POTTSTOWN — A week after Borough Council voted unanimously to enter into a 31-year contract with Waste Management for the treatment of the leachate of the Pottstown Landfill, some members of the Pottstown Borough Authority wondered aloud if some of the $250,000 that was part of the agreement shouldn't wind up in authority coffers.
');
}
//-->
All total, Waste Management will pay Pottstown $500,000 over the next five years and the $250,000 check sitting on Borough Manager Ray Lopez's desk is just the first installment.The contract ends a two-year dispute between Waste Management and Pottstown, a dispute which at one time was marked by the threat of a $10 million lawsuit.Borough Council President David Garner recused himself from voting because he is also the paid solicitor for the borough authority and he said Borough Solicitor Charles D. Garner had advised him it could be seen as a conflict for him to vote on a contract which he had helped negotiate.Both the borough and the authority are parties to the contract and so when it came up during last Tuesday night's meeting, some authority members had some thoughts on how it should be spent.Board member Tom Carroll made a motion that the authority take half that money and use it to fund an ongoing maintenance program for the authority, but it died for lack of a second.Authority chairman Ronald Downie suggested that the money might be used to pay off debts, but made no formal motion.But authority member Don Read told his fellow board members that the money should be for the borough to distribute."Steve Toroney spearheaded this on borough council and when we sat in this room in a joint meeting with the authority, the authority said it was not a problem and we should just renew the existing contract," Read said. "In fact I think that's why a number of the (former authority board members) are no longer here."He said the borough "put so much time into this over the years to get everyone to take a look at this, for us to now suggest we should take control of a share of it just seems wrong.""But we're the ones treating the leachate," Carroll argued."Which they pay for like any other customer," Downie responded.Read, who is also the chairman of Pottstown's Environmental Advisory Council and sits on borough council's trash committee with Toroney, said he hopes the money can be used to either pay the borough's share of participating in a regional composting facility with Lower Pottsgrove, or for a borough recycling project.In the past, the landfill's leachate was treated for free in exchange for the tipping fee for borough trash being waived at the Pottstown Landfill.With the landfill's closure, that option is no longer a possibility."We should use that money to do something to help keep people's trash costs down," said Read.Board member Aram Ecker agreed."We need to do something to offset the trash expense, that seems to be what is driving everybody crazy and they get it with their water bill," Ecker said.But Carroll didn't give up right away.Referring to a previous discussion in which Read had advocated budgeting for regular maintenance and equipment replacement, Carroll said "you just sat here and told these people they need to prepare to purchase the items they will need and we should have a maintenance plan, and there's money there for that."But Read dismissed this appeal as well."Your motion didn't pass, so it's irrelevant," Read said.The authority made no formal recommendation to council on how the $250,000 should be used.
Pottstown Mercury - 09/22/08 - http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=20131847&BRD=1674&PAG=461&dept_id=635482&rfi=8
Monday, September 22, 2008
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Pottstown council hires financial consultant
Wednesday, September 17, 2008 3:00 AM EDT
By Mercury Staff Report
POTTSTOWN — Borough Council Monday night hired a Reading consulting firm to handle the work performed by Robert Armelin, the former finance director who resigned last month.Financial Solutions was chosen on the recommendation of council's Finance Committee, which selected the firm from among three that had expressed interest in the post.Council Vice President Greg Berry, who chairs the finance committee, said the firm was the best choice because it does not charge by the hour, but charges a flat fee.The firm will charge Pottstown taxpayers $8,000 per month for budget and general finances services and $10,000 a month for financial advisory services.
The firm also has experience in the state's Early Intervention Program, a financial audit and recommendation service the borough recently entered, Berry said."They have significant experience on both sides, both as consultants for municipalities like Lancaster, Reading and Muhlenberg, as well as for the Commonwealth," he said.The vote to appoint the firm was unanimous.The council also took unanimous action on a another matter made necessary by Armelin's resignation. Assistant Borough Manager Jason Bobst was appointed Pottstown's treasurer, a post Armelin formerly held.
Friday, September 12, 2008
New borough cars don't please everyone
POTTSTOWN — The borough's codes department will soon have three new cars for its inspectors to use, but not everyone on Borough Council is happy about it.
