Physics inspired art at LVC

From the Lebanon Valley College website today:

"Carol Brown Goldberg, who draws her inspiration from physics, will exhibit her abstract paintings at the Suzanne H. Arnold Art Gallery at Lebanon Valley College early in 2010. Carol Brown Goldberg: Aura and the Implicate Order will be on display from Jan.15 through Feb. 21. Goldberg’s works explore the relationship between color, shape, movement, and space. Comprised of grids of colored circles, her large canvases draw the viewer’s eye through and beyond the rhythm of the receding circles.

“Physics is inspiration, my muse,” she writes on her website. “Quantum particles of hadrons, mesons, bosons, and fermions, anthropomorphized by me, dance across the cosmic space of my canvas.” Her broad spectrums of colors, executed in acrylic, are intensified by the pulverized glass that Goldberg adds to her pigments, creating an effect that she compares to the twinkling cosmos at night. "...

"Gallery hours are Wednesdays from 5 to 8 p.m.; Thursdays and Fridays from 1 to 4:30 p.m.; Saturdays and Sundays from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m.; and by appointment for groups. Schools and other groups are encouraged to contact the Gallery at 717-867-6445 or mailto:detweile@lvc.edu for a guided tour."

Check her out at http://www.lvc.edu/News/index.aspx?newsid=613a4763-7178-4f42-adbe-2aac02f763a6&HeadLine=Physics%20Inspires%20the%20Paintings%20of%20the%20Renowned%20Artist%20Carol%20Brown%20Goldberg;%20Show%20Opens%20in%20January

Another driver loses control of vehicle in Gretna

Surely the rest of you have not missed seeing the demolished rock monument and game land sign that used to be posted on 117 as you enter Mt. Gretna from Mt. Wilson Rd.? So it is, another driver lost control of his vehicle and completely destroyed the Game Land sign and monument (yes, a rock monument). Who is claiming that one...bet that black vehicle was totaled by the insurance provider.

Seems like there STILL is a very serious problem here--a problem that is not corrected by lashing out at one or two vocal residents. And, it seems like that problem has been complained about for many years by many others. Just read this excerpt from a Groce newsletter, Feb. 2006:

""""TEN TOPICS ON MT. GRETNA TONGUES THIS WINTER...

Topic No. 10: Did I see speed checks, using honest-to-goodness chase cars, in Mt. Gretna several times last week? Indeed you did. Cornwall Borough police say they’ve received complaints about trucks, cars and motorcycles speeding through town along Rte. 117, especially during mornings and late afternoons. “We’ll continue to conduct those checks at unannounced times and places,” says Chief Bruce Harris.""""

So, again, I have to ask, why won't Harris, Allwein, Care, et alia respond to the more recent complaints, and, why didn't Harris continue these "unannounced" checks?

Can it it be, Toto, that hypocrisy and failure to perform their public duties have infected their better judgment? What exactly are they trying prove? This problem/concern hasn't changed, except that its gotten worse. Trust me, fate will give you what you are asking for, Bill, Chuck, and Bruce--unfettered speeding on a road chock full of vulnerable people, all year long.

Again, exactly what point are you trying to prove, guys?

Show your compassion during the holiday season

This little bloke spent the two days before the snow wandering about SR 117. He is a very gentle boy, friendly with other dogs, cats, and humans. He was cold, hungry, and had bloody paws, yet he still was wagging his tail at a smile and a hug.

He is at the Humane Shelter (on Ramona Rd. in Myerstown), and his number is 5889. He would be very happy to have a warm home for Christmas and to start the new year off with a family that loves him.

They open at 11am (closed Mondays). Their phone number is 717-273-3300.

I obviously can't provide this abandoned companion animal with any support since Care has already been on the prowl for a few months now, looking for the opportunity to drum up a few more "charges" to bring against my wife and I--including animal welfare charges. Personally, I feel that since a "critical mass" number of the residents here are not "peer pressuring" him into acting more civilized towards the person that is asking for accountablility in our public officials, the rest of you should pony up to take responsibility for the situation that your acquiesence has created: get together and find this Mt. Gretna stray a nice home, since my generosity towards the Creator's other gifts will only be used against me in this community.

Mr. Treasurer, a question for you...

Are you asking us to believe that the audits are being done without the use of digital templates, and that you are not able to provide the public with a digital copy--perhaps for the price of a CD/DVD? Or even just provide a link to it on the entity's website?

Jeese, are we really in the stone age here still?

Safety and Quality of Life in Mt. Gretna

After witnessing various town officials ignore several residents' complaints related to the quality of life here in Mt.Gretna, I decided to measure and record certain aspects of what those complaints were about. So, I purchased a radar gun with a big digital display and set it up in the front yard. I also positoned the video recorder to record the readouts as vehicles drove through Mt. Gretna on 117.

The usual findings are that the largest majority of drivers on this road travel at well over the speed limit--even 50mph is not unusual. And, this routine speeding happens even with Cornwall Police cruisers parked at the tennis courts or elsewhere in Mt. Gretna.

Here is a sampling of readouts from just a ten minute time span, recorded in early Sept. Again, remember, this is just a ten minute time frame--which means that there are hundreds of speeding vehicles blasting through Mt. Gretna in a week. And, remember, that on a prolific month of ticket writing for Cornwall P.D., they maybe issue one ticket--and, I have never seen that speed radar trailer actually IN Mt. Gretna or used for obtaining detailed speed data (as Chief Harris touted that it was capable of when the trailer was acquired).









There are even more pix like these from that time period--but I think the point is made...

Madelaine Gray show in Lebanon thru December

Friday night opened a showing of Madelaine Gray photos at the Gallery, in Lebanon. So it was a "two-fer" that night, as the town also organized a "First Friday Lebanon Art Walk."

The opening reception was splendid. Ms. Gray's work filled the place. The design and architecture of the Gallery and the art work complimented each other perfectly. And for those who found Friday a little too cold to walk the town, Niko's restaurant was just down the hallway from the Gallery.

For those looking for little get away from the holiday shopping, I suggest popping into the show for some food for your mind and creativity, and then into Niko's for food and spirits for the vessel. The Gallery is located at 31 South 8th St., 3rd floor--just park in the municipal parking lot in front of the farmers' market and use their stairs, in the rear of the building, to the third floor. And, check the gallery out online at www.lebanonpictureframe.com

Unfortunately, the next Lebanon Art Walk won't be until February.

who is paying

At the last Borough meeting, our solicitor, Keith Kilgore, described how he is requesting to look at individual residents' tax filings (for years 2004 through 2006, presumed) in the process of representing us in this EIT "over/under payment" settlement debate.

Since he, and his law firm partner, represent allegedly overpaid municipalities (our category) AND alleged underpaid municipalities in this discussion, I have three questions for him:

1. Is he charging us for his time spent requesting and reviewing those tax returns and associated documents?

2. And when he gleans information from reviewing those documents, how much of that is he going to share with the other municipalities--like the alleged underpaids that he or his law firm partner represent?

3. And what does he expect to learn that will really address this issue?

If Foltz was indeed embezzling EIT payments, he likely was pulling individual local tax filings as his office received them and absconding, in some way with the individual's payment--and destroying the actual filing. Which means that a review of even local filings for the period in question will likely show some filings missing. Maybe the individual DID file local EIT filings and someone took the file, or maybe the individual did NOT file at all. Either way, Kilgore is likely to find that even some Mt. Gretna residents have no local file in those Iron Mountain boxes. If he does find that, will he really "report" that to the appropriate authorities, no matter who it may be without a local file?

first snow winter 09/10

Although I haven't forgotten thanksgiving, I thought these pictures would be nice to share right now.If anyone wants to reprint or use them, just ask me.

Another new skill found

Last week I finished a new bathroom floor--grouting tile for the first time ever. I picked the materials and design, trying to support the existing--and very old, wall tile that remains, while giving them a little "pick-me-up".

It doesn't look like much without the fixtures, but here is the finished product.






I also got to rebuilding some dried but rotten trim. The front was fine, but sweat behind the piece had taken its toll and thinned it at the bottom. So I put this hardener on it and will fill it with wood epoxy before stripping and reinstalling it.

Mt. Gretna's Roosters

Seems as if last year's little abandoned cock as attracted quite a fraternity of fellow roosters. Every Saturday, for quite some time now, many of Mt. Gretna's informal and formal community leaders--apparently all white males, meet at the pizza shop for breakfast. And, so I have been told, to gossip and to talk politics.

I even heard that I have been the subject of their conversations on more than one occassion. However, the discussions center on whether or not I am really an attorney, and on how much of a "troublemaker" I am.

I found this all very flattering--its as if they find me and my words too powerful to actually engage me in the substance of these conversations. Its also as if they feel that they have no "weapons"--like contrary documents, with which to dialoque or confront my words with, so they have to try to tarnish my credibility.

This behavior of theirs' is very unfortunate, because the topics that I am presenting have very serious and often negative impacts on many of these roosters neighbors, if not themselves. So, I really can't see why they aren't expressing more concern about these questions and concerns that I am presenting, rather than worrying about whether or not I am really an attorney--like that would have anything to do with the topic at hand. Right?

