The New Mike

Reprinted from the Intelligencer

The new Mike

By: JOHN MULLANE

The Intelligencer

Last week, I wondered which Mike Fitzpatrick would show up on the campaign trail for Congress. Would it be "Moderate Mike," circa 2006, proud of his Sierra Club endorsement? Or would it be a persona to fit the times, say "Tea Party Mike," who recites the 10th Amendment from memory and embraces "Drill, baby, drill."

After announcing his candidacy for the 8th District seat in a rematch with incumbent Democrat Pat Murphy, I realized we have "Mystery Mike." It is a mystery to me what he or his Republican Party will do to end the Great Recession. How would they restore economic vitality and make it so one need not choose between making the mortgage and buying health insurance?

His remarks before hundreds of well-wishers on the lawn of the Neshaminy Middle School Saturday were brief and bland.

Jobs, runaway federal spending and health care are the themes of his campaign. Naturally, he will hammer Murphy's claim that Murf is a [cough, hack, wheeze] "fiscally conservative" Blue Dog Democrat.

But what are Mike's ideas to resolve the present crisis? He didn't say. Maybe we should go to his Web site and click on the policy tabs.

Tough times call for clear solutions boldly stated. Unemployment in Bucks County is 9 percent. From the number of middle-aged men and women I see clerking at convenience stores and stocking retail shelves, underemployment is as bad.

But what does a vote for the county GOP's favorite son mean for these people - and for the ticked-off independent voters who will decide this race? Nothing was offered.

Mike told the crowd that trillions of dollars of government debt is a "national emergency." Of course. What will he do about it? He didn't say. How about channeling the economist Grover Norquist: "My friends, I am committed to reducing the size of the federal government until it is small enough to drag into the bathroom and drown in the tub."

Fighting words like that would be worth tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Bensalem to Springtown.

The lesson of the recent upset in the U.S. Senate race in Massachusetts is that good ideas succinctly hand victory to an underdog. That quick-on-your-feet answers to belligerent questioners can turn the tide of a campaign - and history. ("It's not the Kennedy seat and it's not the Democrats' seat, it's the people's seat," Sen.-elect Brown said, and electrified the nation.)

Fitzpatrick fell flat when a belligerent questioner showed up to heckle him. The heckler marred the day by shouting obnoxiously, "How we gonna fix health care?"

In the crowd, pushing and shoving nearly turned into a brawl. The cops arrived. Fitzpatrick might have said: "Look - I will not support the health care status quo that just bankrupted Lower Bucks Hospital - or any government system that bankrupts the country."

But as shouting and confusion engulfed the event, Fitzpatrick continued reading prepared remarks: "I think that we need someone in Congress who's more concerned with the citizens of Bucks County than with extraneous photo opportunities. We don't need someone in Congress who's a rubber stamp for bad national policy or misplaced priorities."

He actually said "extraneous." At a rally. Egad.

Fitzpatrick runs in a Republican primary. There are at least eight other contenders aligned, more or less, with the Tea Party Movement. But on Saturday, the event felt uncomfortably like a back-door Republican coronation. The crowd was larded with Bucks County's GOP establishment, anathema to independents and tea partiers alike.

After Fitzpatrick finished, two candidates told me they will run as "outsiders." I asked Mike if his Republican establishment pedigree hurts him in the Tea Party era.

"I gotta tell ya - I'm an outsider," he said, and as the words sped from his lips, shrieking birds scattered from surrounding trees.

My jaw dropped like Obama approval ratings.

Mike is a good man who is blessed with a beautiful family. He is blessed with a miraculous recovery from cancer, which gives him moral credibility on health care. But it is the Democrats who are blessed with a (likely) Republican candidate whose positions on urgent issues are pastel and pending.

A Lack of Leadership

A bit touchy, isn’t he? Is Middletown Township Board of Supervisors Chairman Tom Gallagher supposed to be immune to criticism? In a recent Courier Times article, Gallagher said that “Chuck Thompson should let us have a meeting or two and see how we operate before commenting on this stuff.”

This “stuff?” Mr. Gallagher, this “stuff” is the public’s business. This “stuff” is important to the future of our community. This “stuff” involves taxpayer money, and when taxpayer money is at stake, there should not be a grace period of “a meeting or two” to observe how you operate. Your responsibility as an elected official to be fiscally responsible with tax dollars begins on day one, not after “a meeting or two.” Further, your misrepresentations are so transparent as to be ludicrous.