');
}
//-->
What seemed at first to be a routine matter before council instead turned into a split vote when council's finance committee recommended adding the purchase of two more cars for the codes department onto a planned purchase of one.Council Vice President Greg Berry said the 2008 budget has money for the purchase of one Chevrolet Cobalt but that recent repair estimates for other Cobalts exceed the value of the vehicles.Because the Code Enforcement Office has been without a director for a number of months — a new director was hired last week — that salary line has been accumulating money, providing enough to purchase the other two cars.Before the recommendation could be acted upon, Councilman Steve Toroney wanted to know about "the two SUVs I see parked at borough hall all the time."He was informed they are used by Borough Manager Ray Lopez and Assistant Borough Manager Jason Bobst.Both he, Councilman Mark Gibson and Councilman Greg Berry began to discuss the issue of whether the borough ought to be buying two new vehicles if it already has two that are infrequently used.Council President David Garner said the questions were off the point of the vote, but Gibson replied "if it will save us money, let the codes department use those vehicles. We're always crying about how we're trying to save money.""So you want to use SUVs for the codes office instead of Cobalts?" Garner asked."If it saves us money," Gibson replied.Mayor Sharon Valentine-Thomas noted that the low mileage on the SUVs could counteract any savings from not buying new, higher mileage vehicles.Bobst said the Cobalts get between 30 and 35 miles per gallon.He said the vehicles will cost roughly $13,000 a piece, but the borough will get a deal for buying three at the same time.In the end, Gibson and Councilman Jody Rhoads voted against the purchase.
Pottstown Mercury - 09/12/08 - http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=20118167&BRD=1674&PAG=461&dept_id=635482&rfi=8
');
}
//-->
What seemed at first to be a routine matter before council instead turned into a split vote when council's finance committee recommended adding the purchase of two more cars for the codes department onto a planned purchase of one.Council Vice President Greg Berry said the 2008 budget has money for the purchase of one Chevrolet Cobalt but that recent repair estimates for other Cobalts exceed the value of the vehicles.Because the Code Enforcement Office has been without a director for a number of months — a new director was hired last week — that salary line has been accumulating money, providing enough to purchase the other two cars.Before the recommendation could be acted upon, Councilman Steve Toroney wanted to know about "the two SUVs I see parked at borough hall all the time."He was informed they are used by Borough Manager Ray Lopez and Assistant Borough Manager Jason Bobst.Both he, Councilman Mark Gibson and Councilman Greg Berry began to discuss the issue of whether the borough ought to be buying two new vehicles if it already has two that are infrequently used.Council President David Garner said the questions were off the point of the vote, but Gibson replied "if it will save us money, let the codes department use those vehicles. We're always crying about how we're trying to save money.""So you want to use SUVs for the codes office instead of Cobalts?" Garner asked."If it saves us money," Gibson replied.Mayor Sharon Valentine-Thomas noted that the low mileage on the SUVs could counteract any savings from not buying new, higher mileage vehicles.Bobst said the Cobalts get between 30 and 35 miles per gallon.He said the vehicles will cost roughly $13,000 a piece, but the borough will get a deal for buying three at the same time.In the end, Gibson and Councilman Jody Rhoads voted against the purchase.
