Archive for October, 2011

It’s on the Web!

I’ve been meaning to add a blogroll, a set of recommended links which appear to the right of the posts.

Now I have an incentive: a new website that has information about the Republican candidates running for UMT supervisor.

Check it out.

All Your Rights Are Belong To Us

The supervisor campaign heats up, and another “player” comes on board.  This one has the name didyouknowumt@gmail.com, which sounds like someone related to askmeumt@gmail.com.

Here’s the text of the email: Continue reading

Township Meeting – October 19

No video up yet, and I’m not doing a general round up.  Maybe later.  I didn’t watch the whole thing.  In an entirely predictable manner, the supervisors sat quietly during public comments when people praised them, and interrupted constantly when challenged.  The selective courtesy is a hallmark of the Jekyll and Hyde behavior of these supervisors.

Last night’s big draw was public reaction to the budget, now that it’s had some time to circulate and sink in. Continue reading

Streams of Gold

In a prior post, I referred to a guest opinion in the Courier Times.  The “cable franchise fee” was mentioned in that piece.  Looking into that a bit, I found that it’s neither a fee or a tax; it’s rent!

Apparently it has something to do with the Cable Communications Act (1984), which was supposed to ensure that the powers between cable operators and governments would be balanced.  Weren’t you worried about that!  Government bodies are allowed to issue franchise licenses to cable companies; the fee doesn’t have to be passed on to the consumer, but I pay an extra 5 bucks a month on my Comcast bill for a “cable franchise fee”. Continue reading

No One’s Asking

Ugh, this one reeks a bit of desperation, courtesy of ASKmeUMT@gmail.com:

Did you know that Philadelphia Magazine has chosen Upper Makefield the Best Place to Raise Kids?

Philadelphia Magazine, noting policies that Dan Rattigan & Mary Ryan have long supported, declares Upper Makefield among the top suburbs in the region.  Rattigan’s & Ryan’s policies which led to this award were open space, tree and stream restoration, top notch police protection, support of our great volunteer fire department, outstanding water quality, enviable parks & recreation areas, and a host of others that touch our core values.  Rattigan & Ryan have fought long and hard to preserve thevalues which we cherish in Upper Makefield.

Sadly, many of these programs have been vigorously criticized and opposed by their opponents Polhemus, Sasso, and Breeden who wish to cheapen our community.

When you vote in November, keep in mind whose core community values are the same as yours.

Continue reading

Awful State of the County

It seems that not a week goes by without Diane Marseglia being in the news.

Todays it’s this story referring to a Lower Makefield guy who decided to run for supervisor.  Problem is that his company, where he is the general manager, moves the voting machines for the county, and he didn’t disclose that.

I’m not inclined to believe that he had a plan to haul the machines off and replaced them with machines locked and loaded with his name.  This is Bucks County PA, not Hudson County NJ.  But it was a conflict of interest, people complained, and the decision was made to have county workers move the machines in Lower Makefield.

Since this could happen in the future, I’m all for addressing it in some fashion.  Marseglia, however, in true Democrat fashion, wants to push all kinds of punitive rules and regulations.  Not only does she want to stop people from running for office if they (or the company they work for) are moving voting machines, she doesn’t want them making campaign contributions over $50.

No one likes conflicts of interest, but come on.  Why do Dems always go off the cliff?  Employees of companies who move voting machines are prohibited from making campaign contributions, or risk losing business for their employer.  Yet another lefty pol who likes to talk about freedom, but will strangle it at every opportunity.

Even worse is the response from Martin and Loughery.  Martin, in true muscular fashion, said… nothing.  From Loughery we get this:

Loughery, however, indicated he would be willing to discuss the proposed policy if it were put on a future meeting agenda

Agenda?  Marseglia’s “agenda” is the newspaper, and she uses it to every advantage.  Declining to comment and speaking fussily about formal agendas is arrogant and stupid.  You want to get re-elected?  Talk to us.

You Won’t Feel a Thing

I’ve avoided posting about the budget presented at last night’s meeting because I don’t think the prelim 2012 budget is up on the website yet.

Okay, that’s a half-truth.  The other is that the proposed budget is depressing.

The General Fund shows a deficit of just over half a million dollars.  Like the past, it is always with us.

Depressing as the deficit is, there’s worse.  A mil of tax is being diverted from open space funding to the general fund, and a half-mil is coming back to us.  Technically it’s a matter of cutting the open fund mils by one and a half and raising property tax by 1, but in the end it’s the same.

I always assumed that the open space levies would come back entirely to us, so I certainly made an ass of me.

The thing is, there’s still 9.2525 mils going to open space.  Changing my prior assumption, I guess that could all be up for grabs by the township.  Will we ever get those mils back?  Maybe like this:

In funding open space, we may never see that money again, long after the open space plan has ended.  We’re paying it anyway, right?  Pay for this or pay for that; no harm, no foul.  Just keep saying it.

In a year of yet another significant deficit, even with grabbing another mil (about $230,000) which will likely be permanent, why even talk about giving a half mil back?  Seems like just yesterday Rattigan was talking about how a 1 mil increase would be no big deal to a township of fat cats like ours.  What changed?

Oh yeah, the election.

In this news story, Guy Polhemus calls this move a shell game.  I disagree.  I call it a sucker punch.

Sucker!