I know that others were concerned with your decision to put public comment at the end of the meeting and your disingenuous excuse was that you didn’t want the consultants to have to sit through public comment.

Since you didn’t even have minimal documentation at the meeting in which you appointed a new solicitor, I can only take you at your word that his compensation is exactly the same as the last solicitor, except that the hourly rate is $120 instead of $125 an hour.

I wonder if you even know that the solicitor is usually paid a monthly retainer to cover all time spent attending Board meetings, weekly staff meetings, telephone calls and e-mails between his office and the manager, directors, employees and the members of the Board of Supervisors. These items never appear as time charges on the general bill as they are all covered by the retainer.

The hourly rate is paid for any other work, such as writing ordinances, contracts, reviewing documents, litigation, etc.

Therefore, Mr. Gallagher, you aren’t saving any money by having the solicitor or other consultants sit through public comment. Furthermore, the solicitor and engineer frequently respond to public comments because they involve projects on which they are working. Not having them available for public comment is a disservice to any resident with a concern.

How contemptuous you are about public comment: “The only piece of true business at the reorganization meeting was approval of the bill lists and I called for comment on that. The other things were not public comment items.” Seems you have changed your tune from the few times you decided to attend a Board meeting to enlighten us with your criticisms. And if appointments are no longer “public comment items,” the township should be able to avoid frivolous lawsuits like the one you filed over this topic in 2008.

And speaking of disingenuous. The school board does indeed meet the second and fourth Tuesdays of the month. So if you were truly interested in allowing these people the opportunity to attend the Board meetings, why not hold them on the first and third Tuesdays? Sure would have been a lot less confusing.

Staying Safe

Forty-one burglaries in a two-month period in and around Forsythia Gate. More than 50 rightfully angry, frightened and frustrated people gathered in a neighborhood home to learn what is being done to solve the crimes and what can be done to deter future crime.

That was the setting last Thursday night as members of the Forsythia Gate neighborhood watch committee organized the meeting to listen to and query Acting Director of Public Safety Pat McGinty and liaison officer Paul Bingaman.

With the tension in the neighborhood building for the last few weeks, this meeting could have easily devolved into a rally demanding the Township hire more police and increase patrols. This is a simple reaction to a complex problem that is all-too-often exploited by politicians. But, it is not always a solution.

It is known that a seriously depressed economy with a high rate of joblessness inevitably leads to increased crime. It is also known that drug dependency – which also increases in seriously strained economic times – plays a role in this and other crime sprees. But when you add to that mix the fact that gold is now selling for more than $1,100 an ounce, an increase in burglaries is almost inevitable.

Director McGinty was stellar in the way he reassured the residents at the meeting, explaining how Middletown Township police officers, through strong detective work, identified the person involved in at least 24 of the burglaries, tracked him down and put him in jail. They are continuing to work on any accomplices he may have had, as well as tracking down those involved in the other burglaries.

More police officers or increased patrols may or may not have prevented these, or future, burglaries. Deterring crime requires both individual and community efforts:

• Form neighborhood watch groups such as the one in Forsythia Gate, which is the only one in Middletown Township.
• Get to know your neighbors and watch out for suspicious activities in your neighborhood.
• Make it part of your routine before leaving your house and every night before going to bed to insure all windows and doors in your home are locked.
• Keep valuables, such as cash and jewelry, out of sight.
• Keep your vehicle locked and don’t leave valuables (i.e. navigation units, iPods, laptop computers, phones, etc.) in plain sight.

The Middletown Township Police Department provides information about how to form a neighborhood watch group on its Website and lists a number of actions all residents can take to help keep their neighborhood safe. Look for:

• Someone screaming or shouting for help.
• Someone looking into windows and parked cars.
• Unusual noises.
• Property being taken out of houses where no one is at home or a business is closed.
• Cars, vans, or trucks moving slowly with no apparent destination, or without lights.
• Anyone being forced into a vehicle.
• A stranger sitting in a car or stopping to talk to a child.