Pottstown Mercury - 09/12/08 - http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=20118167&BRD=1674&PAG=461&dept_id=635482&rfi=8
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Composting center could cost Pottstown $100K or more
POTTSTOWN — Despite a hefty price tag, Borough Council on Monday unanimously authorized the staff to continue talking to their counterparts at Lower Pottsgrove about a regional composting facility that has the potential to cost borough taxpayers between $100,000 and $175,000 a year."This isn't binding us to anything except continuing the conversation," Borough Council President David Garner said.That conversation was more detailed Sept. 3 when Borough Council debated the merits of joining with Lower Pottsgrove, which is also in discussions with Upper Pottsgrove, New Hanover and North Coventry.The cost split, arranged by Alyson Elliott, assistant township manager in Lower Pottsgrove, is divvied up by population, based on the 2000 census.At 21,859, the borough has the bulk of the population and thus, at $174,980, would shoulder the bulk of the set-up costs, according to the documents used by Elliott in explaining the project.Her own township comes in nearest the borough at $89,759 because of its 11,213 population in 2000.At 4,102, Upper Pottsgrove's costs would be the lowest - $32,836.In 2009, Pottstown would again shoulder the largest burden for operating costs at $99,210 and by 2010, would be hit with a bill of $161,726.Councilman Stephen Toroney said a facility whose costs are determined by how much material it has to compost should charge based on who is bringing in the most material."Yards in Pottstown are much smaller than yards in these more widely developed townships, they are not going to be generating the same amount of grass clippings or tree branches or brush that yards in Lower Pottsgrove are going to create," Toroney said."It does seem a little unequal," said Don Read, chairman of the borough's Environmental Advisory Council.The costs should be based on tonnage, Toroney said, because that is the element that will determine the costs. But Pottstown is not in a position to just walk away, said Toroney and Assistant Borough Manager Jason Bobst.Bobst told the council that because Pottstown does not have a "drop-off" area for compost, the state is withholding money the borough earned through its recycling efforts. As of right now, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection has about $50,000 of Pottstown's money, Bobst said.It's all part of the state's effort to keep compostable material out of landfills where space is dwindling."We have to get rid of the stuff," said Toroney."I think we'd better find our own piece of ground," said Councilman Mike Wenzel."Even if we decided to start our own, it's going to be costly," Read said Monday.According to Elliott's estimates, the facility, planned for a farm site at the corner of Bleim Road and Route 663, would cost as much as $1.2 million - a cost she hopes to cut with grant funding.Costs could drop further if East Coventry and Limerick, which have begun to express interest, end up joining the facility.As envisioned, residents of all participating municipalities would be able to drop off their yard waste at the center, which would be open on the weekends, for free.
Pottstown Mercury - 09/10/08 - http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=20113704&BRD=1674&PAG=461&dept_id=635482&rfi=8
Pottstown Mercury - 09/10/08 - http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=20113704&BRD=1674&PAG=461&dept_id=635482&rfi=8
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Borough pays price for employee lawsuits
POTTSTOWN — The borough's dealings with three employees who filed lawsuits against the borough have cost taxpayers more than $100,000 in the past three years, a Mercury analysis of borough records has shown.
');
}
//-->
By far the largest amount of this money has been paid to attorneys dealing not only with the lawsuits, but also with the issues that led up to those suits, according to a review of the borough's legal bills.The three employees are former water meter reader Jerry Stick, former water plant operator George Famous and W. Patrick Ellison, who still works at the water plant.All three have tangled with borough management and all three have filed whistleblower lawsuits against the borough alleging that they were retaliated against for pointing out problems with the operation of the water plant and other items.Late last year, Stick settled his lawsuit against the borough, walking away with a $60,000 payment. But that money was paid by the borough's insurance company, not by taxpayers.The bulk of the costs taxpayers forked over for his case came from fees paid to lawyers hired by the borough's insurance company, Traveler's.Borough Manager Ray Lopez confirmed this week that the borough's policy covering these cases has a $25,000 deductible, "per case, per year," meaning that the borough must rack up $25,000 in legal costs in a single year before the insurance company starts picking up the lawyers' tab.Melissa Fox, deputy press secretary with