Berks Democrats

Exeter Appoints Zoning Member Secretly

Exetrer Township is still at it, denying the public the open government they deserve.  After violating their own rules for replacing Dave Barbieri as Supervisor they've replaced him on the Planning Commission in a secret meeting.  They claim they do not need to advertise such meetings or allow any public comment or feedback.

This attitude that the people who live in Exeter aren't entitled to open government is wrong, terribly wrong.  Remember this 57% tax increase the next time you vote.

A Boston Christmas

We visited Boston for Christmas this year.  My nephew and his wife hosted at their new home in Medford, Massachusetts amid two feet of snow.  This was only my second visit to beantown, the first being when they moved October 31st.  We drove around a bit and went through the Massachusetts Turnpike tunnels constructed as The Big Dig.  When you exit the tunnels going north you cross this beautiful bridge.  We stayed at a hotel in Cambridge overlooking Fresh Pond and near Harvard.

The snow:

A view of Boston:

Fresh Pond along Soldiers Field Road:

Festive decorations in Newton:

The Big Dig Bridge:

My Problem With Boscov's

I rarely ever shop at Boscov's.  I have several reasons for this and this week I got another.  I was at their North Outlet Center Monday with a family member who was shopping for a new television.  Having made the purchase the individual elected to buy the extended warranty which was listed on the sale tag for $90 less than the clerk charged.  Even after I raised the issue that it's illegal to charge more than an advertised price he refused to correct his scam.

Normally I stay out of Boscov's because their stores are a mess for me to navigate.  I have a balance disorder and having to find my way around their endless aisle obstructions is a problem.  I have no idea how shoppers in wheelchairs function inside a Boscov's.  Someone needs to inform Albert about the ADA.  I'm just surprised he hasn't been sued more over injuries and access.  I know of one disabled person who was injured in one of his stores because of their refusal to provide clear aisles for all shoppers.  Boscov's then fought her claim vociferously. 

Will someone please put Albert Boscov in a wheelchair and make him get around one of his stores by himself?

My other problem with Boscov's are Albert's political contributions.  He regularly contributes to people like Rick Santorum and Joe Pitts.  Not only contributes but maxes out.  This year he also gave to Ron Stanko.   I vote with my dollars so, as much as possible, I shop where they don't wind up in such coffers.

Reality Check

This was written on my major blog The Pennsylvania Progressive, by one of my friends and contributors there.  Kirk is the person who requested the August resolution against me from Tom Herman and the person to whom Mr. Herman said rules forbade him from doing so because nothing is official until approved in the minutes at future meetings.  This is the Herman rule I cited at Saturday''s meeting.  The Chairman's penchant for making up rules as convenient then discarding them when they aren't is a serious issue.

I am cross posting this from my national/state blog along with the comment I posted this morning.

Reality Check

by Kirk Wentzel

John,

The Judicial Committee found in your favor and the County Committee by a majority vote, approved the recommendation. I find it interesting how your language at the County Committee meeting heard by half the room in your attack on a State Representative is no where posted. Your apology on your Berks blog falls short of what decency in this matter would require. I suggest you apologize to the State Rep. "in person" since you acosted him in person and that you apologize in person to the entire County Committee at our next meeting. Your posted outrages, are "one sided" inaccurate misrepresentations, revistist history and/or science fiction. I strongly suggest you actually research your information and allegations prior to posting them on an Internet blog for all the world to see and possibly assume there may be any truth to them. As my email to the Berks County Democratic Community states, "Congratulations," on your prevailing before the Berks County Democratic Committee's Judicial Committee and the County Committee's "majority" vote to support their recommendation. Again, I invite you to become a team player and participating member of the Committee and assist all of us in building the precincts with the DNC's Howard Dean 50 State Grassroots Precinct Building Plan, that we have embraced.

Merry Christmas.

Sincerely,

Tom Herman, Chairman
Berks County Democratic Committee

Above is the comment written by Democratic Committee Chairman Tom Herman in response to an article on this blog. I responded to his comment in that article but I was so annoyed by the bloated ego displayed here by Mr. Herman that I decided to re-word my comment as an actual article.