So, that's why I showed them bar card on Saturday. And, I gave them copies of the documents I used to write my last post,and asked them for their input, possibly an explanation as to why Chautauqua accounts were transfered to a bank without FDIC insurance, and transfered on a motion by a treasurer that I think should have disclosed his personal relationship with that bank and recused himself from the vote. I haven't heard anything from them, yet.

So, let's hope that they can now refocus their collective resources and address the real issues at hand.
Namely, that over $900,000 flows through this community every year, yet our public officials still keep reaching deeper and deeper into our pockets to raise our taxes, fees, or assessments. And many of these "pockets" are on fixed incomes and have limited resources. That is probably what should certainly be the main concern when roosters discuss my comments on local politics or public officials.

Maybe they are concerned, but have let their "impulses" to "keep a woman in her place" take priority over dealing with possible political transgressions or issues. Still, why not just show me the flaws in my research or reasoning rather than spew personal judgments and petty opinions--we all deserve a robust and fully informed conversation on these topics. And I am sure the roosters have much to contribute substantively to the conversations.So, please, if you, Mr. Rooster, know of a flaw in my research or reasoning, please, please, bring it to the table for all to see.

Who is really watching where our money goes?

Does anyone know who the financial secretary and the treasurer is for the Sewer and Water Authority?

and for the Mt. Gretna Borough?

and for the Chautauqua?

and for the Art Show?

And who writes the checks that pays the bills for each of these entities?

Does anyone know how much revenue these bodies take in a year, combined?

and, do you know what their combined expenses are, annually and how much of a difference there is in those two numbers?

Does anyone know exactly how many staff the Borough has?

the water authority?

the sewer authority?

the Chautauqua?

More importantly, does anyone know exactly how many times we pay Bill Care for public works work here in our 87 acres? and how much is he paid for work in other locations, like at our neighbors...? Is he the Boro's public works director, and a director or consultant for a neighbor, for the Sewer Authority, for the Water Authority, for the Chautauqua? Just how many roles do he and Linda Bell have and how many times are they getting paid?


and how do we know that these entities are really separated when their contact information, leadership, and office location are all the same and the monies and checkbook are all controlled by the same persons? How do we know where our money is going--who can tell us with any sort of certainty and transparency?

Please feel free to make your anonymous responses to these questions.

But know that, according to my research, I can only find that three persons control the largest flow of money in and out of these 87 acres and that no one is really looking over their work. I also found that we have almost a MILLION bucks coming through here and only around $700,000 of it is accounted for in the budgets (when combined). Further, I have found no verification process for the tickets sold and cash received for the Art Show, which generates hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. I also have not been able to confirm what any entity has for staff (at council meetings, Care says the boro has 5 full time staff, on state documents, he says that the Sewer Authority has 5, just as an example), and thereby can not confirm labor expenses, benefits expenses, and "cost-sharing" arrangements--and I don't see how the auditor general--in determining public entities compliance with laws related to receipt of state funds, can really decipher these apparently undocumented "cost-sharing" arrangements, especially where the arrangements involve a private corporation like the Chautauqua.

I further can not imagine why a public official that handles almost a million dollars a year in public money--and who was the one handling taxes/revenue that the "borough" is accused of taking too much of, would take out well over $600,000 in mortgages since 2003, all secured by a house not nearly worth that amount, and from the same bank---AND pay $575,000 of those mortgages back in less than 18 months, as a routine, with the largest one taken and repaid that way being for $350,000. And, why would that official, or their spouse urge any of these entities to transfer the
entity's own accounts to this bank that has supplied them with mortgages exceeding the value of their home and that never exist longer than 18 months--especially when that bank does not provide FDIC depositor's insurance? If that official has a family member or friend working there, shouldn't that have been disclosed?

And, with all this sharing of costs and revenues, office space, staff and leadership that exists between allegedly separate entities, doesn't the legal distinction (and liability protection) fade away like piss in the katrina wind? Isn't this where someone shouts out, "Its like "piercing the corporate veil", or like getting a divorce judgment, and then moving back in with each other and comingling funds long enough to be judged common law spouses anyway?

To me, it strongly appears that all these separate entities within the 87 acres here really are intended to be a "paperwork" sham to cloud the money trail and to allow certain persons to benefit personally beyond their one full-time salary. Ergo, I can see why any one of these "gatekeepers", like Bill Care, would get nervous when I started poking around and asking questions back in January about our political infrastructure and money. I can also see, if there was misconduct involved, why they would want to try to scare or harass my partner and I into leaving Mt. Gretna. For those with lots to hide, it makes apparent sense that my persistence triggered a very serious tightening of the anal sphincter.

But, like with other residents requests, mine were also essentially ignored as if they never existed. Perhaps these officials think that if they create this dysfunctional denial pattern where they treat our inquiries as if they never happened, we all will carry on as if they never existed. This "false reality" gives explanation as to why somebody like Bill Care is shocked speechless by my partner's directness the day she went to him face to face and asked to know why the Cornwall Police refused to take our report on the off-duty Middletown police officer that "patrolled" our home and eventually came to our property to threaten and harass us. You see, Care responded to her by threatening us further, and she--being strongly aware that the conversation was really about his intent to harass us into leaving Mt. Gretna and our awareness of his intent, jumped right to replying that we would be more than happy to just sell our home to him--he doesn't have to threaten us, and that the Borough should just make an offer.

You see, its likely that he couldn't respond to that because, in his mind, he also knew the real context of his statements and he really had to think before saying something that confirmed the real context that was just admitted. Normally, if a person's underlying context of a conversation is innocent, they can respond almost immediately to apparent non-sequitors like that, saying something like, "What?"

See how simple that was. But, when you know your context is subversive or could get you into trouble, a statement by the other party that calls out your hidden context catches you like a sinkhole in your path. Thus, this behavior of his (along with statements made by other residents describing his conduct) shows me that he was committed--before my partner even showed up in his office, to a context of making her--and me, out to be criminals and threatening her based on that context. And this is the most likely reason why he wasn't ready to talk frankly about how to get rid of my inquisitiveness into his conduct as a public official.

But, even if he knows that I know what misconduct might be going on, he doesn't know the extent of my knowledge and therefore he can't risk offending me so much that he can't feign interested and innocent conversations with me--which he has done even after threatening my partner. He can also try to discover more information about me--information with which to further harass me and my family, through these conversations, and through soliciting information from other residents, the police, and even from me. Again, we may have a very naive and pure expectation of our community leaders, but we are smart enough to know about fishing and to know about about retaliation--and, having studied interview techniques and from representing alleged criminals, I certainly know how "guilty" people react and how they try to subversively protect and defend themselves.

One tactic is to try to tarnish the credibility of the "accuser" or the discoverer of misconduct. I mean really, public officials like Care don't accept how guilty it looks to organize, or even to participate in, throwing a whole slew of criminal allegations at perfectly upstanding middle-aged citizens with hardly a traffic ticket to their names--and to do so just as one of those citizen's research into those officials' public conduct has uncovered some very serious questions and concerns. And, don't they know that the more you do to cover your trail of misconduct and bad intentions, the more you give yourself away--and that certainly is true when you engage others in your retaliation towards the innocent citizen.

You see, for me, Care's behavior pretty much confirms that there is something very wrong going on here--and by targeting two upstanding middle-aged professional women who give in in-numerous ways to their community, he has let his "cat" out of the bag. I mean, really, what is the point--just show us where the money goes, show us all your own sources of income and possible conflicts, and make our lives safer by having traffic laws enforced. It is crystal clear to me that he is asking you and I to believe that it is easier and more appropriate for him to threaten and to engage in a pattern of conduct with the intent of running two responsible and contributing residents out of town than it is to respond to any of the concerned residents of this community who just want their community made more transparent and safer.

But, for the time being, I am still here, and the information I uncover about our public officials' behavior and use of our money only leads to more and more questions--not answers. I just hope that if something happens to me--like a speeding car nails me coming out of my driveway, or if I am "accidently" shot by a "hunter," that someone will keep looking for the answers and hold public officials accountable for their conduct. I also welcome your comments if you can clarify or add transparency or accountability to the questions first presented in this post.

Rebate or Offset Requested

Well, I have been pondering the logic of making my wife and I participate in this community's EIT "repayment program."

The logic goes, so I was told by local public officials, is that she and I now benefit from the infrastructure investments that these officials spent the EIT revenue on, so we should help "pay for it." So, under that logic, I think she and I, and any other current resident that was NOT living here during the "EIT Overpayment" years should be able to either get a rebate back from the municipalities in which we WERE living back in, oh, say 2004, 2005, 2006, etc,. Or, we at least should be able to offset our current "burden" here by what we paid to those municipalities years ago. Afterall, we are no longer able to enjoy the "infrastructure" benefits that those other municipalities spent our previous contributions on.

Since our EIT-equivalent contribution to Philly in the last year alone that we lived there exceeded $12,000, I would certainly be ok with our offset...It seems only fair.

