidate? And if so, did Caughlan ever tell WRC about this plank in her ‘conservative’ platform?

Is it any wonder, then, that the fastest growing voter identity group is “independent” and that increasingly, voters look with more favor upon UNendorsed candidates?

Political parties are made up of imperfect humans who despite the best of intentions, sometimes get it wrong. Voters have a wealth of free information easily available to them to determine who a candidate really is, what he/she is really about, and whether a candidate resonates with their values.  The fact that so many have voter apathy and abdicate the vetting responsibility to others lends validity to the saying ‘you get the government you deserve”.

Methacton Post Prom 2015 Rocks The Halls

 (For a video featuring many more of the themed art and displays from Post Prom 2015, please visit:  https://youtu.be/hmM_5hu5lPE)

The bluesy tones of an Elvis impersonator greeted curious parents, grandparents and neighbors arriving to take the 2015 Methacton post prom walk-through tour as they were greeted by student tour guides and school board director Cathleen Barone, and given some history on this community tradition, now in its sixteenth year. Superintendent Zerbe was also in line early to get a peek at the ambiance.

In past years I’ve written about what a wonderful program post-prom is and how successful it’s been in keeping juniors and seniors safe after prom. My own son has been out of Methacton a couple of years now and he still wishes he could attend post-prom – that’s how fun it is and what a great reputation it has among students.

I’m adding a few photos here but for lots more pictures (set to music, too!) as to the decorations accompanying this year’s theme, go to https://youtu.be/hmM_5hu5lPE.  This year’s theme – “Rock the Halls” – had substantial assistance from the Arcola music teachers, and a Worcester Township resident donated the use of a vintage 1912 Harley-Davidson motorcycle for the Methacton version of Hard Rock Café. The Café will feature student performers throughout the night and is a coffee-house style setting in which kids can relax.

As always, each of the elementary schools adopts a bathroom and selects a theme in which to outfit it. This year’s themes are Elvis/Blue Hawaii, Katy Perry, Pink Floyd/The Wall and a Jimmy Buffett beachy theme.

In addition to the stunning décor, students have a variety of choices to pass the time all night, from inflatable activities to mechanical bull riding, a faux casino, games like ping pong, foosball, billiards, and air hockey, lazer tag, dodgeball and volleyball tournaments,  to movies in a theater-like setting (this year’s showings include Footloose, The Great Gatsby, and Step Up).  The “cash cab” of the last few years gives way to “Rockin’ Rollercoaster” this year (but functions essentially the same, as a roving trivia contest with cash prizes). Also new this year is a Family Feud game show.

Ah yes, the prizes are a big reason the kids stay. They have chances to win serious electronics (iPads, laptops, iPods, flat screen TVs), concert and sports tickets, and gift certificates for staying the night, and thanks to many generous local food donors, the kids are well fed and exhausted when they leave at 6 am.

Also new this year was a drug and alcohol awareness counter featuring not only information on the perils of a variety of substances but a backdrop of large photos and names of Methacton and local community students who have passed in recent years due to overdoses or alcohol-related accidents or other drug-related situations, to remind kids that these things can and do happen to people just like them, or perhaps to people they know. School director Kim Woodring helped staff this display.

A small army of approximately 400 people works all year to pull together the theme, decorations, food, finances, and all the myriad details that go into putting such a huge event together. This year as many students graduate and move and parent turnover occurs, post-prom is looking for new volunteers to take on leadership positions for Post Prom 2016. Please consider stepping up to chair a committee or help out behind the scenes, or on the magical evening itself, providing security, working as a casino dealer, helping with trike races or in some other capacity. You’ll have fun too and make new (and talented!) friends.

For more information contact Dana Reddington (danareddington@gmail.com), Kim Beam (kimberleebeam@hotmail.com) or Karen Kilgour (khgilgour@gmail.com).

 

 

School Daze

Parents in two elementary school communities within the Methacton School Dstrict are in an uproar following a school board announcement at their February 3, 2015 meeting that they have reviewed recent enrollment and capacity studies they commissioned from the Pennsylvania Economy League (PEL), an education consultant, and will hold public hearings to consider closing two schools.