the Pennsylvania Department of Insurance, said Pottstown's deductible did not seem unusual, but noted that the insurance in question is not regulated by her department.Managers at two neighboring townships said their liability insurance carried no deductible at all.According to the borough budget posted online, liability insurance costs the borough $4,296 per year and $20,000 is set aside as a "reserve for claims."Ironically, legal bills from Travelers' lawyers for dealing with Stick's case over 2006 and 2007 add up to exactly the $25,000 deductible — a bill taxpayers must shoulder.Another bill for which taxpayers are responsible was the $25,116 paid to the insurance company lawyers dealing with the Famous case, according to the invoices. Famous has also filed a defamation of character lawsuit against the borough.Ellison's case has cost taxpayers $39,497 over the course of 2005, 2006 and 2007, according to the bills.That may be because Ellison actually had two cases.The first, was settled in Feb. 6, 2006, after Ellison was reinstated into his job by labor arbitrator Thomas G. McConnell Jr. Ellison received a $7,000 payment as part of that settlement.A letter from Borough Solicitor Charles D. Garner Jr. which was included in a copy of Ellison's settlement obtained by The Mercury, indicated the borough paid $15,568 to cover the legal costs of litigating Ellison's first case.Then in April 2007, Ellison joined Famous and Stick in filing whistleblower lawsuits against the borough, charging he was retaliated against because he had told Maul and former borough manager Jack Layne that workers and supervisors at the plant had "failed to maintain proper standards of operation" which "gave rise to potential health and safety issues for the citizens and residents."Also, Ellison had brought an action through the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in Philadelphia.High Street attorney Adam Sager is representing all three men and both the suits by Famous and Ellison remain outstanding.Stick, who also headed up the borough hall chapter of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, clashed repeatedly with borough managers before he was terminated.Once a tenant in a borough authority-owned twin home on Old Reading Pike adjacent to the water treatment plant, Stick started making headlines when he complained that Utilities Supervisor Robert Maul was paying less rent than him for identical living space and not even living in the home.Shortly thereafter, the borough authority evicted him and knocked the building down — a building in which the authority had invested more than $30,000 in the two previous years — to make room for a bulk water distribution center.Evicting Stick cost ratepayers legal fees, this time from the two lawyers who have represented the borough authority over the past three years, David Allebach and David Garner, who is also the president of Pottstown Borough Council.Since both Famous and Ellison were water plant employees, both Allebach and David Garner were involved in conferences and preparing documents related to their cases.A review of David Garner's records indicate he was paid $2,072 in 2007 and 2008 to deal with matters related to Stick and whistleblower lawsuits.Allebach charged ratepayers $786 over 2006 and 2007 to deal with those issues.A review of bills from Charles D. Garner Jr.'s firm indicates he has charged taxpayers more than $3,000 over the course of three years to deal with issues involving Stick, Famous and Ellison.Further costs involve the police.Stick was arrested by Pottstown Police in 2007 and charged with tampering with evidence in connection with photos he provided to Lopez during an August 2007 labor/management meeting.Those charges were dismissed, for the second time, Friday by District Judge Maurice Saylor.According to the borough's contract with the police union, the man charged with investigating that charge, Detective Sgt. Raymond John Havrilak was paid $30.96 per hour in 2007 and $32.51 per hour in 2008.Given that the contract ensures Havrilak is paid four hours for every court appearance, no matter how long, that means the two appearances he made in the Stick case cost taxpayers $260.08.Assuming he spent at least five more hours investigating the case, and assuming it did not require any overtime, taxpayers would have paid another $175.These types of costs are not unique in Pottstown's history.In 2006, The Mercury reported that in the previous five years the borough had settled three claims made against it, two from black workers fired from the treatment plant, and another from a woman who worked in the public works department.All total, the costs associated with those settlements came out to $36,000.And the clock has probably not stopped running on the legal bills dealing with employees and former employees.Stick said Friday he intends to move forward with a federal lawsuit against the borough charging that his civil rights have been violated by the borough's treatment of him.And in June, former Code Enforcement Director Jeff Smith filed paperwork indicating he also intends to file a lawsuit against the borough.