Officer Bingaman suggested people keep a pen and paper near windows where they can write down anything they see that is suspicious, particularly if they can see a license plate. He pointed out that residents can call 215-949-1000 anytime to report suspicious activity that may not be an emergency. Tips will be followed up, he said.

The police are doing their work – and doing it well. Now it is up to all of us to do our part in keeping our community safe.

A Mockery of Democracy

At the Monday night reorganization meeting of the Middletown Township Board of Supervisors, we got a glimpse of the kind of government we can expect from the Republican majority – and it wasn’t a pretty sight.

First and foremost, the decision of the Republican majority to schedule public comment at the end of the meeting is a blatant attempt to discourage residents from voicing their concerns or opinions. Combined with the fact that the start of the meeting was moved from 6:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., residents may have to wait until 10 p.m. or later to address the Board.

Local government has been referred to as the purest form of direct democracy. It presents a forum in which any resident can come before their elected officials and speak their minds. The minds of those who stick it out will probably be numb before they get the opportunity to speak.

While I would expect nothing less from Tom Gallagher or George Leonhauser – both of whom prefer working in the shadows – I must say I am quite surprised that Pat Mallon and Drew Kreiling would agree to this. I expected more.

Secondly, the Republican majority has established a meeting schedule that may be confusing to some of our residents. As best as I can figure out, meetings will be held on the first and third Monday of each month. However, this will change if a holiday falls on a Monday, which happens quite frequently. In those weeks, the meeting will be held on Tuesday instead. What was the problem, Mr. Gallagher, with simply holding them on a day that would be unlikely to change – say the first and third (or second and fourth) Tuesday?

Third, I was astounded that there was no opportunity for the public to comment on motions. Mr. Gallagher was blowing through a beautifully choreographed set of motions without asking whether other Board members or the public would like to comment until Supervisor Robert McMonagle interrupted him on the motion to appoint a solicitor. This is especially ironic since Mr. Gallagher sued the past administration because of an oversight in allowing public comment before voting on a motion, and then sought an injunction when a meeting was scheduled to redo the motion – the appropriate curative action that was ultimately upheld by a judge. If asked, I wonder if he’d recommend someone following his lead and sue the new board for this violation?

Finally, motions were being made, seconded, and voted upon, in some cases, without even minimal documentation. Mr. Gallagher called for a vote on the appointment of a solicitor when Mr. McMonagle asked if Mr. Gallagher could provide the details of the contract – i.e., what the compensation would be. The dialog happened as follows:

Mr. Gallagher: “All in favor?”

Mr. McMonagle: “Is there going to be any discussion on that vote, Mr Chairman?”

Mr. Gallagher: “Sure.”

Mr. McMonagle: “What is the rate that the solicitor is being hired at or is it just open-ended?”

Mr. Gallagher: “No, it’s actually less than what the previous administration’s solicitor was.”

Mr. McMonagle: “Well, maybe I’ll rephrase the question. What is the rate that the solicitor is being hired at?”

Mr. Gallagher: “It’s the same, uh, monthly fee and $120 an hour.”

Mr. McMonagle: “Same as what?”

Mr. Gallagher: “As what was in the past.”

Mr. McMonagle: “So it’s not less than the previous solicitor?”

Mr. Gallagher: “The hours, the dollars amount for the hourly rate is less, yes.”

Mr. McMonagle: “OK, I just wanted to be clear on that.”

Mr. Gallagher: “The previous solicitor was $125 an hour. This solicitor will be $120 an hour. Is there any other discussion?”

The next motion and second involved the appointment of a township engineer and when Mr. McMonagle asked if there was a rate that the township will be charged, Mr. Gallagher’s answer was “yes, there is and I don’t have it with me.” It is beyond my comprehension that our elected officials voted on hiring a firm without knowing the rate. That is scary and irresponsible, to say the least.

As I said, it wasn’t a pretty sight.

In closing, it was interesting to see that Mr. Gallagher was so pleased in saving the township $5 per hour in legal fees. The reality is that, with legal fees for 2010 budgeted under $150,000, this will not make much of a difference. We do hope that this focus on saving money extends to doing something about police overtime, which topped $1 million in 2008.

Leonhauser votes against restoring chief of police

The Republicans may have begun to see their campaign promises unravel at Tuesday’s meeting of the Board of Supervisors. Only about 12 percent of all registered voters in Middletown Township cast their ballots for Gallagher, Mallon and Kreiling. The entire Township will probably be paying dearly after so many voters stayed home on Election Day.