The PEL reports, which cost $18,000 in consulting fees, provided key findings, including the observations about our dropping enrollment rate, along with the recommendation that Methacton evaluate the potential closing of Arrowhead and/or Audubon Elementary schools for the 2015-2016 school year (and, presumably, for the foreseeable future beyond that, since the enrollment trend is expected to continue downward over the next decade) in order to cut costs and best use its resources. According to the reports, Arrowhead and Audubon face the highest costs of recommended repairs and updating to ADA code.

No serious public outcry came about until the February 3 meeting, in which the capacity study piece was presented along with its findings and recommendations. It was at this meeting that the Board voted practically unanimously (one member was absent) to begin the process of considering the closure of the two schools.  No parents were at the meeting to protest that decision.

As word spread among the parents of children attending both Audubon and Arrowhead that the school board was taking this recommendation seriously and had scheduled public hearings about it, disbelief and anger quickly galvanized into action as parent and civic groups at each school organized to voice their displeasure and to attempt to convince the school board members to reverse one or both proposed closures at the February 23, 2015 (and potentially February 25) public hearing.

But for those looking to assign blame for why shutting these schools down may have to happen, we need to look back in time, before the current board was seated. Some parents are blaming the focus and funding being expended on turf fields and lights, and that may or may not be true, but there is more to it than that.

A handful of concerned citizens from both Lower Providence and Worcester Townships tried, since circa 2005-2006 when the concept and plans for the new 5-6 school began to solidify, to sound the alarm that enrollment trends were already trending down, contrary to the assertions of the Methacton School Board seated at the time the vote was taken to build it*.  And, further, that trend did not support the construction of the Grade 5-6 school eventually named “Skyview Upper Elementary School” nor the approximately $50+ million (across three bonds) in debt the District incurred to build it.  This is debt for which the District doesn’t even begin to start paying down principal until 2018. In fact, we can’t even attempt to refinance the first one until 2018.

The District based future enrollment projections back then on a previously projected population for the then-current year, even after the actual population for the current year was known to be less than that estimated value. Thus, the school district is left with growing consequences of long-term overspending across several different Methacton school boards that only continues to grow.

While belated vindication may be sweet for the residents who expressed concern back then, given that their assertions were borne out with the passage of time, their contention now is that the Skyview project and related soft costs are arguably the primary reason why the closure of two elementary schools is now up for consideration. They say residents were lied to in order to get Skyview built, and told enrollment was trending upward in order to justify the spend. Now, Skyview is at 75% of capacity and can absorb some of the elementary school students.

Meanwhile, as Facebook pages have sprung up (Save Arrowhead School, Save Audubon School), yard signs and unity tee shirts are being ordered, and parents at these schools are mobilizing their forces, I can’t help but wonder if people were paying more attention to those sounding the alarm back then, and perhaps doing some of their own homework on the issue, it’s possible this expenditure would never have happened and this conversation would not be necessary now.  Each elementary would have been spruced up and life would have gone on – and we’d be in much better position to be able to pay for things like turf fields and teacher’s contracts today without the specter of raising taxes.

Total District enrollment when Skyview was built was at 5338 students and expected to climb to 6500 students. That never panned out - we’re at approximately 4974 now and enrollment has dropped every year for the past seven years. The PEL reports give compelling justification for the downward trends that jives with what I know to be true about what’s going on in each of the member townships as far as development projects and demographic trends is concerned.

Perhaps we should try to get our money back from the consultant used to come up with those terribly flawed projections (EI Associates, in combination with enrollment projections the school board developed internally at the time). It’s also worth noting that Methacton’s superintendent at the time, Dr. Jeffrey Miller, listed EI Associates as one of his sources of income on ethics reports filed at the time.

Even if you buy that alleged crowding at the elementary schools at the time warranted a new school, we were already getting by with modular units at some of the schools and the need for that temporary flex space would have gone away. When enrollments dropped, we could have eliminated the lease cost of the modulars and be done with it, instead of paying long-term for a significantly empty "upper elementary" 5-6 school.

For example, Worcester resident Dr. James Mollick** put together a nearly 70 page document (Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3 ) with supporting facts and data for school board review as to why they should not approve the 5-6 school. He was ignored, laughed at, mocked, and called a ‘kook’. **

However, the PA Dept. of Education took Mollick’s concerns seriously and on the basis of a complaint filed by Mollick which included that same document, voided Methacton’s original submission based on problems with Attachment C of Methacton’s application (which included details such as enrollment and capacity projections). The school district was forced to reapply as a result.