THIS ENTIRE ARTICLE IS MY OPINION…LET’S JUST BE CLEAR THAT THE ONLY ACCUSATION I MAKE IS THAT SOMEBODY NEEDS A REALITY CHECK. I WELCOME ANY CORRECTIONS TO ANY FACTS I STATE BUT AS FOR MY CONCLUSIONS AND OPINIONS…OH WELL YOU’LL JUST HAVE TO DEAL WITH THEM. That said…

Mr. Herman, may I point out that despite your hand-picked Kangaroo court’s ruling, you have, and you continue to pursue some unfathomed vendetta against Mr. Morgan. At the meeting you outlined your argument against John and had it printed on Committee stationary for all the delegates despite knowing that the ruling would be in John’s favor. You did NOT permit John to have available any response to your manifesto of allegations. It is my understanding that your own Judiciary Committee chairman REFUSED to sign the report, on the advice of his lawyer. Excuse me but that seems a bit odd don’t you think? What possible reason would a committee person have for fearing to sign a simple report of findings???

Let’s address the comment about (by the way the word is) revisionist history. Why is it you keep changing the rules of Democratic Committee to suit your whims? Talk about revisionist! When I asked you for a copy of the motion against John you told me it wasn’t valid until the meetings were approved at the next meeting. Yet you pay bills and bring in new members so they can take part in meetings immediately without having the minutes approved first? This seems to be a double-standard. I’m an accountant Mr. Herman. I specialize in taking companies with poor systems and making their accounting department shine. Part and parcel of that job is forensic accounting. Shall I request to have a look at the Committee books to see how many bills were paid before the minutes authorizing their payment were approved at the next meeting? What would I find, I wonder?

As for apologies, if anyone here owes anyone else an apology I would think it’s clearly apparently that you owe one to Mr. Morgan.  You have pursued John with a zeal rarely seen today. He still exists under the threat of a lawsuit for the name of his other blog, a suit that has no merit since (as I understand it from checking the ownership online) the Committee doesn’t even own its own blog name. And, in case you read this also…no, Mr. Ryan I’m not a lawyer but neither am I a moron. You don’t need to be a lawyer to research law and precedents and relevant rulings. You sure don’t need to be a lawyer to check and see who owns a website name on the internet…it’s really rather easy. There are non-lawyers who are actually intelligent people. I don’t find people who throw their title around as an ego trip to be especially impressive.

Back to the point…Mr. Herman, have you taken the same action and made the same threats against the person or people who are running the blog entitled Berks County Dems sited at http://berkscountydems.wordpress.com???

How about the person or people at the blog entitled Berks Democratic Committee sited at http://berksdemocraticcommittee.blogspot.com??? And this appears to be run by Republicans judging by their own blog entries.

Nevertheless, you have take action of threat against Mr. Morgan. A threat you have not yet rescinded. How very interesting? And yet, we’re not supposed to believe this is somehow a personal vendetta.

You present yourself as a “man of rules, truth and equity” well let’s examine that for moment shall we. When Tom Caltagirone gave money to a Republican a while ago, did you move to have him punished in any way? When Mr. Caltagirone pulled his little stunt about a year ago changing his vote in the House you wrote a scathing entry on the Committee’s official site. No follow through though. No call for resignation. In fact, now you appear to be his friend. I can’t help wonder what prompted the re-evaluation of your comments.

 

A few days ago John wrote a rather lengthy article about Mr. Caltagirone’s inability to follow campaign finance reporting laws. Yet the silence from your office is noticeable by its absence. Why should we Democrats not be holding OUR officials to the standards we chastise the other side for not adhering to? To allow Democrats to flaunt the law should be intolerable to us. All that does is cost us credibility and votes. It gives the opposition ammunition to use against us and, from the standpoint of trying to get Democrats elected, is your worst nightmare come true as Chairman. Or, at least, one would think it so. And yet the article, with links directly to the Commonwealth’s website to support its factual basis, is treated by you as a traitorous act, not by Mr. Caltagirone, the man who appears to have violated the regulations, but by Mr. Morgan who reported it.

