Comments on McGarrity ExpenseGate Issue

I had signed up to speak at the Haverford Township commissioners meeting in Feb, but unfortunately I was not able to go to the meeting. Below are the comments I had ready for that meeting. The short story is that nothing has been done to look into the Jim McGarrity ExpenseGate issue. I recently obtained McGarrity's expense reports for Sept to Dec 2009, which are now on my Voter Info page.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Remarks on McGarrity ExpenseGate
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

A few years ago there was a redistricting dispute over a gerrymandered plan that was backed by then commissioners Moran, Twardy, McDonald, Kelly and current commissioner D’Emilio. The reapportionment was obviously rigged for political gain – the map’s infamous hockey stick demonstrated that to even the casual observer. The case went all the way to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, (at great expense to us taxpayers,) and the so-called Moran-Twardy plan was deemed to be legal. And the supporters of that Moran-Twardy Plan touted its legality in the face of the obvious injustice.

That redistricting battle was orchestrated by the so-called reformers – Pat Biswanger, Jeff Heilmann, Andy Lewis, and Jim McGarrity, all of whom parlayed that activity and the later grand jury investigation into the Haverford State Hospital misdeeds into better political positions. And among the charges that later came out of that investigation was a charge against Moran for submitting alleged fraudulent expenses. I sat in the courtroom when that charge, I believe it was termed “theft by deception”, was heard and reviewed.

Now fast forward a few years, and we now have the McGarrity ExpenseGate controversy. And those former reformers, joined by our current Board of Commissioners President Weschler, are now circling the Republican Party wagons to defend McGarrity for the large expense amounts that he has submitted, including reimbursement for a phone line he used for campaigning, and about 200 miles per month supposedly on township business submitted without documentation.

From the Delco Times article:
Wechsler maintained that it was “very premature and irresponsible” for Chrzan to publicly make allegations about McGarrity since there’s been no determination he committed any crime.
Regarding his colleague’s car expenses, Wechsler said he’s seen McGarrity drive the entire 7th Ward, checking roads and street lights.
Additionally, “I think we need to revisit the issue and re-evaluate the expense program, which goes back 20 years,” Wechsler said, when prior boards “were told they were entitled to $400 per month in expense money.”
“(McGarrity) hasn’t done anything outside the guidelines of the system he’s operated under. It’s time now we fix the system, rather than accuse someone who’s operated under it for years of committing illegalities.”

In the news story, Commissioner Jeff Heilmann said he did not believe McGarrity knowingly did anything wrong. Heilman also wrote on the Save Ardmore Coalition blog, “This was wrong, but not criminal. It is an election law violation with a fine and a slap on the wrist.”

It sounds like the Moran-Twardy Plan defense – Let’s all say that maybe it’s not illegal by the letter of the law.

But the real question is: Are McGarrity’s expenses right or wrong? Not do you think it was legal or do you think it’s the system’s fault. Is it right or wrong? And what is this Board of Commissioners going to do about it? What is the DA going to do about it? What is the Township Auditor going to do about it?

And it’s not the campaign or election law that we should be concerned about. I’ve already brought numerous campaign law issues regarding McGarrity to the Delco Election board. In fact, McGarrity refused to have a 7th ward debate with me in 2007, saying, “You've had me so busy trying to answer all your questions on my financial statements, I haven't had much time.” I didn’t feel it necessary to raise those issues publicly – no taxpayer money was involved. The McGarrity ExpenseGate question is whether this is a misuse of public funds to request reimbursement for these expenses. That’s what Moran was charged with for submitting alleged non-legitimate expenses – theft by deception, a criminal charge.

Specifically to Commissioner Heilmann, you said you think it’s wrong, so why are your defending McGarrity instead of looking out for the taxpayers?

And Commissioner Weschler, do you think it’s okay for McGarrity to drive around the 7th ward to check roads and street lights and then charge it to the township? Don’t we have a Public Works department that gets paid to do that? Is that a commissioner’s job and should the taxpayers subsidize that?

I would remind Commissioner Weschler and the other members of the Board that you can’t blame an outdated system or what prior boards were told by people that are long gone. YOU are the system now. YOU are in charge of updating the system and the ordinance that currently says $50 is the monthly expense limit. YOU are the stewards of our taxpayers’ money. We elected you to make sure that our tax money is well spent. In fact, Mr. McGarrity has been on the board for 18 years, why hasn’t he tried to fix the system?

It was two months ago that I raised this issue and brought the FACTS, not “premature and irresponsible” allegations, to this board. I brought in the facts, I said I think it’s wrong, and I’ve asked for it to be looked into. That’s a legitimate taxpayer request. Many people have called me, emailed me or come up to me on the street to thank me and encourage me for speaking up for the taxpayers. And if you check the comments by readers on the Delco Times website or the Haverford Blog, you’ll see that many taxpayers are upset that their money is being used like this.

Two months ago I asked the Township Auditor to look into this and have been told that he’ll get to it. I asked the Delaware County District Attorney’s office to look into this and been told the matter is “under review”, but no further action has been taken. And two months ago I asked this Board to fix the broken system and revise the ordinance regarding Commissioner expenses, which still sets a $50 per month limit. To the best of my knowledge, nothing has be done except removing the Contributions line from the Commissioner expense report.

So, instead of attacking the messenger for speculative political reasons and trying to limit the political bad press, I ask this Board of Commissioners to call on the Township Auditor to look into this matter. Call on the District Attorney to investigate it. And stop using the same faulty reasoning that Moran and Twardy used to defend their gerrymandered legal plan. Apply the rules of right and wrong to protect the taxpayers, as these commissioners swore to do, rather than worrying about the politics.