Spinning off PA Chautauqua Assets = tossing Chautauqua charm

Snippet from Nov 5 2008 Chautauqua Board meeting:

"John Feather raised a question, as it appears that we're living off the capital improvement funds....we'll run out of [replenishment] funds in about ten years....Allan Feldman added that the finance committee discussed that monies have been added to capital funds over the years that were never used and ended up in the general fund." and, earlier in the meeting, kathy Snavely asked:

"why we didn't transfer the Hall of Philosophy to the Foundation, so we could avoid paying real estate taxes on it."

Aaaahhhh, but don't worry, neighbors. We ARE spending plenty of PA Chautauqua money on that labor sharing bill (or cross-billing, as Mike Bell puts it) we get from Bill Care and his full time crew of 6. We're spending about $400,000 a year on labor and benefits (see previous post).

And this situtation should strike fear in every property owners' soul right now. Why?
Because the unique character of this community--and, hence our property values, are inextricably tied up with the vitality and identity of the PA Chautauqua, its buildings, and its summer programs and artistic events. Its not dependent on our perpetually growing municipal works staff. That situation would make us like every other suburban subdivision, and not the Chautauqua

A local real estate agent recently said that gretna properties hold their value because of the "location" factor. However, you have to ask yourself how long that misperception is going to hold out. After all, I have years worth of meeting notes from the various governing bodies here, and they all present and discuss quality of life issues that have never been resolved. So, its seems fairly obvious that present owners know the truth--that this location has some serious deficiencies and isn't as valuable as it once was, and that it is only getting worse.

But, back to the Board members' comments: we all know that that's what the Chautauqua does with its assets. It spins them off to other entities, creating such bodies as the boro, the foundation, the arts council, etc.. And, they do this under professed justifications usually relating to avoiding some liability or another.

Let's see how that has worked out for them so far. By my calculations:

--They don't have control over our common grounds, our infrastructure, our water, our sewer, our policing, etc.--Bill Care does. We can't even do our own set up in a Chautauqua building--Bill's staff has to, and we pay twice for that. Once when we pay the $100 rental fee, and again when we pay his crew's staffing costs.

--They don't have control over the theater any more. That belongs to the Arts Council.

--They have a parking lot where an historic building used to be.

--They have now have a highway for an scenic byway leading people to our "Wooded Retreat".

--They don't have control over their checkbook, their annual audit, their budgeting, and their number one cash generator (the Art Show receipts)- Boro employees do: Linda Bell, with, of course, Bill Care's assistance. Oh, someone may look over her shoulder by having arranging for annual audits or such--but that someone would be her husband, the treasurer.

It's a wonder we stay afloat at all, isn't it? But that's not what this post is about. It's about how our leaders are failing us by not having a vision for our assets, by not being motivated to protect our assets in order to achieve the Chautauqua brand/image.

It's totally ironic that I came across these comments from the board, as I was just commenting on what a shame it is that we don't have the ingenuity and vision in this community bring our historic buildings with us into the present, to maintain their character and their usefulness and vitality. My neighbor and I were even discussing how nice it would be to have something done with the Hall of Philosphy that was as creative and interesting--and historically repsectful of the architecture, materials, and design, as was done with the carriage house at Alden Place.

Imagine that: instead of wasting time trying to come up with ways to reduce your "maintenance" burdens on old places, spend that energy with local and concerned talent to keep bringing the PA Chautauqua into the future. 'Cause all this style of management is accomplishing now is to parse off bits of it here and there and to leave more and more of the PA Chautauqua behind--and I am talking about its identity, its uniqueness, its entire character, not just its real assets and infrastructure.

And, our brand, by the way, is not "historic." The PA Chautauqua incorporation documents don't say anything about requesting a charter to preserve some historic element of this area's history. It's asks for a charter to pursue artistic and intellectual endeavors. So, the reason for the PA Chautauqua's existence is PRESENT--not future or past, pursuit of the cultural. Therefore, there is no excuse for not having, as our number one priority, the use of our assets to protect our cultural identity. We are not a living museum. If the PA Chautauqua would rather spend more energy on infrastructrure labor costs and on decreasing control of its assets than in pursuing its mission, then we should seriously consider dissolving it, as it has deviated from its allowed mission.

Studies even show that "cultural" tourists spend more money than the average tourist--so why all the myopia?

(See my earlier post on the renovated Alden Carriage house, which has several new business's in it, including a Buzz Cafe, a jewelry/clothing store, and a day spa.)

Budget Analysis: Expenses Wages and Benefits burden of $400,000?!

Why should this figure be a red flag for us? Well, because we are a VERY small municipality, and this figure represents relatively large burdens for us. To compound the problem, because of our staff's pension benefits that we are paying into today, we, our grandchildren, and future residents, will be incurring this burden well into the future while receiving no benefit from this expense. This is another reason why, again, Mt. Gretnans pay so much more per capita annually ($2300+) to our municipality than similarly situated municipalities ($200-1000/year/capita).

And, let's not forget that the boro "shares" this staff with the Chautauqua--an incorporated homeowners association with little oversight or obligation to transparency as compared with a municipality or an authority.

Don't forget to review the Revenue side of things--its posted in the previous post, below. Please remember though, that I had to use a previous actual budget for the Chauatauqua Art Show, and the other data is from the 2010 Proposed Budgets.




2010 Proposed Budgets Analysis: Expenses

TRANSFERS AND CONTRIBUTIONS
Chautauqua (Art Show), contribution to boro --15,500 ** (18% of gate receipts)
Chautauqua (Art Show), Contribution to boro-- 2,000 ( cultural grant)
Chautauqua (Art Show), transfer to PA Chaut. B&G -- 1,800
Chautauqua (Art Show), transfer to PA Chaut GenFund -- 5,027
Chautauqua (Art Show), transfer to PA Chautauqua Fdtn --10,000
Chautauqua (GenFund), Transfer to Sewer Fund -- 101,141
Chautauqua (GenFund), Transfer to Garbage Fund --36,170
Chautauqua (GenFund), Allocation to Summer Programs-- 3,000

>>>>>> 174,638 CHAUT TRANSFERS TOTAL

EQUIPMENT/RELATED
Chautauqua (Art Show), shuttle bus -- 8,160
Chautauqua (GenFund), Eqpmt rental -- 6,897
Chautauqua (GenFund), Street lights -- 11,000
Boro, Eqpmt use and maint -- 2,220
Sewer Authority, Eqpmt use and maint. -- 6,990
Water Authority, Eqpmt use and maint -- 4,730
Sewer Authority, Equipmt purchase -- 4,000

Sewer Authority, Cap Eqpmt Allocation -- 20,000
Sewer Authority, Cap Outlay Allocation -- 10,000

Boro, gas -- 3,072
Sewer Authority, gas -- 4,000

Chautauqua (Art Show), food court-water heater -- 3,548
Chautauqua (B&G), capital x-boardroom -- 3,000
Chautauqua (B&G), cap x-gift shop -- 2,500

Boro, Supplies and repairs-boro bldg -- 400
Chautauqua (B&G), Supplies (all bldgs) 3,500

Boro, Repairs to Eqpmt -- 5,000
Sewer Authority, repairs to eqpmt -- 8,000
Water Authority, repairs to eqpmt -- 417


OPERATING
Boro, repairs to roads -- 6,324
Boro, street signs -- 500
Chautauqua (Art Show), application/jury system -- 4,664
Chautauqua (Art Show), entertainment -- 4,900
Chautauqua (Art Show), jury day expenses -- 3,623
Chautauqua (Art Show), reseed park -- 52
Sewer Authority, repairs to Treatment Plant -- 10,000
Sewer Authority, sludge disposal -- 12,000

Boro, Operating supplies -- 400
Chautauqua (Art Show), awards -- 2,199
Chautauqua (Art Show), operating supplies -- 2,543
Sewer Authority, Operating Supplies -- 5,000
Water Authority, operating supplies -- 150
Water Authority, treatment supplies -- 10,000

Boro, Advertising and Printing -- 617
Chautauqua (Art Show), Advertising -- 4,500**
Sewer Authority, Advertising and Printing -- 400
Water Authority, Advertising and PR -- 100

Chautauqua (GenFund), communication -- 1,900

Boro, Office supplies -- 600
Chautauqua (Art Show), admin supplies -- 307
Chautauqua (GenFund), Office Supplies -- 500
Sewer Authority, Office Supplies -- 550
Water Authority, Office supplies -- 500
Sewer Authority, Office equip purchase -- 400
Sewer Authority, Office equip repair -- 600
>>>>>>> 3,457 OFFICE STUFF TOTAL

Boro, Phones and radios -- 2,000
Sewer Authority, Phones and radios -- 900
Water Authority, Phones and radios -- 900
>>>>> 3,800 PHONES & RADIOS TOTAL

But, as far as I can tell, these entities all have the same office and phones and radios…




FACILITY RELATED

Boro, rent-boardroom -- 400

Chautauqua (GenFund), rent-boro bldg -- 3,500
Sewer Authority, rent-boro bldg -- 5,000
Water Authority, rent-boro bldg -- 1,300

Boro, rent-office -- 1,817
Sewer Authority, rent-office -- 1,317

Chautauqua (B&G), Utilities, Boardroom -- 1,480 (381 sewer, 464 water)

>>>>>>>> 13334 RENTS PAID TOTAL

Boro, Utilities-boro building -- 2,221
Chautauqua (GenFund), Utilities-boro bldg -- 1,700 (includes insurance)
Sewer Authority, Utilities-boro bldg -- 1,000
Water Authority, Utilities-boro bldg -- 1,000

>>>>>>> 5921 BORO BLDG UTILITIES TOTAL

Boro, Utilities-Office -- 1,141
Chautauqua (B&G), Office -- 1,649 (127 sewer, 155 water)
Sewer Authority, Utilities-Office -- 500
Water Authority, Utilities-office -- 500

>>>>>>>> 3790 OFFICE UTILITIES TOTAL

Boro, tax collection supplies and fees -- 690
Chautauqua (GenFund), Director’s and Official Insurance -- 2,250
Sewer Authority, Dues and Memberships -- 1,000
Chautauqua (Art Show), Workshop registration -- 395


STAFFING RELATED (“full-time/permanent”) $395,877

Boro, tax collector’s bond -- 144 (L. Bell)
Boro, Financial Secretary’s Bond -- 474 (L. Bell)
Sewer Authority, Financial secretary’s bond-- 200 (L. Bell? or maybe L. Bell's husband, M. Bell?)
Water Authority, Financial Secretary’s bond-- 200(L. Bell? or maybe L. Bell's husband, M. Bell?)