You said, “Your posted outrages, are "one sided" inaccurate misrepresentations, revistist (sic) history and/or science fiction.”

Clearly, as we have seen, that is not true. You have an odd sense of values Mr. Herman. I understand you work for a union. It is men like you that make me want to outlaw unions. No scruples and a little light on the ethics.

I would suggest to you that Mr. Morgan’s reporting is well researched in its facts. You may disagree with his commentary and perhaps the conclusions he draws from time to time but so do I. He fully supports unions and I think they should be stomped out of existence like a bug. We fight publically on the blogs all the time about that. You CAN challenge someone and still be cordial and remain friends and maintain a working partnership. But you have chosen to obfuscate the truth and re-write the rules time after time to suit your own needs.

I don’t know who is pulling the strings. I suspect I know the answer but without proof I’m not stupid enough to voice that opinion.

If you really want to have everyone work as a team, rescind the threat of a law suit, stop changing the rules, follow the Bylaws and apply them equally to ALL members, step up to plate and show YOUR strength of character and apologize for the actions you have taken against Mr. Morgan publically and personally and make an effort to show that you are truly an upstanding, honest, ethical person.

I don’t think you’ll do that…I hope that you will…but I don’t think you will. As it stands, I think you’re going to keep pushing until John and his lawyer sue the crap out of you and the Committee and the whole thing blows up in the media making an even larger mess. Well, maybe then we’ll find out why the Chairperson of the Judiciary Committee refused to sign the report on the advice of his lawyer. I just can’t get past that one. That’s a gem…a real keeper…it’s very telling…really it is…

 Posted by Kirk Wentzel at 06:49 PM in Campaigns

My comment:

The Committee cannot rescind the lawsuit threat because Mr. Herman used that as his first charge against me in his complaint. He then used as justification for his illegal suspension of me as an elected official.

Regardless, no Committee person has made any attempt to nullify, rescind, or negate the threat. This is why I have hired an attorney.

Herman took his initial actions against me as a Committee man but now has distributed them in his capacity as Chair and on the Party letterhead making them official Democratic Party documents and positions. Not one Committee person objected to these actions at Saturday's meeting. Oops.

As for apologies, none have been offered to me by either Mr. Herman, Mr. Ryan or Mr. Caltagirone.

I have said Tom Herman would refuse to stop his attacks upon me and his comment here proves me correct. It's similar in tone to various emails he has sent (and which I possess) slandering me.

This is why I will seek a formal legal resolution to this matter.

Posted by: John Morgan | December 19, 2007 at 09:03 AM

John,

The Judicial Committee found in your favor and the County Committee by a majority vote, approved the recommendation. I find it interesting how your language at the County Committee meeting heard by half the room in your attack on a State Representative is no where posted. Your apology on your Berks blog falls short of what decency in this matter would require. I suggest you apologize to the State Rep. "in person" since you acosted him in person and that you apologize in person to the entire County Committee at our next meeting. Your posted outrages, are "one sided" inaccurate misrepresentations, revistist history and/or science fiction. I strongly suggest you actually research your information and allegations prior to posting them on an Internet blog for all the world to see and possibly assume there may be any truth to them. As my email to the Berks County Democratic Community states, "Congratulations," on your prevailing before the Berks County Democratic Committee's Judicial Committee and the County Committee's "majority" vote to support their recommendation. Again, I invite you to become a team player and participating member of the Committee and assist all of us in building the precincts with the DNC's Howard Dean 50 State Grassroots Precinct Building Plan, that we have embraced.

Merry Christmas.

Sincerely,

Tom Herman, Chairman
Berks County Democratic Committee

Above is the comment written by Democratic Committee Chairman Tom Herman in response to an article on this blog. I responded to his comment in that article but I was so annoyed by the bloated ego displayed here by Mr. Herman that I decided to re-word my comment as an actual article.