Returning to this McGarrity ExpenseGate issue, I’ll answer that question I posed - is it right or wrong - just as I was quoted in the paper. “I think it’s wrong that our taxpayer money is spent this way.”

Now, let's fix this system!

- Larry Chrzan

Answers to Questions raised at July 11 Commissioners Meeting

At the July 11 meeting, I asked 7 specific questions about the Township.

Shortly thereafter, Acting Township Manager Larry Gentile provided the answers below, and we had a follow-up conversation to clarify a few items. Board President Steve D'Emilio also followed up to make sure I had received answers to my questions. I specifically asked Mr. Gentile about publishing his answers, as my questions were asked in a public forum, and he told me it was okay to do so.

Thanks to Mr. Gentile and Commissioner D'Emilio for providing the information.
===========================================
Q1. Now that the year is half over, where do we stand on the township budget? Are we on track, ahead or behind? If we are behind, what steps are being taken to address the problem?
A1: The budget reports ending June 2007 indicate that we are slighting over budget due to several unexpected issues, such as emergency road repairs, emergency sewer repairs. However, over the past few months, with the support from the Board of Commissioners, I have instituted new policies and best practices to control spending and to provide a more cost effective service to our community. Some example of this are: Reducing overtime by requiring all Directors to receive pre approval, reduced telecommunication expenses by 40%, implemented a new fuel management system for all municipal vehicles (was able to find over $45,000 savings), instituted a time and attendance system, and several other management initiatives to operate our municipal services in a fiscally responsible manner.
Follow-up: Mr. Gentile indicated that a sewer repair problem that occured the night of the Commissioners meeting on July 11 will cost the Township approximately $200,000.

Q2. Are there any lawsuits against the township right now? What is the nature of these lawsuits, if any? And what is the potential liability to the township of these lawsuits?
A2: Presently we have one lawsuit involving an HR issue. There are few minor suits that have been ongoing for the past few years that I do not believe have any serious liability for the Twp. I would suggest that you speak with Jim Byrne at the Commissioners meeting and he can provide a more detailed response to your question.

Q3. $25,000 was authorized at last month’s meeting for a feasibility study to look at acquiring the former gum factory property. What actions are in place or planned for this work?
A4: $25,000 was authorized last month to perform a feasibility study and Lori Hanlon-Widdop is currently preparing an RFP for the project.

Q4. I attended Commissioner Moran’s preliminary hearing last week and heard testimony from the former township manager that Moran directed him to move employees and/or hire employees. What is the Township’s policy on hiring, promoting and moving employees and advertising positions?
A4: The Twp’s policy on employment is detailed and MaryAnn DelPizzo is mailing this out to you today.
Follow-up: Ms DelPizzo sent this to me promptly.

Q5. What is the Township’s policy on hiring friends and relatives? What constitutes a conflict of interest?
A5: Haverford Township presently does not have a policy on hiring family or friends. However, it is common practice for business not to allow the hiring of family members within the same department. No dept. director or manager should ever be directly responsible for a family member. I have the HR Dept researching policies relating to this issue. In addition, the entire employee policy manual was recently revised and is being reviewed for any potential corrections.

Q6. I’ve heard that a new position of Recycling Director was established a few months ago. Is this the case? Was this position planned in last year’s budget? Is there a job description for this position? Was this position publicly advertised so that the township could get the best available person for the job? Or was this position created for the former head of Public Works? Is this employee a friend or relative of Commissioner McGarrity, and was McGarrity involved in this decision? With an estimated annual cost in salary and benefits in the $100,000 range, the public has a right to know.
A6: There is no such position as Recycling Director or Recycling Coordinator. Mr. Falance was reassigned by Mike English several months ago to review the recycling program and to determine a method to improve the process and reduce operating cost. Presently Mr. Falance is meeting with all Twp. businesses and developed a mailing that is also sent out to all businesses relating to recycling initiatives. Mr. Falance has been extremely successful with obtaining additional grant monies by improving our recycling program. It is important to note that the position was not posted because it is only a reassignment and not a permanent position.
Follow-up: In the follow-up phone call, Mr. Gentile confirmed that this assignment was not in the budget for 2007.

Q7. I’ve heard that a Highway Inspector position was filled a few months ago. Is this the case? Was this position planned in last year’s budget? Was this position publicly advertised so that the township could get the best available person for the job? Is this employee a friend or relative of Commissioner McGarrity, and was McGarrity involved in this decision? Again, the public has a right to know how our tax money is being spent.
A7: There was no Highway Inspector hired during my few months as Acting Manager. The only positions recently posted and advertised were a codes enforcement officer and a staff accountant. Both positions were advertised internally and externally. The codes enforcement officer was filled after the Dir. Of Codes performed here assessment and recommendation. The staff accountant is currently unfilled. Both positions are budgeted.
=============================================

My comments:

The former director of Public Works was moved from these duties and given a special assignment regarding recycling. I believe that Mr. McGarrity was involved in these personnel decisions and that Mr. Falance is a friend of Mr. McGarrity. Regardless of any after-the-fact performance, a huge cost was added to the Township's expenses to create this position. And this expense was not in the budget for this year. This is exactly the kind of interference, favoritism and cronyism that I pledge to fight against. And it again points out the need for better fiscal oversight.

The lawsuit (mentioned above) against the Township is another situation where a friend of Mr. McGarrity was given a position at McGarrity's behest. As a result, the Township is responsible for legal fees and the potential liability of the lawsuit. Again, the result is a direct cost to the Township and its taxpayers.

It's time for this "business-as-usual" with its favoritism and cronyism to stop. We can't afford it! As taxpayers, we need to know that our hard-earned money is being spent more wisely.