Unbelievable!!

Well, well, well, if the days don't surprise you! I still do not believe my ears.
Around 3 today I went over to get my mail, and there is ole' Chucknuts outside the Jiggershop putt-puttin'. I still have to pinch myself, because its what I am about to write next is the stuff that lawyers, prosecuters, and investigators dream of--its when a "perp" splays himself for you. And this is how a Chucknut splaying evolves:

He is alone in his putt-puttin' and spies an opportunity to speak with the person that he perceives as his fiercest enemy. He calls me over and then acknowledges everything that I have been revealing about his conduct.

He admits that, for decades now, he has been fervently pushing a modernly refined method of political corruption: he calls it "expense-generation".

In short, he relies on his two best buds, the solicitor and public works director, to come up with any-which-way they can to create, for the public, an impression that this teeny-tiny municipality needs the staff, labor costs, fleet of earth moving equipment and vehicles, etc. of a municipality 8 times our actual size.

In addition, they used the unique situation here, where the homeowners association perfectly overlaps the municipality, to mix and muddle the money trail so badly that no layman is ever able to detect that there is so much redundancy and double-dipping that it would make your head spin.

He then admits that this "governing" strategy has allowed is other friends to collect State Pension Funds when they really weren't eligible, to collect over $20,000 a year in overtime--again, when there really was no overtime necessary to provide the municipality with services, and to bloat their timesheets to the point where we taxpayers pay almost $200,000 a year more than we needed to to get good public services.

He then apologized for denigrating me and my family and trying to harass us out of town.

He further promised that from now on, he would be on his best behavior--not his best christian behavior, but his best neighborly behavior, that he would cull the Borough down to two full time staff--which is a 30% more staff that other municipalities our size average, and would get rid of his "expense-generator" conduct.

He then admitted that this winter has been hard on him and that he would like to let some one else be the politicial spotlight. He feels that he has done all he can to get his "stuck in this fuckin' town" son on his feet and ready for taking care of himself, and that that is the only reason why he let all his other friends walk all over us Borough taxpayers--to set up an "estate" for his only offspring to inherit. (And then, in a rather humble way, he confided in me that he was never so proud of his boy as when he finally cut off the rat-tail that he sported for so many years.)

We then agreed that abandoning his "expense-generating" ways would effectively cut our budget by at least half without ever impacting delivery of services to the public, and that there are several people here that have the integrity and capacity to step up to the plate and work to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of mount gretna borough proper.

Wow!

Cheatemore and Chucknut's modus operandi stolen by the State!

I have been reading news stories about PA's botched Tax Amnesty Program and have come across some similarities with Kilgore and Chucky's modus operandi. Apparently, these tax amnesty letters are just simply stating that "you owe a debt to us" and don't include any information whatsoever about this alleged debt--not even an amount or a time frame. And, just like Cheatemore and Chucknut's strategy, rather than using proof, they use threats of penalties, etc, to extort more money from the little taxpayer. Certain Mt. Gretnan's may feel wealthy enough to play their game with them, but its really unethical, corrupt, and belligerent behavior--not to mention very unpatriotic, and not all Mt. Gretnan's actually are wealthy enough to participate in a corrupt political community.

Here, with this Amnesty stuff, some people have developed some interesting ways to deal with these mysterious notices. Below is a copy of one response that I thought many of you would find interesting:


April 27, 2010

PA Dept Of Revenue
Office of Tax Amnesty
POBox 281101
Harrisburg, PA 1712801101

Dear Sir or Madam:
I recently received your letter of “Notice of PA Tax Amnesty Program” and have made several attempts to contact you via the information suggested in that letter. Through no fault of my own, I was not able to reach your office using either of these two methods. Thus this letter serves as the only accessible route to making contact and obtaining information necessary to resolve the issue created in your letter.

In order to determine the fairness and accuracy of the debt alleged in your letter, please timely send me information establishing the basis of the original "debt" amount; relevant dates; copies of all correspondence sent to me regarding this alleged debt. This letter serves as timely notice to you that I am indeed availing myself of this opportunity to participate, and that, however, the details of my participation will necessarily depend on the amount that you prove that I owe. Please also note that your office’s failure to timely provide access to my information should in no way prevent me from participating in the program, should your response fairly and accurately prove that I do indeed owe a tax debt to PA.