John Andrews of Lower Providence, a former, actual rocket scientist for GE / Lockheed-Martin who worked on NASA projects (a graduate of Princeton and MIT) and a master at compiling and analyzing data, has appeared at practically every single school board meeting over the past ten years, many of which were spent attempting to get the Board to understand that Skyview was not needed and was an expense the school district could ill afford. He ran his own enrollment data (which he has updated frequently and provided to the school board regularly over the years) which was in direct contravention to those provided by the school board at the time. In March, 2008, Andrews was quoted by the Times Herald as calling Methacton’s enrollment projections “unreliable and fictitious”.

Mr. Andrews has also been treated with a degree of derision over the years by various board members (for this as well as other matters he has spoken out about). The PEL report has largely validated Mr. Andrews’ projections at the time and since.

Candy Allebach, another LP resident whose property is adjacent to Skyview/Arcola, has been very vocal over the years and quoted often in the press questioning the school district on various matters, but most particularly related to opposing the construction of Skyview – from the cost, to the validity of the enrollment numbers proffered by the Board at the time to justify it, and to the traffic impacts an additional facility would bring to Eagleview Road.

I’ve seen and heard a lot of angst about class sizes since this story broke. Personally, not only am I a Methacton alumni but I put two kids of my own through the District. As part of the ‘Baby Boom’ generation, it wasn’t unusual when I attended Woodland, Arcola or Methacton to have as many as 35 kids in a class. The vast majority of us turned out just fine and are upstanding, productive citizens contributing to society. Many of my teacher friends tell me that times have changed substantially in recent years such that a large number of kids are on IEPs – so they are hardly being lost in the shuffle regardless of class size.

Ideally, we’d love smaller classes and more individualized attention; turf fields and all kinds of bells and whistles. The reality is, just like with our household budgets, we can’t afford everything we think our kids deserve.  We elect people to help figure out what should be prioritized when it comes time to make tough decisions. We’re in a tough economy and education is heavily regulated with many mandatory spends. There’s not a lot of wiggle room, even in a budget that’s a tenth of a billion bucks.

Bottom line, our residents have been misled in the past. We had a board led by several people who stayed on for years, and considering that there has been a history of 30+ straight years of tax increases, they were spending boards. Several current board members, along with some of those prior board members – are still trying to silence the voices of those who were outraged at the unnecessary spending to build Skyview, saying ‘that’s in the past’. Well, perhaps, but it’s relevant because residents were misled in the past, significant money was spent that arguably didn’t need to be, and it’s an important part of understanding what we are dealing with in the present.

More troubling, several of the individuals who served on the ‘Skyview board’ are still active behind the scenes in selecting and mentoring future school board candidates and helping to shepherd them through the election process. A positive consequence of the proposed school closing announcement has been an increase in the number of folks looking to run for school board in the May 2015 primary. Fresh faces may well be in order.

In recent years, our school board has already trimmed any low-hanging fruit: T1 classes have been eliminated, after-school late buses have been eliminated…then ALL our buses were eliminated when transportation was turned over to First Student, along with our fleet. The cafeteria workers were furloughed and Aramark brought into replace them. And in that time, so far, teacher salaries and pensions have NOT been touched. If schools are not closed, serious cuts will need to be negotiated there.

While money certainly isn’t the only consideration when evaluating closing schools or redistricting, here’s what we save if we do this…the approximate $11M in school refurbishments to correct deficiencies at the neediest two facilities identified in the study, Audubon and Arrowhead. If you take the average cost per square foot to do so noted in the study ($200 per square foot, and multiply it by the 55,000 square feet total between the two schools) you arrive at the $11M number. On top of that, there are savings to be had in teacher salaries and pensions and in the costs of keeping two extra facilities open, heated, lit and operating each year.

We’re at critical mass – mandatory PSERs (Public School Employees’ Retirement System) debt/increases to the tune of $12M is on the horizon beginning in the next two years, which Methacton is obligated by law to fund, and that will only continue to grow going forward. A new teacher’s contract will need to be negotiated as well. Room in the budget needs to be made to accommodate these.

