Free Press – November 15, 2007

2007 Elections, October 25^th Column, Bob Leight

Dear Friends,

Good morning. Before I get to my thoughts about the November 6 election, I have several items. First, Robert Leight called me with an interesting addition to my column on the Docktor family in Richland Township. I wrote about Jeannette Docktor who recently turned 100. (Her name is spelled with two “n’s.”)

In it, I mentioned her four living children and their careers. They are: Alex, Jr. Willard, Robert and Jeanette (interestingly spelled with one “n”). When I interviewed them for the column, Willard failed to mention that the Future Farmers of America organization awarded him as its outstanding Pennsylvania student for 1950.

Bob Leight remembered Willard’s honor because Bob was also enrolled in the FFA program at the time. “Willard was already a [successful] farmer,” Leight told me. “He [Willard] worked on the family dairy farm and raised tomatoes. He sold them to the Campbell Soup Company in Camden, N.J.”

Willard remained in agriculture while Bob Leight became an academian. He is presently a Quakertown school director. Thanks Bob for cluing me in.

And now to business.

As you know in Bucks County, the $87 million dollar bond issue passed with flying colors. The Bucks Republican Commissioners, plus the row officers won as well. Let me begin with this observation.

The Morning Call did itself no favors for its endorsement of Democrats Diane Marseglia and Steve Santarsiero for Bucks County Commissioners in its October 31 editorial. The Call acknowledged that the two Democrats were blowing smoke for their red herring argument against building a new courthouse. But the Call endorsed them anyway.

Why?

“It isn’t healthy, politically for one party to be in control that long,” the editorial scolded, observing that the GOP has controlled the courthouse for 20 years. The Call’s reason was flimsy. Worse, and making less sense, it endorsed Republican Charley Martin who was seeking his fourth term. If the Call were so unhappy with Republican domination, wouldn’t you think that they’d have endorsed Jim Cawley who was running for his first term instead?

Using the same logic next year, will the Call oppose State Representative Paul Clymer because he’s served in the legislature for eons? Don’t hold your breath. I predict that the Call will support Clymer, and when they do, you might ask them why they’re so inconsistent?

Next week, I’ll write about the local elections and how the open space bond issue passed resoundingly with a three to one ratio.

And now to the column, which the Free Press refused to publish in its October 25 edition.

Editor Dave Anderson told me that my piece could not run because it was too close to the November 6 election. My quarrel with Dave is that in the October 25 edition, there were plenty of letters to the editor about the local election, some from the candidates themselves. You’ll see that my topics were the Bucks County Commissioner race plus the open space bond issue referendum, 12 days hence. It also addressed the Pennsylvania Power and Light’s land grab in Richland Township.

If readers objected to my October 25^th column, they had another edition (November 1) to air their differences before the November 6 election. In my next life, I’ll understand this paper’s logic…just as I will the Morning Call’s.

So here’s the October 25^th column as I submitted it. I’ve added my comments after the fact in parenthesis.

The November 6 election is fast approaching and the stakes are high. As I see it, the only issue that clouds the Bucks County Commissioner election and the approval of the $87 million bond issue is a red herring. I’m referring to the anger issue…anger with the Bush administration and anger at municipal and school property taxes. Will that anger affect the commissioner race?

Voter unhappiness with President Bush’s performance at the national level and exorbitant school, borough and township property taxes and fees at the local level should not influence the county election. (It didn’t) The important question is: should voters continue the Republican majority in the three county commissioner seats or not? (They did, though narrowly.)

Still, you never know.

The margin between Democratic and Republican voter registration is narrowing. The GOP is still ahead but a voter registration lead no longer guarantees Republican victories. Personally, I don’t think that the Democratic commissioner candidates have built a sufficient case to expel the Republicans. (They didn’t.)

Democrats Diane Marseglia and Steve Santarsiero would have us believe that Republican Commissioners James Cawley and Charles Martin don’t have to build a new courthouse at an estimated $113 million cost. In addition, the Democrats are trying to convince us that the Republican majority hasn’t done enough to protect open space.

That’s just baloney.

No county commissioner would willingly build a new courthouse unless the judges have built an airtight case for its need. I was a county commissioner a long time ago and remember the fights we had with the judges during their annual budget reviews. After all the angst and arguments ceased, the judges always won. Once, I challenged the court to seek legislative approval to raise its own taxes. I argued that the judges should take the political heat for their judicial needs, rather than passing the buck to the commissioners for the heavy lifting. Guess how far I got?

When commissioner candidates tell you that they can order the court to spread out its cases and workload among the 13 district court sites instead of building additional space in the county seat, they’re just blowing smoke. Pay no attention to that false argument. (You voters didn’t.)

Similarly, county commissioners lack the power to regulate where and how much development should be permitted. The state legislature gave that right to local municipalities…directly influenced by the largest and most expensive governments of all, the Pennsylvania’s 501 school districts. The 67 counties in the commonwealth can only advise local governments. County commissioners cannot order them to do anything.

Yes, the county government can protect open space by passing bond issues to acquire farmland and development rites. That’s precisely why the commissioners successfully fought for a $59 million bond issue in 1997. They spent that money wisely and acquired 15,000 acres of open space. This year, they are leading the way to create an $87 million bond issue for the same purpose.

Both parties and all the commissioner candidates are supporting a “Yes Vote.” I agree with them. (So did you.)

Can more be done? Absolutely. But most of the effort must come from local municipalities and school districts. Remember, county commissioners do not have the power to regulate zoning or planning.

Milford Township is thinking correctly about safeguarding the open space that it has acquired. The three supervisors plan to ensure that open space paid for with tax dollars is not used for something else. They might name a third-party conservation organization, like the Heritage Conservancy of Doylestown, to have a vested interest in the land. That would make it more difficult for public utilities to force its way onto protected land.

There’s an interesting case in Richland Township that is headed for a showdown. John Heley is a Quakertown attorney who represents a Cherry Road family, which is fighting the Pennsylvania Power and Light Company (PPL). Instead of grabbing new chunks of land for its power lines, Heley claims that PPL could expand its power grid by using existing rights of way in Upper Bucks, such as the Route 309 corridor or the railroad. Heley says that PPL is really interested in readying an expansion in the undeveloped farmland in Richland and Springfield Townships.

I think that Heley is right. He claims that local governments have not stood in the way of PPL and they should.

You can understand why Pennsylvania’s 2,600 municipalities are no match for developers and utility companies, which divide and conquer. The 54 municipalities in Bucks County would have far more clout if they were organized into 13 districts like the public schools. One municipal government instead of six (Haycock, Milford, Quakertown, Richland, Richlandtown Borough, and Trumbauersville) would be a stronger opponent of developers and public utilities.

If I had a magic wand, I would give the 67 counties the power to plan and zone for growth. But to accomplish that, the state legislature would have to change the way Pennsylvania governs. Unfortunately, that won’t happen anytime soon. Just look at the state of affairs in Harrisburg.

I get weary and angry at the state legislature, which works harder for its own retention than tackling issues for its citizens. For example, was anyone surprised that the legislature refused to consider reducing its size last week? Nor would the legislature allow voters to decide whether the state constitution should be reviewed…40 years after the last constitution convention.

You can understand why I’m a proponent of term limits.

So I continue to rail and wail in vain…rather like the junkyard dog baying at the noonday whistle.

Readers, if you’d been a Free Press policy maker, would you have run this column 12 days before the election?

Sincerely,

Charles Meredith