Boro, Financial Secretary’ Salary -- 17,063 (L.Bell)
Chautauqua's Financial Secretary --No figure reported (L. Bell)

Sewer Authority, Financial Secretary’s salary-- 10,250 (L. Bell? or maybe L. Bell's husband, M. Bell?)

Water Authority, Financial Secretary’s salary-- 4,700 (L. Bell? or maybe L. Bell's husband, M. Bell?)

>>>>>>>> 32,013 FINANCIAL SEC. SALARY TOTAL

It is also my understanding that tax and fee collectors get a commission based on the amounts that they collect.

Boro, FICA/Medicare -- 3,928
Chautauqua (GenFund), FICA/Medicare -- 4,851
Sewer Authority, FICA/Medicare -- 8,110
Water Authority, FICA/Medicare -- 3,763
>>>>>> 20,652 FICA/MEDICARE TOTAL

Chautauqua (GenFund), Dental/Vision Ins -- 1,626
Chautauqua (GenFund), Disability ins. -- 1,438
Chautauqua (GenFund), Health America -- 17,375
Boro, Employee Benefits -- 12,260
Sewer Authority, Employee Benefits -- 29,005
Water Authority, Employee Benefits -- 14,799
Chautauqua (GenFund), Pension Buy Back Prgm -- 1,340
>>>>>>> 77,843 BENEFITS TOTAL

Boro, Labor Salaries -- 34,283
Chautauqua (Art Show), labor services -- 1,425
Sewer Authority, Labor salaries -- 95,760
Sewer Authority, Director and Manager fee -- 2,160
Water Authority, Labor salaries -- 44,495
Chautauqua (GenFund), Labor Services -- 63,417
Chautauqua (GenFund), Office of the Secretary -- 600
>>>>>> 242,140 LABOR TOTAL

Boro, Pension -- 4,652
Chautauqua (GenFund), Pension -- 5,787
Sewer Authority, Pension -- 12,290
Water Authority, Pension -- 500
>>>>>> 23,229 PENSION TOTAL


Chautauqua (Art Show), Parking- MG Fire Dept-- 11,409** (13.25% of gate receipts)
Chautauqua (Art Show), Parking-Philhaven -- 2,200
Chautauqua (Art Show), Parking-Lots and Tents -- 11,135
Chautauqua (Art Show), traffic police/Security -- 16,909
(This obviously can't be for two days of art show. Its more like that this money is really spent on parking staff throughout the summer, which can be a couple/three thousand a month and may be "repaid" in "relative portions" by leaseholders with summer businesses, including the Jiggershop, which is owned and operated by the Boro Council President. However, the determination of his portion of that expense is not established via contract--at least not a contract that the Boro showed to me. And, I asked to see them all, including leases--which, are contracts for property interests.)
Chautauqua (GenFund), Temp Force Labor -- 5,000
Sewer Authority, Temp Force labor -- 2,042

Boro, Workman’s Comp -- 2,072
Chautauqua (GenFund), Workman’s Comp -- 2,320
Sewer Authority, Workman’s Comp -- 3,968
Water Authority, Workman’s Comp -- 1,711

Boro, Insurance (gen, car, prop, e&o) -- 4,884
Chautauqua (Art Show), insurance -- 5,018
Chautauqua (GenFund), auto -- 391
Sewer Authority, Insurance (gen, car, prop, e&o)-- 8,035
Water Authority, Insurance (“) -- 3,575

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EXPENSES (“repetitive” and “unique”)

Boro, Police Contract -- 28,467
Chautauqua (Art Show),ems services -- 1,560

Sewer Authority, Engineering Services -- 6000

Boro, solicitor -- 10,500
Chautauqua (GenFund), solicitor -- 3,500 (Kilgore)
Sewer Authority, solicitor -- 2,500 (Kilgore)
Water Authority, solicitor -- 500 (Kilgore)
Chautauqua (GenFund), other legal fees -- 400 (Kilgore)


Boro, Auditing -- 6,200
Chautauqua (Art Show), Auditing -- 2,200
Chautauqua (B&G), Auditing -- 1,560 (unable to confirm professional)
Chautauqua (GenFund), Auditing -- 3,978 (unable to confirm professional)
Sewer Authority, Auditing -- 2,950 (unable to confirm professional)
Water Authority, Auditing -- 3,350 (unable to confirm professional)

OTHER EXPENSES (“uniqueness” to one entity “certain”)
Chautauqua (B&G), Utilities, Phil. Hall -- 5,161 (456 sewer, 614 water, 165 waste)
Chautauqua (B&G), Garages/restrooms -- 1,155 (228 sewer, 307 water)
Chautauqua (B&G), Gift shop -- 1,675
Chautauqua (B&G), Lodge -- 7,996 (456 sewer, 614 water)
Chautauqua (B&G), improved parks -- 12,415 ( gen exp 2k, landscaping 2.5K, tree maint. 5k, tree purchases 0)
Chautauqua (B&G), unimproved parks -- 3,253 (tree maint 2k)
Chautauqua (B&G), Playground -- 8,774 (labor 4300, FICA/Medicare 329)
Chautauqua (B&G), Post Office -- 2,485 (456 sewer, 614 water)
Chautauqua (B&G), Visitor’s Info Center -- 2,193 (228 sewer, 307 water)*

Sewer Authority, Utilities-treatment Plant -- 5,500
Water Authority, Utilities-plant -- 7,100


* Theater not listed in Chautauqua B&G’s budget

**The Mt. Gretna Art Show, which is reported in the PA Chautauqua’s IRS files (990’s), is a serious cash generator as well as a serious expense for us. Therefore, I think it should certainly be considered in this analysis. However, because I only have the Art Show’s 2007 Budget to Actuals, I had to use those figures.

It requires lots of resources to execute the set up and break down within our community—on our grounds. The Boro apparently hires temporary help for this, and our staff is used extensively to set up, break down, and to prepare (i.e. installing permanent power stations throughout our Art Show area), and to repair the damage done to our improved parks. For example, this year, we had to resod a significant area of grassy area that rutted—a “soggy” situation that was certainly exacerbated by the trampling of thousands of people and tons of weight. Our monies and staff accomplished this “repair”. Also, I have not been shown any contract describing such an arrangement (although, again, I did ask the Boro to look at all contracts), it is rather common knowledge that the Art Show “splits” its revenues with at least the Boro, and the Fire dept., but that that “revenue” is not budgeted by them. It seems like it is treated more like a “donation” from another entity within this geo-political boundary ---an entity that claims to be completely independent from all others here even though it uses a significant amount of our monies and resources yet maintains that it is not accountable to us in any way for quality of life concerns we present to them.

Also, it appears as if the theater is not really owned and operated by the PA Chautauqua, but, rather by another non-profit, the Mount Gretna Arts Council. This council, of which one member is Dale Grundon and the contact is listed as Keith Kilgore, appears to be taking depreciation for this building on its own 990’s. Further, there is a PA Chautauqua Foundation, which claims things like the Cicada Festival, and this non-profit has the same officer composition and contact info as the PA Chautauqua, which is the same as the Boro, and the two authorities, as far as I can tell.

If you have any other info clarifying or confirming these comments, please make a comment and let me know what your source is--I am sure that we would all like to see documentation to confirm all this, and not just memory or hearsay. Thanks.

Budget Analysis: Revenue of a Million Bucks for Mt. Gretna?!

Ok, so the Chautauqua, the Boro, and the Water Authority and the Sewer Authority have published their proposed budgets for 2010. As, for example, the Boro's budget indicates that it is around $150,000, and that I was told that the Boro is engaged only in 5 contracts (1 police and 4 snow removal), AND that the Boro's public works director answered at the last council meeting that we only have 5 fulltime staff (not six, as the new guy we have been seeing since, oh AUgust, is a TempForce guy) a $150,000 Boro budget seemed a little "short" for me. The glaring but unspoken fact must be that there is some "cost sharing" "plant sharing" and maybe even "revenue sharing" going on between these entities.