A copy of your letter to me is enclosed, as it provides all the necessary personal information with which to identify this issue.

I think that I would also send it return receipt requested--and add a little blurb about how incompetent and cheating PA public officials have grown that they can just "say" that you owe a debt and never prove that it really exists.

Other people have printed out all their "error notices" when trying to register, and have sent copies to their representatives. I guess this is to remind them that their incompetence is showing, again.

Still, I revel in the fact that I am not a lone voice crying out against all this insanity. I am sure that there are others asking why Kilgore never showed us the results of his little investigation of our tax returns? Uhmmm, I wonder, what did he do with all that access to our personal and financial information. Obviously, he didn't find anything to use to help us out of this whole EIT scam that he organized upon us. It is quite possible then that he really only used the EIT issue as a pretext to gain access to our tax filings so that he could have even more leverage to use against us to keep us in step and line with Cheatemore and Chucknut's organizational objectives to rip us off to the fullest extent possible.

A former EIT employee once told me that they found out that a very high-earning Mt. Gretnan had no EIT tax files on record, suggesting that Kilgore's investigation is going to be very tricky for him because he is not going to want to reveal that that particular Mt. Gretnan may not have paid their EIT. What's up with that, Keithy? Who are you protecting? Have you counseled the Borough to file a claim for that person's EIT owed us? Why not?

If getting a screwin' is good public sevice

Then Cheatin' Chucky, Stealmore Kilgore, and Know-more Care are experts and delivery of public service.

I know some long-time residents think that we pay three times as much for our public services than we should because that's what it takes to deliver them well. But, you are being duped. There is no other characterization for what these three have developed over the last four decades. And, well frankly, its time that especially our oler residents stepped out of denial about this. Why? Well, because its going to hurt you the most. It HAS already hurt you the most.

For those of you who are retired, you are on a fixed income that they have managed to figure out how to squeeze out of you a thousand ways to Sunday. I mean, come on, we absolutely do not need five full-time staff, much less six.

What we need is our neighbors to step up to the plate. We need John Feather to stop smiling that baby face and pretend that he is innocent in all this. For example, last year when the Chautauqua renegotiated a biased and exceptionally unfavorable--unfavorable to us Chautauqua shareholders-- Jiggershop lease with Chuck Allwein, borough council president and Jiggershop owner, Baby-face Johnny told us it was ok for the chautauqua lawyer (who is also the Borough lawyer) to forget about his duty of loyalty to US and to personally represent Cheatin' Chucky in those negotiations. WTF people--that is NOT good public service--its an ethical violation and a conflict of interest. And, Baby-face Johnny knows that.

And

What is the Chaut. Board thinking!?

Borough financial records indicate that the Chautauqua is routinely used for paying the following Borough bills. Don't forget that Chautauqua records suggest to US, the lowly shareholders, that it has its own separate bills for many of these "line items.":
1. AT&T
2. Code Enforcement
3. Comcast
4. State Pensions
5. Workman’s Compensation
6. Met Ed
7. Heating Oil
8. Life Insurance
9. Verizon
10. Verizon Wireless
11. Blue Cross
12. Executive Answering Service
13. Lebanon Mobile Phone
14. Propane
15. Public Risk Management Insurance
16. Business Insurance
17. Disability Insurance
18. Radio Maintenance
19. Electric Maintenance
20. Stauffers (of Kissel Hill)
21. Staples
22. Traffic Control (aka-- the maniacal chain-smoking parking lot attendants)
23. Sysco
24. JH Brubaker
25. Zeager Brothers
26. Bashore’s Restaurant Equipment
27. Sporting Valley Turf Farm
28. United Rentals
29. Stephenson Equipment

In addition to these charges, the Borough also sends Chautauqua shareholders twice-monthly bills for Labor Services, for Art Show labor, and the Chautauqua also outright “contributes” a substantial amount every year (usually around $18,000, which is more than the Chautuaqua tells the IRS that it spends on summer programs). Historically, the yearly total sucked from shareholders is over $200,000.

All this, in addition to taking our property taxes, earned income taxes, water and sewer fees, and pass-through funds like state and county taxes or fees (like the liquid fuels surcharges on the gas we buy and state income tax).

Oh don't get me wrong--the Council isn't to get all the blame in this. Its time to ask the Chautauqua Board what in the hell they were thinking--this is clearly not about efficient delivery of services to us. Its about squeezing us for all we are worth.