THIS ENTIRE ARTICLE IS MY OPINION…LET’S JUST BE CLEAR THAT THE ONLY ACCUSATION I MAKE IS THAT SOMEBODY NEEDS A REALITY CHECK. I WELCOME ANY CORRECTIONS TO ANY FACTS I STATE BUT AS FOR MY CONCLUSIONS AND OPINIONS…OH WELL YOU’LL JUST HAVE TO DEAL WITH THEM. That said…

Mr. Herman, may I point out that despite your hand-picked Kangaroo court’s ruling, you have, and you continue to pursue some unfathomed vendetta against Mr. Morgan. At the meeting you outlined your argument against John and had it printed on Committee stationary for all the delegates despite knowing that the ruling would be in John’s favor. You did NOT permit John to have available any response to your manifesto of allegations. It is my understanding that your own Judiciary Committee chairman REFUSED to sign the report, on the advice of his lawyer. Excuse me but that seems a bit odd don’t you think? What possible reason would a committee person have for fearing to sign a simple report of findings???

Let’s address the comment about (by the way the word is) revisionist history. Why is it you keep changing the rules of Democratic Committee to suit your whims? Talk about revisionist! When I asked you for a copy of the motion against John you told me it wasn’t valid until the meetings were approved at the next meeting. Yet you pay bills and bring in new members so they can take part in meetings immediately without having the minutes approved first? This seems to be a double-standard. I’m an accountant Mr. Herman. I specialize in taking companies with poor systems and making their accounting department shine. Part and parcel of that job is forensic accounting. Shall I request to have a look at the Committee books to see how many bills were paid before the minutes authorizing their payment were approved at the next meeting? What would I find, I wonder?

As for apologies, if anyone here owes anyone else an apology I would think it’s clearly apparently that you owe one to Mr. Morgan.  You have pursued John with a zeal rarely seen today. He still exists under the threat of a lawsuit for the name of his other blog, a suit that has no merit since (as I understand it from checking the ownership online) the Committee doesn’t even own its own blog name. And, in case you read this also…no, Mr. Ryan I’m not a lawyer but neither am I a moron. You don’t need to be a lawyer to research law and precedents and relevant rulings. You sure don’t need to be a lawyer to check and see who owns a website name on the internet…it’s really rather easy. There are non-lawyers who are actually intelligent people. I don’t find people who throw their title around as an ego trip to be especially impressive.

Back to the point…Mr. Herman, have you taken the same action and made the same threats against the person or people who are running the blog entitled Berks County Dems sited at http://berkscountydems.wordpress.com???

How about the person or people at the blog entitled Berks Democratic Committee sited at http://berksdemocraticcommittee.blogspot.com??? And this appears to be run by Republicans judging by their own blog entries.

Nevertheless, you have take action of threat against Mr. Morgan. A threat you have not yet rescinded. How very interesting? And yet, we’re not supposed to believe this is somehow a personal vendetta.

You present yourself as a “man of rules, truth and equity” well let’s examine that for moment shall we. When Tom Caltagirone gave money to a Republican a while ago, did you move to have him punished in any way? When Mr. Caltagirone pulled his little stunt about a year ago changing his vote in the House you wrote a scathing entry on the Committee’s official site. No follow through though. No call for resignation. In fact, now you appear to be his friend. I can’t help wonder what prompted the re-evaluation of your comments.

 

A few days ago John wrote a rather lengthy article about Mr. Caltagirone’s inability to follow campaign finance reporting laws. Yet the silence from your office is noticeable by its absence. Why should we Democrats not be holding OUR officials to the standards we chastise the other side for not adhering to? To allow Democrats to flaunt the law should be intolerable to us. All that does is cost us credibility and votes. It gives the opposition ammunition to use against us and, from the standpoint of trying to get Democrats elected, is your worst nightmare come true as Chairman. Or, at least, one would think it so. And yet the article, with links directly to the Commonwealth’s website to support its factual basis, is treated by you as a traitorous act, not by Mr. Caltagirone, the man who appears to have violated the regulations, but by Mr. Morgan who reported it.

You said, “Your posted outrages, are "one sided" inaccurate misrepresentations, revistist (sic) history and/or science fiction.”

Clearly, as we have seen, that is not true. You have an odd sense of values Mr. Herman. I understand you work for a union. It is men like you that make me want to outlaw unions. No scruples and a little light on the ethics.