So, I looked at all the budgets for these four entities. This post will include the revenues analysis. The next includes the Expenses Analysis. Please remember though, that I had to use a previous actual budget for the Chauatauqua Art Show, and the other data is from the 2010 Proposed Budgets.

Our 87 acres takes in almost a Million Bucks a year, which is one reason why our municipal "efficiency" numbers are through the roof, relatively speaking. Where our neighbors and similarly sized municipalities never receive more than $1000 per capita, we are at $2300+.

Where our neighbors--also participants in our water and sewer authority pay $1100 for five services (water, sewer, trash/leave/snow removal), we in Mt. Gretna pay close to $1900.And, in addition to paying the "fee" for water and sewer, we are also responsible for the salary and benefits paid to the same staff who are all on our payrolls: the Chaut, the Boro, the Water Authority, and the Sewer Authority Compared to rates in big cities, like Philadelphia, it still looks bad: for a full-time resident in Philadelphia, the water AND sewer bill averages about $450 a year.

Don't be fooled--there is no gold in our drinking water and our sewer pipes don't sing happy jingles to us when we flush. (Note that "infrastructure" work or improvements is a different assessment, so those figures don't effect these comments.)


Have a look for yourself:


2010 Proposed Budgets Analysis: REVENUE

Revenue

Chautauqua Art Show receipts -- 187,362 (2007 data)
Chautauqua HOA fees (1275 x 221) -- 280,000 (approx)*
Chautauqua Bldgs and Grounds, Leases -- 52,305
Chautauqua (B&G), allocation from capital project -- 8500



Boro, Intergovernmental Transfers -- Not in budget
Boro, snow removal contracts -- 8,600
Boro, tax revenues -- 87,488
Boro, Cable -- 4600
Boro, Liquid Fuels -- not in budget

Sewer Authority, Assessments** -- 188,000 (289,750 – Chaut transfer)

Water Authority, Assessments** -- 106,340

>>>>>>>>>>> 923,195 Rough total of Income

OTHER INCOME (“certain/sole” source)

Chautauqua, State Pension Aid -- 3,819
Sewer Authority, State Pension Aid -- 6,500
Water Authority, State Pension Aid -- 3,000

Boro, Art show admissions -- 16,000


OTHER INCOME (“uncertain/shared” source)

Boro, rental of boro building -- 9800

Boro, rental of equipmt -- 13511
Sewer Authority, rental of equipment -- 7327

Boro, Labor Services, MG Playhouse -- 5,956






Notes:
1. Neither the theater nor the Art Show are in the budget. The theater may be operated by another entity, but the art show is all PA Chautauqua, thus is included in the Chautauqua data. (See expense analysis notes in next post). As the Art Show generates nearly 250K in revenue annually, and has significant expenses that are often either directly or indirectly passed on to the budgets of the boro, tranparency requires that the Art Show numbers be included.

2. Now what does the Chaut. do with those assessments collected:
They pass 101K on to the Sewer Fund, leaving about 150K for maintenance of our infrastructure. However, the budget shows that that seems to be a piecemeal endeavor, at best. A lot of it seems to be operating expenses, rather than maintenance. See the expense analysis in next post.

3. Sewer and water fees appear to be egregiously inflated. First, neighboring municipalities that are also on our systems pay a flat out fee of about 1100 a year for sewer, water, snow removal, leave removal, etc. Adding all our fees up gets us to about 1800 bucks a year. Second, when we were using metered water, we were paying about 400 a year—and that was living in the house full time, which a lot of our homeowners around here do not do.

4. Before going on to the Expense Analysis, take note of which entity is claiming rental revenue (as opposed to lease revenue)--in other words, who is renting what building/space to whom here, where the "rentor's" office is located. Also, look at phone numbers, who is listed as "in charge," office supplies and equipment expenses, etc. A couple of months ago, I asked to see all the Boro's contracts and was presented with only police and snow removal. From this, I can only conclude that there is no "agreement" between these entities to "share" office space, office equipment, comunications equipment, and, especially, to share staffing. So how do we know who's clock or use paperclip anyone is on around here?
* From the 2010 proposed budget break down:

Chautauqua, Sewer Assessments -- 84,391
Chautauqua, Sewer Main replacement fee -- 16,200
Chautauqua, Home Waste Assessment -- 35,970
Chautauqua, Maintenance Assessment -- 146,970
>>>>>>Total: 283,531

**I assumed that these assessments include more than assessments from the residents of MGB.
It is also unclear to me why the Chautauqua’s sewer, garbage, and maintenance revenue streams are in their General Funds budget, and not in their Buildings and Grounds Budget.

New cafe

I found this new cafe just off Rte 72 that is great.

They have the usual array of pastries, savory stuff, and seasonal snacks, as well as a great relaxing location and creative architecture:
its located with a spa and an eclectic jewelry and clothes shop in a renovated carriage house.

The design was done by local architect Kip Kelly, and the building itself is set back off Alden rd., on the entrance to Alden Place. The upstairs is home to the day spa!

They have chai, steamers, teas, and, of course coffee.

Unfortunately, its somewhat of a bittersweet find, because everytime I go there, I ask myself, "Just why is that we don't have something like this in Mt. Gretna?" Maybe I will get some pictures up on this post soon.

Da dee da deee da--here we go again

"stinkin' more than anybody has a right to"

Well, I just can't believe the fodder local political reps provide for the intelligent and inquisitive. Again, Kilgore--OUR solicitor, failed to present any evidence-or logic, justifying Mt. Gretna's participation in this extortion scheme the EIT Bureau and city solicitors are calling the "over/under-payment issue"--strike that, "problem", as Kilgore clarified last night. I now suspect that there is much more "foul play" and intentional covering-up going on. And, here's why.

Again, last night Kilgore tried to shoot the messenger, rather than heed the message. While being asked more questions about the EIT--specifically, what evidence that he has that shows that there is a foundation for any sort of "settlement" agreement on this over/under allegation, he again tried to suggest, in a public forum, that I didn't know the proper facts about the EIT. Don't forget that at the Oct. meeting, he also suggested that I needed to learn about the laws authorizing the EIT by telling me to "go read the EIT laws." As he, and his best buds should certainly know by now--I do my homework. So, with great pleasure, I reminded him that I had just finished my fourth reading of them in the hour before the meeting. And, with great pleasure, I will provide here the documentary evidence that he was, once again, wrong about what's been going on with the EIT here.

But, him being wrong, even multiple times, is not really a problem. Its his willingness to be wrong in public and the triggers that bring out this behavior in him that we should all be worrying about: when challenged substantively on the legal foundation for the allegations, the law, and the "process", he tries to destroy the inquirer's credibility and will even get the law and the facts wrong to do so. In witnessing this pattern of his--his willingness to publicly show his lack of knowledge about the issue and his lack of interest in getting the facts correct, I am beginning to suspect that he is motivated to take these risks because he knows something else is at stake--something other than a settlement. In other words, he is falling on his sword. So, I think that the question that we all should have now is " who is he falling on his sword for?" More about that by the time we get to the bottom of this post.

And, because my time is as valuable as his, and because I am providing the Boro with much needed information that Kilgore is failing to provide, I will send the boro the bill.

First, as to the EIT law, it is called the Local Tax Enabling Act. CapTax provides an easily accessible version of it on their website, but I have linked to it in the Community Info list at the bottom of this blog. Kilgore told me to read it when I asked him what evidence there was indicating that the historic distribution of the EIT in Leb. Co. was incorrect--or, "arbitrary", as the Bureau and the solicitors put it. His response was, to paraphrase, ""Fixed percentages" is just not how it was done. You get 50% of what you paid in. You would know that if you read the EIT laws." Well, Mr. Smarty-Pants. I knew you would say that. So, that's why I re-read them before asking you the question in a public forum--because there is no mandate for receiving 50% of what you paid in. NONE. But, I thought I would check with you. Thanks for that confirmation.

And, that tidbit is what JQ PUblic needs to know about the solicitors' and the Bureau's assertions: there is NO mandate in the laws to distribute EIT revenue the way Kilgore asserts. Further, there is no prohibition, in those laws, against distributing the revenue according to a percentage-allocation pattern fixed within the system--which is the distribution pattern the Bureau admits existed. So, just because we didn't get back 50% of what we paid in, doesn't mean that we didn't get what we were supposed to get. And, they can't prove we didn't get what we were supposed to get.

Second, all the real evidence presented here supports the idea that its the EIT Bureau's fault if anything went missing or misdirected. The EIT laws that Kilgore is refering to also require an annual EIT audit, and require each political subdivision to annually reconcile the EIT numbers and make the necessary adjustments. Here's the text of those laws:

Section 11
…the governing body of each political subdivision which levies and collects or provides for the levying of a tax upon earned income, shall provide for not less than one examination each year of the books, accounts and records of the income tax collector..

and

13.III.B.V.h
…The political subdivisions shall not be required to request the officer to distribute the funds collected but shall at least annually reconcile their receipts with the records of the officer and return to or credit the officer with any overpayment….