In the alternative, should the school board raise your taxes 15-20%, driving our tax base right out of the school district, or is there something else we can do about it so we don’t have to take that step? We all know that if put to a referendum vote, such a huge tax increase will never pass, which is why school districts generally avoid the kinds of tax hikes that by law have to go up for referendum.

What else should be cut to accommodate keeping these schools open?  Contrary to what some politicians would have you believe, there is no infinite supply of money. Even lobbying the Commonwealth for more money, like Philadelphia does, still results in more money coming out of each of our residents’ pockets to support this, at a time when cries for property tax reform are growing louder in Harrisburg. Any funds that come from the state are obtained from taxpayers first…the same taxpayer pool paying local taxes too. People are tapped out, especially our seniors on fixed incomes. 

We’ve redistricted several times over the past thirty years, as have many other school districts, and I don’t believe anyone has suffered dire, life-changing consequences or loss of quality of life as a result.

It is long past time for the adults in the room to stand up and come clean with parents.  The public has finally been told the truth:  enrollment is down, and there is too much capacity at Skyview. Anyone who wanted to expose what was going on before Skyview was constructed, and disagreed with the need for it, was shut down, disparaged and silenced.

I applaud the current board for having the courage to have the hard conversation now and for having the fortitude to consider making very difficult, unpopular choices NOW to avoid even more difficult, unpopular choices later

Notes:

*school board members at that time were: Jim Van Horn, Joyce Petrauskas, Marijane Barbone, Michael Simeone, Dan Sattler, Ted Chylack, William Kazimer, John Lynch and Wilson Bohanak.

The first five voted to build Skyview; the last three voted against. Chylack was absent for the vote.
Shortly after that vote was another election;  some of the individual members changed and voted on subsequent items such as putting it out for bid etc. It was during this time that disgraced and departed former superintendent Quinn was hired.

**I note with a bit of hilarity the schadenfreude  - and delicious irony - going on over at neighboring local community blog, www.worcesterpapolitics.org , which, while anonymous, is rumored to be authored by David Brooks, the spouse of Worcester supervisor Susan Caughlan, and/or Art Bustard, and/or John Harris, recently of child pornography arrest fame. Dr. Mollick is a frequent subject of attacks on the site, primarily for daring to question them about anything.

Worcester Township and Dr. Mollick have been at odds for several years over a number of issues, so there’s no love lost between them, but since Worcester Township is also locked in combat these days with Methacton over (primarily) the stadium lights issue, and thus happily taking shots at Methacton of late, they begrudgingly admit – without naming him, of course – that Dr. Mollick was one of those who was right to sound the alarm about enrollment and Skyview, noting “At the time, several residents complained at public meetings about these projections, but their complaints were ignored”. How it must kill them to realize that the one person who consistently calls them out on their shenanigans was right about Skyview.

 Links:

"Dozen Methacton School Board Hopefuls Slated to Appear at Candidates Forum" - April 2007
"Space Occupies [Methacton Candidate] Forum" - May 2007
"Slim OK to Seek Bids for 5-6 School" - March 2008
"Board OKs bids for 5-6 School" - May 2008
"Skyview Construction on Schedule" - June 2009
"Is Methacton Really Growing?" - August 2014
"Without Change, Methacton to See $12M Deficit by 2019" - September 2014
"Methacton's Enrollment Study Shows Continued Declines in Student Populations Over Coming Decade" - January 2015

See You In Court

Some of you may recall a 2007 incident that resulted in then-current Methacton School Board president (and LP resident) James Van Horn stepping down from that post in December of that year. While he remained on the school board until the end of his term, he did not run for re-election in 2009. That incident can be viewed below:

 

Worcester resident Dr. James Mollick was filming a school board meeting, as he was frequently known to do and which is perfectly legal. According to published reports at the time ("Van Horn to Face Charges", Times Herald 12-14-07,  "Van Horn Pleads to Lesser Charge", Times Herald 3-14-08 and "Methacton School Board Meeting Incident", Times Herald 2007), when Van Horn noticed Mollick still filming after the conclusion of the meeting, he left the dias and charged toward Mollick, allegedly assaulting him in front of several witnesses; Mollick wound up being thrown over a couple of rows of seats in the audience. Van Horn has claimed ever since that he was going after the camera, not Mollick, and claimed at the time he was never charged with assault, but Mollick wound up with what are apparently serious injuries.