I would suggest to you that Mr. Morgan’s reporting is well researched in its facts. You may disagree with his commentary and perhaps the conclusions he draws from time to time but so do I. He fully supports unions and I think they should be stomped out of existence like a bug. We fight publically on the blogs all the time about that. You CAN challenge someone and still be cordial and remain friends and maintain a working partnership. But you have chosen to obfuscate the truth and re-write the rules time after time to suit your own needs.

I don’t know who is pulling the strings. I suspect I know the answer but without proof I’m not stupid enough to voice that opinion.

If you really want to have everyone work as a team, rescind the threat of a law suit, stop changing the rules, follow the Bylaws and apply them equally to ALL members, step up to plate and show YOUR strength of character and apologize for the actions you have taken against Mr. Morgan publically and personally and make an effort to show that you are truly an upstanding, honest, ethical person.

I don’t think you’ll do that…I hope that you will…but I don’t think you will. As it stands, I think you’re going to keep pushing until John and his lawyer sue the crap out of you and the Committee and the whole thing blows up in the media making an even larger mess. Well, maybe then we’ll find out why the Chairperson of the Judiciary Committee refused to sign the report on the advice of his lawyer. I just can’t get past that one. That’s a gem…a real keeper…it’s very telling…really it is…

 Posted by Kirk Wentzel at 06:49 PM in Campaigns

Reading Eagle Gets It Wrong

The Reading Eagle is reporting today that Tom Gajewski voted against the 2008 budget.  That is wrong, he did vote for the budget after trying to save taxpayers money for the next two years when the budget is continuing to show a surplus.

For 2008 the fund surplus is projected to be $83 million, or 22% of tax revenues.  The standard for this account is between 10-15%.  Gajewski, after getting mercilessly attacked for the size of the balance sought to reduce it to acceptable levels and return some much needed funds to taxpayers.  His effort was defeated.  After it lost he did vote for the overall budget.  The Eagle's reporting is wrong.

Update:  The Eagle still has failed to correct their error.  I now have to begin questioning their motivations for printing this lie.  John Forrester moderated a candidate's event in Kutztown shortly before the election and is well aware of the issue raised by the Republicans about the fund surplus.  Why are they so silent about the flip flopping by the GOP on this issue?  They cannot have it both ways, harshly criticizing the surplus during the campaign then refuse to reduce it during the budget approval process?

The Riverfront Amphitheater

The County Commissioners voted this morning to appropriate $625,000 in matching funds for the initial phase of the Schuylkill River waterfront development project.  Judy Schwank and Tom Gajewski overcame Mark Scott's vehement opposition to approve the action.  The development of our river front area has been slow to develop and now something finally is underway.  The Commonwealth has approved $1.8+ million for the amphitheater project but it requires matching funds from the City, County and RDC.  Without some movement towards those matching funds Harrisburg might have reallocated the state money for other projects.

This move was designed to get the ball rolling and secure those funds.  Scott has been extremely vocal in his opposition to this project even though history shows strong urban renewal spurred by waterfront development projects everywhere.  These areas have rejuvenated many communities and brought serious investment into the communities and engendered great public appreciation and activity.  Opposing the development of our riverfront doesn't make any sense whatsoever.  David Thun was at this morning's meeting and reiterated the significance of the project and to allay concerns about progress of planning and dispel Mark Scott's objections.

Gajewski Tax Cut Rejected

The County Commissioners year end meetings are always interesting...and long.  Today's adjourned at 12:45 pm and deferred the routine business to Thursday after several presentations and discussion of the 2008 budget.  Tom Gajewski, after getting hammered by the Republicans on the fall campaign trail for the excess County operating fund, proposed a one mill tax decrease.  Mark Scott and Judy Schwank defeated the motion.

Gajewski's rationale was the current surplus which is 22% for 2008 and 16% for 2009.  The general recommendations are for surpluses in the 10-15% range so a 1% tax cut would mean using some of those funds to fund County government and return money to the taxpayers during a sharply slowing economy.  Even Mark Scott acknowledged, disingenuously (since he opposed the cut) that tax cuts should be taken during recessions and slow economic times.