Its about figuring out all the redundant ways in which they can extract money from us to pay for the same set of services provided to the same set of people BY the same set of people.

Why don't all these numbers show up in the Borough's proposed budget that they let us see every year? and why won't the Chautauqua tell the IRS where all this money is really going? Heck, why don't they tell us where it is really going?

Why Entrenched Leaders Keep Saying the Word "Good" to Constituents

Currently, I am dancing between two books:
Raj Patel’s The Value of Nothing: How to Reshape Market Society, and Shelby Steele’s White Guilt: How Blacks and Whites Together Destroyed the Promise of the Civil Rights Era.

I didn’t plan to read them at the same time. It just happened. Ironically, though, they are very similar. Both topics discuss generalized social behavior—one, capitalism/consumerism, and the other, civil rights and the responses to that movement. Where they overlap is that, in the lead up to each of their discussion points, they necessarily describe the power dynamics displayed socially. Both rely on the idea that, in social groups historically, the group in power imposes negative conditions on the less powerful group. Now, these conditions are usually couched in terms that really do NOT reflect the truth about that particular society or situation. But the less powerful group will see the trade off in accepting this “lie” from the power group, and will concede or comply with the falsities, largely because the lie fits in with the context that the power group has created and perpetuates. In the societal situations in both books, the power group’s falsities always rely on enough of a historically and morally truism to provide the less powerful group with enough of a basis to convince themselves that its ok to adopt the power group’s false construct.

Also, interestingly enough, Steele included a comment about when he first realized, on a drive through California, that there was this moral deficiency in the current social construct dealing with America’s history of racism. He was worried that his drive would end too soon. To quote: “It had been a luxury just to drive along in Chautauqua-like contemplation of a paradox.” That statement took me back to a statement published by a Chautauqua resident not so long ago. It seems that a couple of their programs triggered some “religious” blowback, and that Chautauquan took the time to remind his compatriots that that’s what Chautauqua’s did—their programming and speakers were intended to bring seemingly oppositional or incongruent positions or knowledges together, whether in one presentation or in a series of such, and to reveal any overlap, common ground, or compromise.

Although I had been seeing the applications of both men’s writings to the social construct that is Mt. Gretna, Steele’s reference made it imperative that the connection be made. So, here goes.

In discussing the good intentions of the architects behind the Great Society, Steele mentions how politicians and social leaders are a “touchy lot.” Both authors spend ample text showing us how these power figures, being human after all, express an innate drive to be seen, and for their policies and actions to be seen, as “good.” This drive extends throughout their lives, long after the end of the usefulness of their innovations, long after community needs are no longer fulfilled by their innovations, and, most relevant to us, long after their innovations have turned into something that is now harmful to the group.

Both authors also discuss how the power group, in its effort to keep control of its “good” image or moral character, will become blind to their own motivations, to their own humanity. They assume a pattern of making decisions and setting agendas that put their innovations in the best light possible. More importantly here, they also establish a pattern of ignoring any issue or fact that would only serve to challenge or threaten their reputation for “effectiveness” or of “good intentions.”

So, I now learn more abut why Chuck, Peggy, Bill, Linda, etc can’t, or won’t, acknowledge the truth or realities of the needs here or of the finances here—because it would necessarily lead to the possibility that something that they decided or did was not “correct” for this community and that, in turn would erode their sense of accomplishment and contribution to this community. Forget about the fact that the community now has a leadership structure that is not responding to the actual needs of the community, their blind reliance on the concept that something that they once did forty years ago makes even their current behavior “good” and, more importantly, not open to debate. Otherwise, to apply reality as a test of their current effectiveness would be to also erode the perception of their authority, legitimacy, and power in this community today.

Ergo, here in MG, where forty years ago we saw leaders pursuing innovations that truly spoke to the needs of the community, today this same community sees those same leaders continuing to try to rest on those historic laurels. Only, the innovations of yesterday are not enough for the community of today. It simply is not enough to say that Chuck or Bill or Linda provided a great service to the community in the 1980’s and to assume that that applies today. The community has changed in dramatic ways and their “innovations” of the past have taken on such a life of their own as to have become a beast to us.