 Originally charged with harassment, Van Horn plead guilty to a disorderly conduct charge in 2008 and paid a fine , but the civil suit Mollick filed against him and Methacton School District in 2008 is still ongoing six years later. Methacton’s two insurance carriers requested in May 2013 to intervene and apparently all attempts to arrive at a negotiated settlement fell short. After years of delays, the case is headed for trial, scheduled to begin on May 5.

 An elected Republican committeeman (in a section of Audubon) and the current municipal leader of the Lower Providence Republican Party, he is currently running for re-election in the May 20 primary.

Van Horn, second from right

 Van Horn, who earned something of a reputation as a bully based on accounts I’ve heard from numerous colleagues and adversaries over his 20 year tenure on the school board (one of whom resigned over this), is still believed to have wielded considerable influence with subsequent (and the current) school board. I have personally observed how Van Horn gets wrapped up in the selection and promotion of school board candidates – to the exclusion of almost all else. I and other candidates for local offices in recent years have been somewhat annoyed that his almost-exclusive focus on school board races has resulted in non-school board candidates’ campaigns being virtually ignored.

Sources who wish to remain anonymous tell me that the parties are ‘miles apart’ from settling, and thus the trial is expected to be a go. Van Horn is evidently sticking to his guns and confident that by rolling the dice in court he will prevail against Mollick. I’m told Mollick’s career as an OB-GYN has come to a standstill ever since the incident in which he alleges he sustained serious and career-ending injuries.

 The records were sealed early on in an effort to protect Mollick’s tax and professional information, but voir dire rules for jury selection are being hashed out now and jury empanelment will begin May 2 in the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas in Judge Kelly Walls’ courtroom.

UPDATE: As I was drafting this, I called the judge’s clerk to get an estimate of how long the trial was expected to last. I was advised that the case was believed to have reached settlement today (5/1) , although nothing formal had been received by the Court as of 4 pm. I was able to confirm later that the case had indeed settled for an undisclosed amount. 

The extensive case docket reveals a flurry of activity in the last couple of days on several dozen pending motions, and several orders were handed down which appear to have been detrimental to Van Horn’s defense. Several others were deferred to be dealt with at trial instead of being dismissed outright. Again, the pleadings are sealed, so I can’t tell for sure, but perhaps Van Horn saw the handwriting on the wall and decided not to take his chances with a jury.  

Of course, we will likely never know how much the parties agreed to settle for, and it’s typical in personal injury litigation to keep such information confidential. But the bigger questions are: how much did Methacton School District have to spend in legal fees to defend their former school board president over those six years - I've heard upwards of $100,000, but don't quote me on that -, and how much of the settlement exceeds their insurance coverage limits and must be paid out of pocket? How much of that will we taxpayers be paying for next year in the form of a tax increase?

In the meantime, if Van Horn hopes to remain active in local government and politics, perhaps he might want to invest in an anger management class.

 

 

 

 

The Young And The Restless

Updated 12/7/12 8:04 am

Fox 29 reporter Jeff Cole filed an update segment earlier this evening (here). The Methacton School Board is next scheduled to meet later today, at 7:30 pm.

****************************
It's doubtful that even much-revered Methacton Community Theater could conjure up the kind of drama our school district has been generating in recent months and years, but you can bet that anything for which they produce and sell tickets is a work of fiction.

Unfortunately, truth is often stranger than fiction at our local school district, which serves both Lower Providence and Worcester Townships. Between the news in August that a 43 year old teacher (Sean McCullough) has been having an inappropriate relationship with a 17 year old student, to the prom drinking incident a couple years ago, to the controversy over the need for and costs of the turf fields and lights, to the former school board member going after a resident and/or his camera (depending whose version of that incident you believe) in a public meeting, you have to wonder what the next chapter at Methacton will bring.  

By now you've probably seen or heard about the Fox 29 investigative report (here) about controversial Methacton superintendent Timothy Quinn and their allegations that Quinn and a colleague, former English teacher Diane Barrie, have been conducting an extramarital relationship at work, on taxpayer-paid time, using taxpayer-paid equipment (cellphones, computers etc). The story also mentions pervasive rumours I've been hearing ever since Quinn landed here about past similar behavior during his tenure with at least one and potentially two other school districts, information at least one Worcester resident tried to no avail to bring to the school board's attention at the time. More information is available here.