During a budget discussion, they found that their ideas for hiring more police officers without increasing the budget were like smoke in the wind. The police department’s $9.2M budget represents 66% of the overall township budget, with the next closest department coming in at $1.9M, or 14% of the budget. With the township manager proposing flat revenue and flat expenses for 2010, we have a shortfall of $3M. That is without hiring more police officers.

So, with the budget already falling short (meaning a tax increase), how can the township afford hiring more officers with no tax increase (as the Republicans promised)? Additionally, their campaign promised to “dedicate all community policing revenue earned at the Oxford Valley Mall, Sesame Place, and special events to the police budget – not to the general Township operating funds.” The Township Manager confirmed last night that this revenue is ALREADY allocated to the police budget so there is no silver bullet there either. What really surprised us is that Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Kreiling seemed shocked that their campaign promises may have had no merit (Mr. Mallon did not attend the meeting). This shock would seem to indicate they might have actually believed their campaign bluster. That’s scary!

Earlier George Leonhauser made a mockery of their campaign promise to restore the position of chief in the Police Department. In an attempt to acquiesce to what was reported to be the wishes of those who voted on November 3, Supervisor Robert McMonagle introduced a motion to abolish the resolution creating the position of public safety director and restore the position of chief.

Mr. Leonhauser should have been delighted, right? Final vote, 4-1 with Mr. Leonhauser voting against the motion.

One final observation: during the meeting, Mr. Leonhauser referenced that the newly elected Republican supervisors would be “in power” soon. Those two words (“in power”) represent most of what is wrong with politics today. Politicians are not elected “to power.” They are elected “to serve.” If more politicians remembered this key difference, more might be accomplished in government. We hope that Mr. Gallagher, Mr. Kreiling, and Mr. Mallon do not share Mr. Leonhauser’s feeling that they were elected to be “in power.” We hope they will be there “to serve” all residents of Middletown Township.

In the Arena

Middletown Township residents were either lied to or misled by at least two of the supervisor candidates elected on Tuesday. That fact alone means that it is now more important than ever to monitor the newly elected Republican majority closely as they are sworn in and take office at the January reorganization meeting.

Bookmark this site and together with your help we will keep the community informed and hold our supervisors accountable to every last word they printed or said during the campaign. If warranted, we will also illuminate their abuses over the next two years – and, if we rally enough support for the lone Democrat on the Board, Robert McMonagle, maybe there will be times where we can even stop them.

Mr. Gallagher Mr. Mallon and Mr. Kreiling said they want to hire up to 10 more police officers without raising taxes. As residents, we immediately need to start asking how they going to do that? We’ve suffered through double-digit tax increases from them before. Under Republican control, we went through tax hikes of 15.3% in 2006, 18.3% in 2007, and 11.3% in 2008. When Democrats regained the majority on the board, the 2009 tax increase was limited to 6.7%. After three years of double-digit increases, Democratic leaders got spending under control.

Now, we have returned to a Republican majority on the board. A big reason for those tax increases in 2006, 2007, and 2008 was, under a Republican majority on the board, there was no oversight of the out-of-control police department budget. In 2008, overtime for the police department shot up to $1.1 million, with the sergeants on the force leading the charge by raking in an average of $130,000 per year. One sergeant even went over $165,000! If we are to believe our opponents are correct in saying only four officers are on duty at a time (when our police force totals over 50 people), how can we, as taxpayers, justify this kind of spending. Further, with over 50 officers on the force and assuming only four are working at any given time, this would seem to indicate that no officer is working anywhere near a full-time schedule for a 6-figure pay package. How can that be right? Our community is currently outraged over teacher salaries, which average less than the police department and, using the numbers published by our opponents during the election, teachers are working many more hours. Again, how can that be correct or even possible?

A new contract for the Middletown Township Police Department will be negotiated next year. It’s time to ask ourselves why friends and family members of certain police officers worked so hard to get our new supervisors elected. If the police wives and emergency services workers who were at the polls on Election Day were truly “non-political” as we heard them claim all day, consider these questions:

1. Why did those police wives and other emergency services workers claim they were organizing “as a result of recent campaign literature,” when, as early as July 2009 and possibly earlier, they were holding meetings to discuss defeating the entire Democratic ticket?