I present to you today’s situation, and ask you to apply that “Chautauquan” approach to exploring our community situation today. Specifically, to explore how ethical and efficient is it to allow entrenched leadership to continue to avoid the proper scrutiny—Chautauquan scrutiny, if I may. For, if one really cares about this community, they will forego the perpetual mulligan that has been issued to protect anachronistic leadership policies and decisions. Coming soon, you will have the opportunity to ask our leadership:

1. Why this community has a million dollars flowing through it annually yet only reports to us taxpayers a combined expense budget of around $740,000?
2. Why Borough can report to us an annual total budget of around $150,000, yet report to the state an annual budget of $589,000?
3. Why we pay more for Authority services than other participants, who only pay their water/sewer fee and never have to pay for shared labor costs between their Authority and with their Borough or with their homeowners association?
4. Why we have the physically smallest sized municipality in the state and a water/sewer use pattern that never—ever, reaches its capacity, yet we have a staff of 5 full time employees, especially when other municipalities our size have only one full time staff. Do you all really believe that you are getting THAT much “good” service today, or is it that you ONCE got that level of service?
5. Why, with a staff that has four extra full-time staff, our public works director still can’t get the job done without billing us taxpayers for an average of 520 hours of overtime a year? Could it be that its not “Extra” service that he’s delivering, but extra pension and income that he is taking?
6. Why, when the original arrangement is that the Borough is supposed to provide set up and breakdown for the Art Show for free, employees bill overtime for those periods and that overtime is marked as “Chautauqua” or even as “Art Show”?
7. Why a public office and materials paid for by the taxpayer can be diverted for use by a public officer in his private business operations?
8. Why a public government can routinely and regularly bill a private corporation—the Chautauqua, for labor, yet the corporation can deny that it has any labor costs on its IRS tax filings and yet both entities can deny that any contract or documentation of terms exists? And, when that Chautauqua money is used to pay for labor services of someone who is also a Chautauqua officer, the Chautauqua also denies to the IRS that it transferred any payment to any of its officers? More importantly, why is every member of the Board approving the submission of IRS forms in which they know improper answers were given?
9. Why, or how, the Chautauqua Board, can justify, year after year, spending more money (around $150,000 a year) on a non-competitive labor “arrangement” for maintenance of such few grounds and buildings than on its summer programs (around $9000)—which is a required activity under its incorporation document? And why won’t either party provide us with a written explanation of the terms of this arrangement, like how overtime is determined, approved, allocated and paid for?
10. Given the current “arrangements”, how can the Chautauqua Board even justify its continued existence? Either through open or completely obscured and hidden transactions, the corporation as pawned off or ignored almost all of its real responsibilities, and, today, only tangentially serves as the programming coordinator it was intended to be. This Chautauqua’s mission fulfillment pales in comparison to other Chautauquas’, and there is no excuse for it.
11. Why, when LebCo’s transportation profile shows a truck traffic increase on 117 of 50% in the last eight years and a 67% increase to year 2030, and when at least 6 different people from 6 different households in the last 5 years have raised concerns about safety or asked for increased enforcement of traffic laws like speed laws, this leadership sees fit to ignore the reality around us or to denigrate or besmirch either the issue or the constituent. I will never forget Chuck’s curt re-characterization of Mt. Gretna when he told me years ago that newcomers would just have to get used to speeding because, well, choosing Mt. Gretna really was an act of “coming to the harm.” That’s exactly what he said. How is that good service, guys, when your leader pretty much sets up your community to guarantee a tragic traffic death in the near future?

So, yeah, the toilets may flush and the drinking water is drinkable. But that in no way means you are getting “good” service overall or that our leadership really cares about us. Just look at their willingness, Council and Board alike, to figure out even another way to reach into our pockets and take our money to pay for an issue that has never been proven to have any merit—the EIT overpayment allegation. Yeah, they care about us—but it seems only in terms of our wallet and whether we keep it open to their whims and to stuffing their pensions and whether we keep calling them “good public servants.”

As I learned from the above referenced books, just because the power group in this community feeds to us a little of the good thing that they are supposed to be delivering to us, it doesn’t mean that asking for an acknowledgement of our true, present-day reality, you know, for example, asking for an accounting of their present day financial on-goings, or asking for substantive traffic law enforcement when hundreds are violating such laws every day in our community, is “stirring up trouble.” Rather it’s a sign of responsible citizenry, of persons who care about someone other than themselves—their neighbors.