It's unclear exactly how the story came to light. Did one of the betrayed spouses trip over the digital evidence and make sure it found the light of day, hoping for revenge or to gain leverage in an eventual divorce proceeding? (Since the Fox investigation began, I have confirmed that both couples have filed to dissolve their marriage; the Barries filed in late October of this year). Or did a disgruntled school district employee out the couple? The reporter had copies of emails evidencing intimate conversations between the two, and presumably only a small circle of people would have had access to any place those conversations could have been viewed.  Not that it matters in the grand scheme of things, but the source of the emails could put the allegations into perspective and lend to - or detract from - the credibility of the story. 


While cheating on one's spouse in the workplace is hardly a new phenomenon, neither is sending the occasional personal email from a work account, during the work day, and/or on employer-owned piece of equipment. You can discuss amongst yourselves whether or not evidence of an extramarital affair conducted by publicly paid employees on public time, using publicly paid for equipment, is worthy of scorn, especially when you consider that Quinn is alleged to have conducted himself similarly in past positions. I do know it's not behavior that a number of residents want to see from publicly paid employees during the days when their children and grandchildren are entrusted to their care, and it's certainly nothing that's considered setting a good example for our students to emulate in their adult lives. Arguably, those in public positions should conduct themselves according to a higher standard than most.

I do, however, believe there's a bigger issue here, one that Fox 29 reporter Jeff Cole seems to me to miss taking a deeper dive on, and that is, how and why exactly did Mrs. Barrie get the position she now holds?    

Now, I have met Mrs. Barrie. My son had her for English a few years back and she seems to be a nice lady. However, she has had a rapid and recent rise in title and salary.  She went from K-12 Reading/Title I and K-8 English/ILA Coordinator (after working at Arcola for 14 years as a 7th grade English teacher at Arcola) to being appointed to Acting Coordinator of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment on June 21, 2011 when the school board approved a change of status for her; the promotion was to be effective almost six months later, on December 12, 2011. With the promotion to acting coordinator, she was given an additional stipend of $2,500.

In April of this year, the school board approved a change of status from Acting Coordinator of Curriculum and Instruction to Director of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment, the position she now holds. This promotion was effective June 18, 2012 and carries a salary of $103,500.  

My understanding is that Mrs. Barrie's promotion was intended to be a replacement of sorts for the retirement of assistant superintendent Jane Martin, who retired effective February 17, 2012 (her retirement was accepted at the May 24, 2011 school board meeting).

In this and her 'acting' position, she reports directly to Quinn...and therein lies the rub (no pun intended). Did she receive her promotion because of her apparent personal relationship with Quinn? Were other candidates discriminated against because they did not enjoy a similar relationship? Could this revelation impact the disposition and potential damages paid out in other pending cases against the school district? Methacton has at least one current lawsuit against them alleging discrimination (Lena Sampson v. Methacton School District, filed in July 2011); Ms. Sampson is a former acting principal at Arcola who alleges discrimination and harrassment by Quinn due to a disability (more here); there have been others.

I don't know if Methacton has a policy against their (single) employees dating each other, but in the nonpublic employee world, dating your boss or subordinates is pretty much universally prohibited, if for no other reason than it tends to give rise to sexual harrassment claims. If it's not prohibited outright, it's generally not considered a smart career move for all kinds of reasons, not the least of which is what happens when you break up, although a surprising number of people meet their spouses in the workplace. For employees who are married to other people, well, I should think all of this would go without saying.

In the course of my political activities, I hear lots of complaints about Methacton School District in general and Quinn himself has not escaped criticism; I am aware that he's generally not well liked, and sources tell me there are even school board members that are not fond of him or stunts he's pulled recently.

A recent example given was that Quinn decided to appear before Lower Providence's Zoning Hearing Board alone, without counsel and apparently without authorization of the school board, back in June of this year, in case # Z12-02,  to seek variances for a 9' 9"x6' digital sign at Arcola, something that is not advisable given the hurdles one has to overcome to get a variance or other considerations approved and which are best navigated by an attorney. The ZHB denied the superintendent's request, and in September 2012 Quinn, allegedly without school board authorization, had school district counsel file an appeal against the Township in the Court of Common Pleas (docket #2012-24145, filed September 7, 2012). A search of school board minutes didn't turn up anything authorizing counsel to commence any court actions in this matter.