Has anyone been reading the economic reports lately or speaking to the business community?  New home starts are at their lowest level in 16 years nationally and 24,000 construction were lost just last month.  This is the time.

It's easy to understand Tom's reasoning for this idea after watching Christian Leinbach severely criticize him for the fund balance.  The Republicans cannot have it both ways:  if you're going to sharply criticize the amount of the fund balance then you must support a tax cut to draw them down.  Mark Scott voted against the tax cut.  I wonder how Republican in Berks County are going to appreciate that since tax cuts are the GOP's number one issue each and every election?

Blog Space Day

PSoTD is at it again daring his fellow bloggers to do something.  This time it's "show your blog space day."  The idea is to show everyone where it is we actually do our blogging.  For me, I have a corner area devoted to my computer hutch and equipment.  My primary blogging platform is a Dell Dimension 4700 desktop with wireless keyboard and mouse and double flat screen LCD monitors.  The dual monitors enable me to write posts on the left side and do and keep my research on the right one.  I also keep the Gmail account for the blogs on the right side monitor. 

I have a selection of stickers and decals from various political campaigns on the hutch along with a Pennsylvania Dutch hex sign which says "willkommen" (welcome).  I keep the laptop (Dell Inspiron 6000) on the side table and use that when I'm mobile.  If I'm using the desktop for something besides blogging (like Civilization) I keep the Gmail going on the laptop.

County Committee Meeting=Part 2

I'm pretty upset today.  After receiving word from my attorney Paul Rossi yesterday that the Judiciary Committee had found in my favor while also harshly criticizing me I entered the meeting to find an official document at the sign in table further attacking me.  This was obviously done at Committee expense and was distributed to Committee people with the other official Committee documents.

That put me in a very nasty frame of mind.  Tom Herman, as I keep saying, will refuse to stop coming after me and this was evidence thereof.   I apologize to Rep. Caltagirone for telling him to "go f*ck himself" but that is how angry I was all morning.   The Committee overwhelmingly voted to accept the Judiciary Committee report and Herman then lifted my suspension.  His supension of me was illegal and actionable and he did this as Chair.  As such I then called for his resignation.

That wasn't well received by Committee persons but I felt it important to give the Berks County Democratic Committee the opportunity to settle this legal matter at the least possible expense to them.  No settlement of this matter will happen without Tom Herman's resignation.   With a new Chair a settlement of the pending legal issues, I think, could proceed.  It won't with him as Chair meaning the Committee will be responsible for my lawyer's ongoing fees, at $350/hour.

I gave them the chance to mitigate their financial liability and they rejected it so, so be it.

On the positive side I will not hold any Committee persons personally liable for financial damages because the Committee failed to incorporate.  Only those Committee persons with individual culpability are risking that loss.  This has caused me severe emotional distress for four months and the Committee continues to harangue about the domain name on this blog.  They refuse to let these matters die even as they acknowledge I have every legal right to use the name.  Herman allowed a new Committee man to rail ramble on against me even though he was out of order and the point of order was raised.  He won't stop attacking me until I force a legal resolution.

Now is the time for accountability for what has transpired.  Today's vote, legally, settled nothing, especially in light of the Chair's continuing conduct.

County Committee Meeting=Part 1

I'm at the Berks County Democratic Committee meeting.  There's a wireless connection so I can live blog what is happening.  My first outrage today, especially in light of Tom Herman's Judiciary Committee finding for me in his attempt to expel me as a Committee person.  In spite of this he distributed a flier at the meeting continuing to attack me.  This was done at County Committee expense and distributed at the sing-in table.  It wasn't distributed as an individual piece on the tables in the meeting room.  It was an official handout from the County Committee.

Now he has ruled me out of order for objecting to his not following his own rules.  Tom Herman, when asked to provide a copy of the Committee's motion against me last August replied that no business of the Committee is official until the next meeting when minutes are read and approved.  Aside from openly acknowledging he made the statement he ruled my point of order enforcing his rule, out of order.

I will also note that Tom Herman did not allow me to present any witnesses or have anyone but my lawyer speak for me at his Judiciary Committee meeting while he allowed John Ryan to attend and speak against me.