Ok, so, now we at the logical point where we need to know if Kilgore or the Bureau has any evidence that Mt. Gretna did NOT do the annual reconciliation and make the necessary credits or returns. Why is it important to know this? Its important because if all evidence shows that an annual reconciliation was done, then the most we could ever "owe" is the current year's possible overpayment.

So, last night I told Kilgore that I found evidence that Mt. Gretna had indeed did some type of reconciliation one year (1969)and requested--and received, a corrective payment. I then asked him if he knew of any OTHER evidence that suggests that the legally mandated annual reconciliations were not done. Again, he told me that the system was run in such a disorganized fashion, that laws like that don't mean anything--essentially, that I shouldn't and can't rely on the LAW to figure out what, if anything, we owe. But, then he just had to end his response by saying "That [corrective payment] could not have happened. Mt. Gretna wasn't even in the EIT until the 70's."

Well, folks, also in the links list below, you will find Cornwall-Lebanon School District meeting minutes from November 3, 1969, where the school board discusses Mt.Gretna's EIT-correction request and decides to issue them a check. Further, the C-L School District EIT was adopted in 1967, and Mt. Gretna was one of the first, if not the first, municipality to return their "acceptance" to participate in the intended EIT system. I also posted a link to those meeting minutes below. Now who, again, doesn't know what they are talking about---and getting paid for their ignorance....But, I suspect that there is a reason why he is not motivated to know his "legal" stuff about this issue.

So, in short, my research, which has been confirmed by EIT Bureau statements and by solicitor statements, suggests very clearly that:
1. there is no reasonable or legally sufficient evidence of arbitrary distribution.
2. There is no reasonable or legally sufficient evidence of mis-distribution.
3. There IS evidence of missing money--a lot of it, that can't be attributed to Foltz's activities. And,
4. our solicitors are acting more like the Bureau's front man than our legal representatives.

The story line here could go something like this: "

EIT Bureau and Solicitors, not wanting to shine spotlight on clients and long-time friends involved with the collection of EIT in Lebanon County, intentionally pursued--via threats of "crushing" financial and legal entanglements, settlement of allegations for which they knew there was grossly insufficient evidence to pursue properly."

I mean, really, we need to start asking loudly, "Could it be that both of these parties have a good suspicion where to look for the missing money, or that the "missing" part happened at levels lower than Foltz--like at the municipal EIT collector level?" That would explain a lot about their curious behavior and their lack of inquisitiveness, now wouldn't it?

Election Results

Well, even though detailed election results are not available yet (the write-in votes are not specific as to what name may have been written in), the LebCo website posted enough results data to make interesting observations and comments.

First, the Mt. Gretna position that received the most votes was for the Inspector of Election--with a total of 71 votes cast between two candidates. From this, we can assume that at least 71 MG voters turned out on Tuesday.

Second, two MGBoro positions were essentially totally ignored by even those 71 voters who did show up on Tuesday. The Assessor's position received one vote only--and that was for a write-in. Congrats to that person...And, the MG Boro Tax Collector position received only 6 votes--again, all cast for a write-in. The question now is, "How will those offices be filled?"

It is possible that there is a "majority" within the write-in, so would that person be "elected?" Or will the boro council "appoint" two persons to these two offices? If the incumbents for both positions did not run as candidates during this election, and if almost all of MG voters rejected the opportunity to cast their votes for the incumbents as a write-in, wouldn't that be a clear message to the council that the incumbents do not want the position anymore AND that the MG voters don't want the incumbents anymore? So, it will be interesting to see who the council appoints...

Third, if only 71 voters turned out on Tuesday, and more than a third of those votes were cast for write-ins, is that a sign of anything? I mean, I assume that a voter is not allowed to cast the same name as a write-in three times on the same ballot. So, that would mean that one voter's repetition of the same name would only count once, and that there were 25 distinct votes cast for someone other than a council incumbent. Or, to look at it another way, even if each voter could write-in "no confidence" in all three of their slots for boro council and the vote counters counted all three as three separate write-in votes, that means at least 9 people had the courage to cast a write-in vote.

Since it should be fairly obvious that I didn't vote 9 times (or 25 times) on Tuesday, I find comfort in knowing that there are at least 8 (and maybe 25) others out there with this kind of courage. That said, I hope the numbers provide our local elected officials with the motivation to also use their votes and decision-making powers with thoughtfulness and courage to "buck the trend." After-all, it is apparent now that there are allies out there that they can rely on when it comes to considering certain issues.

See the results at
http://www.lebcounty.org/lebanon/lib/lebanon/UnofficialFinalResults110309_0951p.HTM

Transparent and Communicative Chautauqua is Possible

The Sidewalk to No Where debate has generated some comments and concerns on both sides of the project--yea and nea. But, I still can't help but ponder why we even have to have this debate on this blog--or why we even need this blog. All this discussion and analysis should be occurring within the structure organized and responsible for guiding this community: the PA Chautauqua.

Several years ago, I discovered the New York Chautauqua, who's website can be found at:

http://chautauqua.squarespace.com/about-chautauqua/

Granted, they have more resources than the PA Chautauqua--but there is no excuse why our Board is not posting more details, meeting minutes, committee compositions, contact info, etc at our website. They even post their homeowners association material with what seems to be complete transparency, when compared to us. So, you can even find their rules, meeting dates, etc. right online, at:

http://www.cpoa.ws/webhelp/cpoa.htm

Now, a quick look at their manual, and you find statements like:

"The Chautauqua Property Owners Association serves as a communication link between the property owners and the administration, advocating for the interests and needs of the owners, and, in turn, conveying to the owners the concerns of the Institution."

and, in comparison, here is how they would start to approach this whole safety, sidewalk to Princeton issue:

"Chautauqua was created as a walking community long before the advent of the automobile. Its streets are narrow, not designed for cars. Its lots are small with little or no space for parking cars.
When cars began to appear, it was understood they would be parked outside the fence. Today, cars, trucks, bicycles and golf carts appear everywhere often in violation of existing regulations. This creates three concerns: primarily safety, loss of ambiance and a loss of beauty.

The community would be safer for all community members, including young children and the elderly, the ambiance and quality of life would be enhanced, and beauty could be restored and preserved if all Chautauquans followed the driving and parking rules.

Chautauqua has always prided itself on being a walking community where pedestrians have the right of way. Bicycles are the preferred form of vehicular transportation and even bicycles must follow all of the N.Y. state laws which apply to automobiles.

Driving a car on the grounds is a privilege intended only for the necessities of loading or unloading baggage or other essentials. (Special provisions with a doctor’s certificate are made for the handicapped). The car driving privilege is intended for you to go directly from the entry gate designated on your pass to your place of residence to unload your groceries or other goods and then to return directly to the parking space assigned. The driving privilege is not intended for driving to:

The post office to pick up mail or a newspaper,
The Cinema,
The Plaza for a little shopping, or
To pick up or visit a friend, or to make such a visit a preliminary to a shopping trip off the grounds.

Please designate a meeting place at your exit gate.

The Institution has provided free busses and trams to take people from almost anywhere on the grounds to the major places of program or activity in a very efficient way. This shuttle service is reevaluated and improved every year.
Limited use of commercial vehicles is also an essential need for which special
provision is made. A property owner who schedules all but immediate need deliveries before or after the season is being a good neighbor and making a difference in the atmosphere of the community.

Parking of cars on the grounds is permitted only in the specifically designated parking place indicated on the parking permit issued to a ticket holder. This is usually a private home or an Institution lot.

If each resident makes the effort to adhere to these rules, although sometimes a bit
inconvenient, Chautauqua will truly be a pedestrian community and the unparalleled beauty and ambience of an atmosphere without cars and trucks will be our legacy to future generations."


A legacy for future generations--what a concept! I suppose that means that we can't just let ourselves deteriorate into just another subdivision...

It seems as if many of us here really want the subdivision amenities and aren't willing to make the sacrifices necessary to keep the unique and tranquil character of the Chautauqua. That is a tragedy, and it is unfair to those of us who chose to own property in the Chautauqua simply for that professed unique character. While you may have had that 30 years ago--you certainly are losing it rapidly now. So, its deceptive to maintain and solicit that that character still remains or will be protected.

Historic Preservation: Windows

We have, right under our noses here in Mt. Gretna, a great source of information on caring for our older homes. The City of Lancaster publishes a series of concise, yet very helpful, brochures on various aspects older homes, from painting to masonry to windows. Here, I will share with you a taste of the information from the "Caring for Wood Windows" brochure.

The author starts by reminding us that a home's windows and trim add significantly to a homes value, yet are often shortchanged by thoses with other motives. For example, window maufacturers benefit only when you replace your home's windows, rather than do routine maintenance or repairs.

The brochure then debunks several misconceptions. First, older materials are much more durable than modern materials--older windows, if properly maintained, can last hundreds of years. Modern windows, on the other hand, don't last any where close to that long, no matter how much you do to maintain them. Oh, the vinyl is around forever, but not the functioning window--the vinyl breaks down and distorts with exposure to the elements and there is no way to fix the "broken" element of the vinyl. The entire window has to be replaced. Second, roofs, walls, floors, and chimneys are the primary source of energy loss (80%), as opposed to windows (20%). And, of that 20%, the energy is lost because of unfilled gaps around the window, rather than through the window itself.