In addition to his apparent pursuit of 'afternoon delight', Quinn has evidently forgotten that he works at the pleasure of the school board, who work at the pleasure of the voters who elected them, and all are ultimately answerable to those voters. Quinn has no business playing footsie on the clock or going rogue on legal matters and should be held accountable, not given pay raises and contract extensions.

Yet inexplicably, in 2010 the school board not only opened up the superintendent's three-year employment contract a year early and handed him a raise, but they also gave him another 2% raise in July of this year. He currently earns approximately $175,000 a year plus benefits and bonus; Ms. Barrie, as I mentioned above, earns $103,500 plus benefits. Not that Mrs. Barrie's behavior is excusable, but she is the subordinate employee here.  

Am I the only one who recalls the fateful and tragic personal relationship in the 1979-1980 timeframe at Upper Merion High School involving principal Jay Smith and teachers William Bradfield and Susan Reinert? Reinert wound up dead, her children have never been found, and Smith and Bradfield did time in the slammer. Books were written and movies were made about the case. If ever there was a textbook cautionary tale against love and romance in an educational institution, that was it.

The next time Methacton wants to hit you up for more tax dollars, think about what these people earn and what they're doing all day, and also consider how much it costs every time the school district incurs legal fees to defend itself when scandals arise (two, count 'em TWO special counsel law firms were hired by Methacton in November to handle whatever legal issues arise from 'affair gate'). My understanding is that normally, the superintendent would investigate the claims and special counsel would represent the school district. In this instance, since the superintendent himself is the subject of the controversy, a second firm must be retained to do the investigation piece. Information from the Methacton School Board's official press release on the matter appears here. 

Are Methacton taxpayers getting their money's worth? It seems to me that the student dress code is the last thing the school board should be concerned with at the moment. 

Start showing up at school board meetings, communicating with your school board, and tell them you prefer drama and scandals be left to thespians, not school administrators and employees who apparently are "acting" the role of professionals instead of taking their responsibilties seriously.   

 

Thanks, But No Thanks

At any given time, there are residents who have a bone to pick with our elected township supervisors. Disgruntled residents file into the township building for any number of reasons, large and small, some legitimate concerns, others from people who complain about everything under the sun in general. That comes with trying to govern a community the size of, say, Lower Providence, with approximately 26,000 residents. There are bound to be problems, disagreements and mistakes made that need to be fixed. But, overall, I think Lower Providence is well managed by a terrific township manager in Joe Dunbar, an excellent staff of professionals at the top of their game, and five supervisors that more often than not make good decisions. We have, over the past few years, become a benchmark against which other townships measure themselves, progressive, proactive, and a leader among our local communities. We are, usually, at least a step ahead of everyone else.

 Imagine, for a moment, if that entity were gone or, worse, overruled and hamstrung by politics and government at the county level. We all read the paper. We know how dysfunctional that’s turned out to be. Think that’ll never happen?

Think again. It is a real possibility. Democrat Rep. Tom Caltagirone of Berks County recently introduced HB 2431 (link: http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2009&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=2431&pn=3570), which calls for a constitutional amendment to make the county the basic level of government. This radical plan would drastically change how we are governed, as it calls for elimination of townships, cities and boroughs, leaving the county to oversee all municipal functions such as land use and zoning, trash removal, police, park maintenance, road repairs etc. that townships like Lower Providence perform now. It would also determine what if any duties local municipal officials would perform.

And, counties would presumably be in charge of determining and reaping the rewards of all municipalities’ property and local taxes, including earned income tax, water and sewage fees and, also presumably, disbursement of same back into the communities within its borders. But what’s to say it would be disbursed equitably or fairly?

 Given the 3-ring circus that constitutes the Montgomery County commissioners’ office these days, about the scariest thing I can think of is the ‘dynamic duo’ of Jim Matthews and Joe Hoeffel calling the shots that affect us, and running the day-to-day operations of Lower Providence. It’s tough enough to weigh the concerns of Audubon versus those of the residents of Trooper, but just imagine where we might fall in the bigger picture, as commissioners weigh the concerns of a Lower Providence against those of Narberth, Worcester, Abington, or any of the other of the 62 municipalities that comprise Montgomery County.