Pottstown Mercury - 09/07/08 - http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=20109940&BRD=1674&PAG=461&dept_id=635482&rfi=8
');
}
//-->
By far the largest amount of this money has been paid to attorneys dealing not only with the lawsuits, but also with the issues that led up to those suits, according to a review of the borough's legal bills.The three employees are former water meter reader Jerry Stick, former water plant operator George Famous and W. Patrick Ellison, who still works at the water plant.All three have tangled with borough management and all three have filed whistleblower lawsuits against the borough alleging that they were retaliated against for pointing out problems with the operation of the water plant and other items.Late last year, Stick settled his lawsuit against the borough, walking away with a $60,000 payment. But that money was paid by the borough's insurance company, not by taxpayers.The bulk of the costs taxpayers forked over for his case came from fees paid to lawyers hired by the borough's insurance company, Traveler's.Borough Manager Ray Lopez confirmed this week that the borough's policy covering these cases has a $25,000 deductible, "per case, per year," meaning that the borough must rack up $25,000 in legal costs in a single year before the insurance company starts picking up the lawyers' tab.Melissa Fox, deputy press secretary with the Pennsylvania Department of Insurance, said Pottstown's deductible did not seem unusual, but noted that the insurance in question is not regulated by her department.Managers at two neighboring townships said their liability insurance carried no deductible at all.According to the borough budget posted online, liability insurance costs the borough $4,296 per year and $20,000 is set aside as a "reserve for claims."Ironically, legal bills from Travelers' lawyers for dealing with Stick's case over 2006 and 2007 add up to exactly the $25,000 deductible — a bill taxpayers must shoulder.Another bill for which taxpayers are responsible was the $25,116 paid to the insurance company lawyers dealing with the Famous case, according to the invoices. Famous has also filed a defamation of character lawsuit against the borough.Ellison's case has cost taxpayers $39,497 over the course of 2005, 2006 and 2007, according to the bills.That may be because Ellison actually had two cases.The first, was settled in Feb. 6, 2006, after Ellison was reinstated into his job by labor arbitrator Thomas G. McConnell Jr. Ellison received a $7,000 payment as part of that settlement.A letter from Borough Solicitor Charles D. Garner Jr. which was included in a copy of Ellison's settlement obtained by The Mercury, indicated the borough paid $15,568 to cover the legal costs of litigating Ellison's first case.Then in April 2007, Ellison joined Famous and Stick in filing whistleblower lawsuits against the borough, charging he was retaliated against because he had told Maul and former borough manager Jack Layne that workers and supervisors at the plant had "failed to maintain proper standards of operation" which "gave rise to potential health and safety issues for the citizens and residents."Also, Ellison had brought an action through the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in Philadelphia.High Street attorney Adam Sager is representing all three men and both the suits by Famous and Ellison remain outstanding.Stick, who also headed up the borough hall chapter of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, clashed repeatedly with borough managers before he was terminated.Once a tenant in a borough authority-owned twin home on Old Reading Pike adjacent to the water treatment plant, Stick started making headlines when he complained that Utilities Supervisor Robert Maul was paying less rent than him for identical living space and not even living in the home.Shortly thereafter, the borough authority evicted him and knocked the building down — a building in which the authority had invested more than $30,000 in the two previous years — to make room for a bulk water distribution center.Evicting Stick cost ratepayers legal fees, this time from the two lawyers who have represented the borough authority over the past three years, David Allebach and David Garner, who is also the president of Pottstown Borough Council.Since both Famous and Ellison were water plant employees, both Allebach and David Garner were involved in conferences and preparing documents related to their cases.A review of David Garner's records indicate he was paid $2,072 in 2007 and 2008 to deal with matters related to Stick and whistleblower lawsuits.Allebach charged ratepayers $786 over 2006 and 2007 to deal with those issues.A review of bills from Charles D. Garner Jr.'s firm indicates he has charged taxpayers more than $3,000 over the course of three years to deal with issues involving Stick, Famous and Ellison.Further costs involve the police.Stick was arrested by Pottstown Police in 2007 and charged with tampering with evidence in connection with photos he provided to Lopez during an August 2007 labor/management meeting.Those charges were dismissed, for the second time, Friday by District Judge Maurice Saylor.According to the borough's contract with the police union, the man charged with investigating that charge, Detective Sgt. Raymond John Havrilak was paid $30.96 per hour in 2007 and $32.51 per hour in 2008.Given that the contract ensures Havrilak is paid four hours for every court appearance, no matter how long, that means the two appearances he made in the Stick case cost taxpayers $260.08.Assuming he spent at least five more hours investigating the case, and assuming it did not require any overtime, taxpayers would have paid another $175.These types of costs are not unique in Pottstown's history.In 2006, The Mercury reported that in the previous five years the borough had settled three claims made against it, two from black workers fired from the treatment plant, and another from a woman who worked in the public works department.All total, the costs associated with those settlements came out to $36,000.And the clock has probably not stopped running on the legal bills dealing with employees and former employees.Stick said Friday he intends to move forward with a federal lawsuit against the borough charging that his civil rights have been violated by the borough's treatment of him.And in June, former Code Enforcement Director Jeff Smith filed paperwork indicating he also intends to file a lawsuit against the borough.