The tips that they give include:

1. Routine inspection of panes, glazing, paint, frame, etc.

2. Timely repair or replacement of the individual parts that need attention.

3. Use of proper splicing techniques or materials (like the Dutchman technique or wood epoxy)

4. Replacement only as a last resort and with same dimensions, design, and material of the original window.

5. Avoid contractors that do not have experience or a desire to save existing windows.

I can tell you from experience--we have hands on experience with all 5 tips, that that last one is really the toughest tip of all to follow. On one 100 year old house that we rehabbed, we had no choice but to replace the deteriorated windows in a bay. To preserve the historic/architectural details of the house, we had to order custom windows with a wood finish. Even though the manufacturer came out to measure the opening, he still sent us standard sized windows that would have required that we actually take the frame of the bay apart to install the windows that he sent, which were an inch too short in one dimension and an inch too long in the other dimension. Of course the manufacturer told us that he would give us a "rebate" and that his installers could certainly get these windows to fit if we let them do it. Thank goodness that we had time to let him come to the correct decision, and never stopped insisting that he deliver the custom sized windows that we ordered and paid for. Lots of times, it just doesn't work out that way, and you are stuck with what they decide you want.

Just write Lancaster and request the brochures, at:
City of Lancaster
120 North Duke Street
POBox 1599
Lancaster, PA 17608-1599

Kathy Snavely and moral and financial bankruptcy

With great humor I read this email conversation that I had earlier this year with Kathy Snavely.
Her comments are in black, and my responses to her comments are in blue.

Even she, as far back as March of this year, can't shake the Mt. Gretna Myopia and see the reality of what kind of community the Chautauqua Board and the Borough Council have created for us and for themselves.

The best line from her is the p.s. (having the smallest Boro in the state). EXACTLY--listen, I am making these bumber stickers that say "3/87/170" That means: 3.2 miles of paved road, 87 acres of land, and 170 registered voters. Yet we have a public works crew, a fleet of public works machinery, vehicles, and equipment, pension plans and obligations that our grandchildren will be paying on, police service contracts that add no policing value to the community and automatically increase at 6% a year, 2 administrative boards, and a summer programs schedule that often attracts more of the coordinator's groupies than real audience members.

I met a guy the other day who said he was on the board in a neighboring town, where he dropped two staff, lowered taxes, and still closed his budget while also giving out raises. He was quick to say "just file bankruptcy." While I was laughing at the impossibility of our boro council thoroughly considering ALL possibilities, let alone this one, he jumped right in and said "I bet you even have a police contract. Bankruptcy will get you out of that contract, too." I said, "well, I don't see how it can hurt our credit rating." To which he replied, "Well, at least you ought to let two staff go and dump the police contract. That oughtta about make up for your $50,000 deficit, right?" Right. Who does the boro serve, anyway? Me or our employees...?

Anyway, the conversation between Snavely and I is posted at this link:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AZATkbVJQ0FiZGZzMnd4Y2tfNGNoODd2NGhn&hl=en


And, for those of you who have been following the inside scoop, where Snavely has recently admitted to me, in writing, that she has been reporting my conversations to police, politicians, etc, note my explicit request to keep our conversation confidential, to which she agreed later in the conversation. Please also note who, of the two of us keeps trying to divert from my real concern--which is the deteriorating quality of life here, by mischaracterizing my concerns as much more specific than they really are.

Somebody's gonna be doin' some 'splainin'.... I only hope that we get back to part where some of the humor comes back into the dialogue...

PA Chautauqua By Laws

L. Bell provided me with this copy of the PA Chautauqua By Laws.
You can see it at this website:

http://picasaweb.google.com/viragogretna

A link to them is also posted in the Our Community Links List at the bottom of this blog page.

Sidewalk to nowhere

Records from the recent paving of State road 117 indicate that our own Bill Care had urged, during the planning meetings for this project, that crosswalks be painted at the intersection of 117 and Pinch Rd. Now, why this was of interest to him was not recorded. But I suspect that it is because it is a dangerous intersection--frought with fatal peril.

However, when the project actually went down, the state said to Care, essentially, the entrance to the Campmeeting, across Pinch, leads to, aaahh, nowhere. So, they can't do the painted crosswalk there.

So, since that rejection, Care has been hell-bent to make a "receiver" end for that painted crosswalk that he wants across Pinch. Let's also admit that it gives his staff something to do for a month or so, as well as an excuse to use his "big toys." With a sidewalk in front of P&W's home, he can now request his coveted painted crosswalk.

Let's now talk about the reality of that scenario.
First, the Borough Council is not acting responsively to its constituents by carrying out this project. The Council has received any number of written and formal complaints about this type of "development" within the Chatuaqua. However, the Borough Council has never acknowledged and incorporated these concerns into their actions. Instead, they just do things like this project on the sly. FOr example, in the Sept. Borough Council meeting, they tabled this sidewalk project, essentially until P&W die. [That's a paraphrase of Care's comments, but I have it available on dvd for your review, if you would like to see for yourself.]

Second, you and your neighbor's elected this council, and, well, they can do what ever they want in this regard. As long as they spend less than ten thousand a pop, there basically isn't much to keep them in check.

Third, as with MANY other MGB commitments, this project serves noresident or property owner in MGB. It starts across the street in the Campmeeting, runs across a private citizen's property, and ends in, well, a road. It does not connect with another sidewalk, a park, a bench, nothing pedestrian or ped-like. Further, it does nothing to address the reasons WHY that intersection may be dangerous. And, whats more interesting, is that the residents that have really driven home the reason why that intersection is dangerous, have been ostracized and targeted for police harassment--all under the authoritative umbrella of authority from Care and the Council.

Fourth, the Chautauqua Board has adopted a "no more tree cutting" resolution, which applies to this project. Or, is supposed to apply---but is not really being enforced.

In the next couple of days I will post the video of the council tabling this project, and pictures of how it leads to nowhere. In the meantime, we are grieving the loss of a family friend-Toby. However, if anyone feels like it, I have the name of an attorney who is adept at filing Sunshine Act violations and will also file an injunction on this matter. I will gladly share it with you at your request.

"MGB, where incestuousness is the political standard?

At the risk of annoying those few persons in my community that I find have enough of that thing called integrity to show me that they deserve my respect, this post is going to be very frank. Mind you: you must read this post thoroughly, and repeat it accurately, for none of these people have said that they want to run for Borough Council in this Nov 3 election. I just think they--or people like them should be the ones at the helm right now, for we certainly seem to be in that political conundrum where the people who really have a sense of "representational" government and integrity in government also recognize the enormity of the burden and the commitment it takes to meet the task. So, they decline to run for things like boro council--and we are left with second best--if we are lucky.

So, I wrote to Santa yesterday and I asked him to make Nov 4, 2009 the day when I wake up to find that persons like Karl Gettle, Roberta Warshaw, and Bill Barlow have been elected to boro council. So, to my knowledge, based on all my review of public material, discussions with officials, and review of the laws, I think that:

1. The incumbents have proven completely unresponsive to citizen concerns. In fact, I have been trying to "make an appointment" to speak with one incumbent since before the Art Show. Apparently, spending time learning of your constituents' concerns is an option in Mt. Gretna. But I can't really say that that particular incumbent isn't just following her council president's lead-I also know him to never have responded to a constituent's concerns. By the way, he is also an incumbent this year.

2.Let's pull up our sleeves and stick our hands right in the dishwater. Our incumbent council president is the person responsible for the financial and administrative operations of our borough. And, here's what he has allowed to happen:

A. He has allowed our tax collector to apparently fail her duties--and is trying to pass resolving that financial disaster on to us. By law, our Earned Income Tax collector is required each year to reconcile the EIT monies and to repay any overpayment. However, Mt. Gretna Borough is being accused of being overpaid EIT for many years--to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars. It seems to me that the only way for us to accumulate overpayments is for our tax collector NOT to have performed the required annual reconciliation. And, its a red herring to throw up, as a defense, that calls were made to the then EIT director and he said everything is fine. PA employers, also by law, are required to withhold their employees EIT AND to report those witholdings to the PA Dept of Revenue quarterly. The tax collectors certainly have access to that data, at least, which only means that they may have to wait three months or so for it.

B. He has allowed public equipment and personnel to be used for private gain. It is my understanding that staff like Bill Care and "his guys"--and our machinery, vehicles, and other equipment, are used to do things like re-grade roads in the Campmeeting or Heights. However, when I asked to see all the Boro's contracts, I was only shown three snow-plowing contracts and one police services contract. So, for example, I am only left to conclude that no contracts exist with Care for his personal use of our equipment or staff, or for accommodating his work as an independent contractor for any other entity. Nor can I conclude that there is any contract for MGB resources to be supplied to any other homeowners association or municipality.