 How would we like it if the county planned to put a sewage treatment plant in your neighborhood, and you had no local government to seek recourse from? Oh, wait, we’re already sort of ‘there’, what with a regional authority, the Lower Perkiomen Valley Regional Sewer Authority, trying to jam a sewer interceptor project here, but at least residents have been able to get their local supervisors engaged to fight it. I can’t imagine where something like this would fall on the County’s list of “things to do”.

 As much as I dislike the whole idea, I think a municipality should, at least, be given the option of voting on a referendum to eliminate their local government and ‘opt in’ to this county option if they desire. To have it forced on local governments and their residents doesn’t make sense. I mean, where would it stop? Why not dissolve the states? Why not let the UN govern everything and dissolve countries? Absurd, of course, and this is, too.

 I hope that Rep. Caltagirone meant well. Certainly there are likely duplications of service and the potential for savings and efficiencies due to economies of scale in areas like sourcing and human resources, for example. Not that consolidating power is any guarantee that those efficiencies will be realized. All you have to do is look at any Federal government agency to see how bigger = waste and inefficiency. No, this seems much more like a blatant power grab by Democrats, especially when you consider that all of the bill’s sponsors are Democrats, and one is from Allegheny County (Pittsburgh) and another is from Philadelphia. Philadelphia, by the way, is listed as an exception to this bill. It would not have to worry about being governed by Philadelphia County.

 In my opinion, consolidating power is not necessary, especially when our local County government seems to be a never-ending episode of a bad soap opera, rife with obvious conflicts of interest and violating its own rules such as those governing how contracts are bid and awarded. The more local the government, the greater the opportunity of having an impact in your own community. Only local governments such as what exists already are the most accountable to their constituents and most committed to keeping the spending and taxation of their constituents – many of whom they know personally, and run into regularly at the gas station or grocery store – in check.

Consider contacting your local state rep (Rep. Vereb or Drucker, depending on where you live in Lower Providence) to tell them how you feel about HB 2431.

In the Light of Day

In case you haven’t yet heard, Methacton School District is holding a rare daytime meeting for residents on Friday, June 4 at 11 am in the large group instruction room at the high school to present an outline of the 2010-2011 proposed budget and to take questions about it.

Dr. Timothy Quinn, Methacton’s Superintendent of Schools, said in a press release that ‘members of the community expressed interest’ in a daytime meeting for those who have otherwise been unable to participate in the budget process via other electronic means or at the evening meetings until now. While I applaud this latest step toward more transparency and responsiveness, it’s not entirely as proactive as the press release would make it seem.

The school district only considered such a meeting because a Worcester resident collected petitions in both Worcester and Lower Providence from primarily senior citizens (who shoulder a significant chunk of the tax increases on fixed incomes), requesting that they be so accommodated. Nevertheless, it’s yet another opportunity for our residents to have input and dialogue with the governing body that is, to date, solely responsible for increases in your property tax bill.

There are a lot of numbers being tossed around, but the bottom line as it stands right now, with the cuts proposed to date, is that the average tax bill for Lower Providence househoulds will rise $235.08 for the year – primarily to pay down the debt load on the new Skyview middle school (and to staff it) slated to open later this year. That’s bad enough by itself, but don’t forget, caps on electricity are set to be removed in January 2011, causing electric rates to rise approximately 40%. Our seniors in particular are understandably very concerned, since their incomes are not rising at commensurate rates (heck, my salary isn’t either).

When it comes to Methacton Education Association (MEA), my understanding is that the proposed budget numbers only include what the school district has already offered to the teachers. A question I hope somebody asks is what they plan to do if the teachers keep asking for more, and strike until they get it. Where in the budget would that money come from?

As for that issue, I’m told that the school district and MEA are supposed to be negotiating today, June 2, as I write this, and that they will stay at the bargaining table up to twelve hours. Hopefully, today’s session will shed more light on the status of our budget for Friday’s meeting. I highly suggest you try to make it to that meeting and be heard if you have issues. Final budget approval is slated for the June 22 school board meeting.


For more information, check out the Methacton School District’s website at www.methacton.org.