Pottstown Mercury - 09/07/08 - http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=20109940&BRD=1674&PAG=461&dept_id=635482&rfi=8
Legal fees costing Pottstown taxpayers $10,000 per month
POTTSTOWN — Doing legal work for the borough is a lucrative business.
A review of the borough's legal bills over the past three years indicates that Garner & Bauer, the firm whose namesake Charles D. Garner Jr. is borough solicitor, bills taxpayers an average of $10,000 per month.A review of those invoices shows that Garner's firm, which also provides services to the Pottstown Planning Commission, has earned $64,277 in the first six months of 2008, averaging $10,879.51 per month.That's an improvement over 2007, when the firm averaged only $10,033 per month, taking in a total of $120,397.62.In 2006, the average was better — $10,349.85 per month — earning the firm a total of $124,198.28.According to the bills, the firm charges $150 per hour for general legal and litigation services and $120 per hour for services provided to the planning commission, which is the smaller portion of the work, generally between 12 and 16 hours per month.This figure seems to be at odds with the 2008 adopted budget, which divides legal costs among many departments, but adds up to only $80,000.Although by far earning the most money, Garner is not the only firm on the payroll.Up until 2007, legal services for the Pottstown Borough Authority were provided by David Allebach, a partner in the firm of Yergey, Daylor, Allebach, Scheffey and Picardi.The rate he charged prior to being replaced in 2007 was $135 per hour.That year, he earned $20,445 for his firm.In 2006, Allebach's firm charged water and sewer system ratepayers nearly $62,000 for legal services and his bills averaged just over $5,000 per month.By comparison, his replacement is a bargain.David Garner, who also does double duty as president of Pottstown Borough Council, began billing the authority's customers in May, 2007.That year he was paid $20,442.32, averaging about $2,500 per month.Garner, who is cousin to the borough solicitor, has so far earned $16,353 in 2008, having billed through June when the legal bills were examined by The Mercury.His monthly average was $2,336.18 in 2008.
Pottstown Mercury - 09/07/08 - http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=20109941&BRD=1674&PAG=461&dept_id=635482&rfi=8
A review of the borough's legal bills over the past three years indicates that Garner & Bauer, the firm whose namesake Charles D. Garner Jr. is borough solicitor, bills taxpayers an average of $10,000 per month.A review of those invoices shows that Garner's firm, which also provides services to the Pottstown Planning Commission, has earned $64,277 in the first six months of 2008, averaging $10,879.51 per month.That's an improvement over 2007, when the firm averaged only $10,033 per month, taking in a total of $120,397.62.In 2006, the average was better — $10,349.85 per month — earning the firm a total of $124,198.28.According to the bills, the firm charges $150 per hour for general legal and litigation services and $120 per hour for services provided to the planning commission, which is the smaller portion of the work, generally between 12 and 16 hours per month.This figure seems to be at odds with the 2008 adopted budget, which divides legal costs among many departments, but adds up to only $80,000.Although by far earning the most money, Garner is not the only firm on the payroll.Up until 2007, legal services for the Pottstown Borough Authority were provided by David Allebach, a partner in the firm of Yergey, Daylor, Allebach, Scheffey and Picardi.The rate he charged prior to being replaced in 2007 was $135 per hour.That year, he earned $20,445 for his firm.In 2006, Allebach's firm charged water and sewer system ratepayers nearly $62,000 for legal services and his bills averaged just over $5,000 per month.By comparison, his replacement is a bargain.David Garner, who also does double duty as president of Pottstown Borough Council, began billing the authority's customers in May, 2007.That year he was paid $20,442.32, averaging about $2,500 per month.Garner, who is cousin to the borough solicitor, has so far earned $16,353 in 2008, having billed through June when the legal bills were examined by The Mercury.His monthly average was $2,336.18 in 2008.
Pottstown Mercury - 09/07/08 - http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=20109941&BRD=1674&PAG=461&dept_id=635482&rfi=8
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