C. He has allowed a slew of conflicting relationships to exist--none of which provide any benefit--either out of convenience or cost savings. He has allowed our city solicitor to represent us as well as the "enemy" on this alleged EIT overpayment issue. He has allowed the city solicitor to represent him and the boro in his personal real estate agreements with MGB--the very entity in which he is council president. He has allowed the tax collector and "bookkeeper" and our treasurer to be a married couple--under the law, spouses enjoy what we call "spousal immunity" when it comes to things like testifying against your "better half." This means that even if the treasurer, and the audit which he is responsible for generating each year, find something amiss, there are some serious questions as to whether he could publish that finding-especially if it leads to legal action.

D. He routinely violates our right to participate in municipal proceedings and discussions. He allows items of public interest to be tabled, while instructing/allowing staff to carry out the tabled item anyway, and he makes decisions without providing the public access to them. For example, the boro apparently reduced its staff size by one, yet I know of no public discussion of that issue. Reducing staff size is NOT a confidential matter--how you tell that person that his/her position is gone is confidential, however. So there is no excuse for us finding out through the grapevine that the Water Authority has "picked up" one of our staff.

Second example: at the Sept. Council meeting, the issue of taking a portion of Peter and Walter's land, cutting down more trees and paving a sidewalk from Campmeeting entrance to---nowhere in the Chautauqua, was tabled--for years. To paraphrase Allwein, he said that the budget right now couldn't afford it, and that Peter and Walter wouldn't own that property forever. Care's interjection was something like "Yeh, they'll be dead at some point." And, the issue was tabled until there were different owners to attempt to get them to contract away their land to the Boro. [Additionally, at the Sept Chautauqua meeting, the Board adopted a resolution placing a moratorium on cutting down trees in the Chaut.] Yet, just last Monday, Care and his crew started this project anyway, which will including cutting down at least 4 more trees in addition to the one that they cut down Monday. Again--the sidewalk leads to no where in the Chautauqua--travel lanes and parking areas for automobiles do not count, there simply is no place at the end of the proposed sidewalk to properly and safely receive pedestrians. If the intersection is an issue--perhaps dealing with it properly is in order...

I found what I consider to be a host of these examples, and Allwein himself admitted at the Sept Boro Council meeting that he has had, and intends to continue having, private discussions about public matters.

D. He has failed to present himself with transparency and the kind of integrity that we should expect from our representatives. In his campaign ethics disclosure, he fails to admit that he has an indirect real estate interest (his Jiggershop lease), that his lease has clauses in it that result in a interest in other leases and matters of both the Chautauqua and the Boro, that he has real estate agreements with the Boro, etc. The Boro budget also has a "Jiggershop" account, out of which it pays a relatively small portion of the temporary parking staff that is hired throughout the summer. Where is the contract for this, when was/is it negotiated, and why didn't I get to see that? More importantly, why is the Jiggershop's apparent burden so small compared to the other leaseholders in the Boro? Does Allwein recuse himself when it comes to parking issues? And, how many of these other types of "sweet deals" are there for him with the Boro?

It is time to pry open all these nasty little redundancies, overlaps, and deficiencies: just exactly how many ways are we going to allow staff to make money off our resources and our fees and tax money. Is Bill Care really our municipal works guy and a "private consultant" to the water authority or to any other municipality? Does he clock off the boro clock when he changes hats? If the EIT system was so poorly checked on that EIT collectors across the state are able to hold on to revenues without impunity--to the tune of $811,000 alone by the Leb Co EIT collector., and nobody's been checking on our EIT collector, who has any real idea what's been happening in MGB regarding EIT--or with any other monies going through our borough.

I think this confluence of events makes it imperative that we change the leadership in our community. Which is why I will not be casting one single vote for any of the three incumbents, but will be writing in three names of those I think would do a better job. I think of it as kind of a "vote of no confidence."

EIT Bureau admits there was a pattern of distribution based on set or predetermined percentages

I recently asked the EIT Bureau Board President to confirm whether or not there was a percent-allocation distribution schedule. He recently clearly replied that there was a pattern of distribution based on a predetermined, or set, percentages. However, he said that it wasn't a "schedule." This response confirms the three points that I have been blogging about since July:

1. There was a known distribution pattern that Foltz did not deviate from. The accusers' own report demonstrates this.

2. Keystone's current distribution of EIT revenue is a deviation from an admitted distribution pattern, yet this change in the rules of administration for this tax was never properly enacted. The Enabling Act for the EIT requires such rules be adopted via resolution. There is no evidence that this was ever done. In the meantime, because our solicitor is failing to push the EIT Bureau and Keystone to follow the law here, Mt. Gretna is getting seriously short changed.

3. Our city solicitor is failing to properly represent Mt. Gretna on this issue. The accusers have not presented any evidence that presents any sort of legal sufficiency--its all been conclusory hearsay and accusation. Therefore, there is no basis for our solicitor to get us into any "settlement" negotiations, much less, a "settlement." His failure to properly represent us is primarily based in his conflicting representation of municipalities that are the "accusers" in this matter.

At the last Borough meeting, I asked our borough solicitor to "Please show me where you are finding the proof that something was done wrong here, because, in all my research, I can't find that proof?" His answer was for me to "read the Local Tax Enabling Act. The proof is in there." That is not a sufficient answer--and I knew that, because I, unlike some legal practictioners Ihave met, like to do my homework BEFORE asking the question. So, I kindly replied to him that I have already referred to that Act, and the laws embodied there really contradict all the things he has been asserting. (Later in the meeting, he admitted to another concerned resident that the documentary evidence that was found really is poor--"paper shoved in garbage bags shoved in a closet.")

You other residents should know that, before presenting that question to the Borough, I spoke at length with three very knowledgable sources--other EIT collectors and the Harrisburg guru on the matter, who each spent enormous amounts of time reviewing the Enabling Act with me. I am very appreciative of their graciousness in spending so much time with me and their transparent and eager sharing of knowledge on the administration of the EIT and the Local Tax Enabling Act. However, in each conversation, we concluded that:

1. There is NO mandate for distribution according to actual contributions to the EIT pool. That's simply how EIT taxing entities usually do it.

2. That taxing bodies are allowed to deviate from the 50/50 split by agreement (as long as they don't exceed the tax allowed by law), and

3. That such rules can be created by the tax officer but must be adopted by resolution.

So, applying these laws to the facts here, the conclusions are that an agreement to distribute according to the admitted to percentages was made some time ago, it was adhered to, and Keystone is deviating from that policy even though no resolution has been adopted that changes the administration of this tax in terms of distribution.

Further, the Enabling Act requires that each municipality annually reconcile its EIT receipts with the tax officer so that any adjustments for over or under payments can be immediately made. There has been no suggestion or evidence presented that this did not happen, and there is no requirement that it be done in writing. For nearly 50 years since this tax has been levied in Lebanon County, NO municipality or school district is known to have complained about being accused of, via this annual reconciliation and adjustment requirement, under or overpaying. So, absent sufficient evidence establishing the contrary, the ONLY supported conclusion here is that the distribution pattern was indeed an accepted "schedule" and ALL under and over-payments were reconciled annually.

The reality is that the EIT Bureau lost track of what it was supposed to be doing. That Foltz embezzled $800,000, that he could send a municipality a check at the ring of a phone call, and that he didn't send EIT entities outside Lebanon County their due revenues collected do NOT show that he didn't distribute the revenue appropriately within the County. Why? Well, a recent state study of the EIT shows that this tax is so poorly administered that millions and millions are "lost" each year--even to embezzlement. (The estimates put the loss at from $100 million to $200 million, a year!) Further, if your county's plan allocates a set percentage to each municipality, you know exactly how much you can send it when it calls you asking for a check. In Mt. Gretna's case, Foltz knew he could send us .35% of whatever had come in recently. From the resulting consistencies demonstrated in the actual EIT data of the McKonly Asbury report, Foltz apparently did an efficient job of making sure municipalities got only their percentage for the year, even though you could call and get part of that percentage earlier, rather than later. And, that recent government study also established that many EIT collectors weren't even sending the outside taxing bodies the tax their own county collected from the other counties' residents--ever. So, its no surprise that Foltz may have been under-paying these other taxing bodies--that was, and still is, common practice across the state.

Ultimately, all this is irrelevant but highlights a much more important point: it is up to the alleging entity to prove its case--it is not up to Mt. Gretna to prove its "innocence."

Here, the allegedly under-paid municipalities, the EIT Bureau, and our own solicitor are relying on the McKonly-Asbury report to make the accusers' case. (There is a link to that report in the Links List at the bottom of the page.) However, that report does not have the authority of an audit, and it relies on highly inaccurate data and hidden formulas to craft a conclusory argument:

1. The DOR data is simply not a reflection of EIT data, and therefore can not be used in place of EIT data--the two are very different sets of numbers, and

2. According to the Bureau's own admission, set percentages were apparently applied to the McKonly derived DOR data, yet those percentages were never called out in the report. Nor does the report explain its use of those percentages.

The report simply is a well-crafted, non-objective statement manipulated by the accusers to state their accusations in a different way. More importantly, no matter what way I read the report, I can not find that it provides support to their allegations--especially not legally sufficient support to justify taking more of our money for any type of "repayment" plan.

The documents referred to in this post can be viewed by clicking their link in the Links List at the bottom of this page.