2. Why were they pushing the entire Republican ticket? How did endorsing candidates for auditor, tax collector, and constable contribute to public safety?

3. Why were there no attempts to talk to the Democratic candidates about their public safety concerns in order to endorse those individual candidates that best reflected their point of view?

The answer to these questions is simple: follow the money. Our newly elected supervisors, along with current supervisor George Leonhauser, have promised to protect the culture of entitlement that a handful of officers in the department demand. They have promised not to safeguard the financial interests of the township and taxpayers, but instead to safeguard the financial interests of these members of the police department.

To repeat what we said during the campaign: “Ninety percent of the members of the Middletown Police Department are honest, hardworking men and women of the highest integrity; a credit to the uniform and a source of pride to our Township. We salute you. But, as in any large organization, there is always a small group that will resist any form of progress or management by disrupting operations, abusing authority, and fighting to maintain an impossible status quo. The rest of the force is embarrassed by them, and many have said so, but would never do so publicly.”

We know that addressing concerns about public safety will be a priority of our new board of supervisors. For the good of the township, we hope they will address these concerns in conjunction with doing something about the arrogance displayed by and entitlement demanded by this small group within the police department. We cannot address public safety without addressing the corruption that exists in and disruption that is caused by a small segment of our police department.

We will keep you informed and highlight important issues that impact your township in this blog. It is up to you to do something with that information and make a difference in our community.

We are proud of the work we did over the last two years to try to get Middletown Township back on a stable course – where problems and needs of residents were addressed without skyrocketing budget increases. In the end, the bluster of our critics won out. So today I will leave you with this quote from a speech President Theodore Roosevelt made on April 23, 1910;

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

Moving Forward in Middletown Township

I sat at the Middletown Municipal Center last night and watched our community at odds. As a resident, I was ashamed of and embarrassed by most of the behavior I witnessed. Rather than residents working together for the good of our community or simply communicating effectively, many resorted to screaming, bullying, heckling, and finger-pointing. How is it possible that people who all have the same goal (a safe community) cannot have a productive conversation?

Allow me to look backwards for a brief moment to state a fact. I’m not placing blame or pointing a finger – I am stating a fact. Members of the fire companies asked last night how they were dragged into politics. Republican flyers distributed as early as this past summer claimed the Democratic candidates ‘failure to support our volunteer fire and emergency services.’ As a resident and a candidate, this deeply offended me. Prior to this claim appearing in Republican literature, nobody ever asked me how I felt about emergency services so how is it possible that somebody could claim I failed to support them? For the record, I have the highest respect and regard for all emergency responders and I value the significant contributions, and personal sacrifices, they make to ensure that our community and our residents are safe. There are some administrative issues that need to be addressed in both the police and fire departments, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the service or performance of our police officers or our volunteer fire fighters. As an example (and this came from a volunteer firefighter in Middletown Township), each of the four fire companies that serve our township may need to purchase new hoses. When this occurs, each company purchases what they need. What a firefighter suggested was why not pool these purchases together and buy a total of, say, 800 feet of hose instead of each company purchasing 200 feet individually. Grouping purchases like this, and therefore using economies of scale to our advantage, is an example of the kind of administrative issues that need to be addressed. To ensure clarity, I am in no way trying to change how our police, fire fighters, or EMS respond to emergencies. They are experts in their respective fields and they do an outstanding job for our community. Listening to suggestions for improved administrative efficiencies directly from our emergency responders and then working with them to make these kinds of changes ensures that Middletown Township will continue to receive the best possible emergency services.

I have said to many people that I will talk to anyone with a concern about our township anytime, anywhere. However, that conversation must be reasonable, rational, and respectful. I will not engage in shouting matches, I will not be unprofessional in my communications (nor will I tolerate a lack of professionalism from others), and I will seek to solve problems, not place blame. This township must look forward and ensure we are prepared for whatever new challenges may be ahead. Everyone pointing fingers at everyone else only looks backwards, and looking backwards does not solve problems. I am not interested in looking backwards and I am not interested in figuring out who is to blame for a particular issue. I am interested in moving forward, solving problems for our community, and never again seeing what I saw last night.