tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52582844260452458872024-03-14T01:11:41.232-07:00REMEMBER ParkhouseA website dedicated to information regarding the sale of Parkhouse Providence Pointe in Upper Providence Township, Montgomery County, PALisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-51303672910706621892014-02-24T17:13:00.002-08:002014-02-24T17:13:59.369-08:00ParkhouseGate: The Movie<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/8TgLXcf0CgM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
"An emotional tour de force! I laughed. I cried. I registered to vote."Lisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-38598721003348971542014-01-28T18:11:00.002-08:002014-01-29T16:29:29.874-08:00Oh, Montco! You Shouldn't Have!<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 8pt;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-83UoTfb1Csk/UuhiJRdjltI/AAAAAAAAAzg/9Vrk_YdAQ1s/s1600/the-holy-grail-chalice.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-83UoTfb1Csk/UuhiJRdjltI/AAAAAAAAAzg/9Vrk_YdAQ1s/s1600/the-holy-grail-chalice.jpg" height="200" width="106" /></a><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Over the past few months, as we’ve tried mightily to get specifics
about the sale of Parkhouse, the winning bidder’s response to the Request for
Proposals has become a Holy Grail of sorts. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">What was so great about
Mid-Atlantic’s proposal that clearly elevated it above all others, that made it
the best option <em>so much so</em> that according to Mid-Atlantic’s owner Scott Rifkin
they were asked to increase the amount of their bid? And what does the company
that has ‘no set plans’ for the 200+ acres of wide open fields <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">really </i>intend to do with it? <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I mean, it’s one thing to talk, but it’s
what’s in writing that matters. And yet Montco has remained steadfast in their
refusal to release that document. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 8pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">After days, weeks and months of asking for that proposal and
being denied repeatedly by Montgomery County, you can imagine my excitement
when last evening an email quietly appeared in my inbox from Montco solicitor
Josh Stein’s office. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Was this the Mid-Atlantic proposal at
long last? </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 8pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Alas, it was not to be. What I received was the equivalent of
a gift-wrapped empty box. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I don’t know
if Mr. Stein believes we don’t know the difference between what they sent and what we asked for -
the actual Mid-Atlantic Healthcare proposal - but what they provided was the
Asset Purchase Agreement (APA) – minus all the detailed schedules that are the
real meat of the APA <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>- <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>plus an amendment. It was accompanied by the admonition that “Given
the recent announcement that the sale will not close on January 31, 2014, there
will likely be another amendment; however, that document has not yet been
drafted”. </span><br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-1SR4w2fdjYU/UuhhqtOhnkI/AAAAAAAAAzY/eSUFo4f99FA/s1600/crusaders.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-1SR4w2fdjYU/UuhhqtOhnkI/AAAAAAAAAzY/eSUFo4f99FA/s1600/crusaders.jpg" height="176" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">'Tis the proposal we seek!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">So, even though it doesn’t reveal much, I am providing the APA and amendment <a href="http://issuu.com/janicekearney/docs/_mahc__asset_purchase_agreement_-_p?e=1929198/6513496" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="http://issuu.com/janicekearney/docs/_mahc__parkhouse_-_amendment_to_apa?e=1929198/6513507" target="_blank">here</a>. If the Commissioners were hoping
that this release gives them some sort of credibility in the ‘transparency’
argument, well, ok….you released some papers we didn’t ask for. Thanks, but it doesn’t mean
you are off the hook. </span><br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 8pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">My response to Mr. Stein is captured below:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“Dear Mr. Stein,</span></i><br />
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><o:p></o:p></span></i><br />
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">While I am thankful
that you sent me the APA and amendment, I think you will agree that these
documents are fairly meaningless without the associated schedules. Please
provide those at your earliest convenience as they are not exempt from
disclosure.</span></i><br />
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><o:p></o:p></span></i><br />
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Furthermore, again,
while I am glad that at long last Montco is releasing something meaningful about
this transaction, it is not what I requested which, as you surely must recall
since I have requested it at least three times myself (and others have
requested it), was Mid-Atlantic Healthcare’s response to the RFP. I have also
requested copies of the non-winning bids which also have not been disclosed. I
am yet again asking that those be provided as there are no legitimate reasons
for the County to continue to withhold any of these documents.</span></i><br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 8pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">For your reference I
am again attaching the PA Office of Open Records’ second Final Determination
that I have been granted in this matter directing your actions. <o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 8pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">~ Janice Kearney”</span></i><br />
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><o:p></o:p></span></i> </div>
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">There's been no response from Montco. I'm still waiting...</span>.<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 8pt;">
<o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YxsiualcGqc/UuhpbQ_W80I/AAAAAAAAAzw/O_33vXcmYLo/s1600/Help+Help+I'm+Being+Repressed.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YxsiualcGqc/UuhpbQ_W80I/AAAAAAAAAzw/O_33vXcmYLo/s1600/Help+Help+I'm+Being+Repressed.png" height="262" width="400" /></a></span></div>
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 8pt;">
<o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></div>
Janice Kearneyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14553607607225403569noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-42758151504349419572014-01-05T11:45:00.002-08:002014-01-05T11:49:06.629-08:00Montco using Open Space as a piggy bankThe following is the full text of my latest letter to the editor, which has so far appeared in <a href="http://www.theintell.com/opinion/letters/montco-open-space-becomes-a-piggy-bank/article_84f189fa-7448-5ef6-bfba-8f42b34c6a45.html">the Intelligencer</a>.
<br>
</br>
<blockquote>There was a time in recent memory when the term Open Space meant something in Montgomery County. It meant that land was set aside to preserve it for future generations to enjoy. It meant that the community where it was located would be protected from overdevelopment. It meant that towns and municipalities could plan their neighborhoods with intelligence and foresight.
<br>
</br>
It used to mean all of that. For thirty some years, Montgomery County has been accumulating open space for all of these reasons. In fact, in 2003 Montgomery County voters overwhelmingly (78%) voted in support of a referendum on the ballot supporting higher taxes to the tune of $150 million earmarked for the purchase of Open Space.
<br>
</br>
One bad investment later and Open Space is nothing more than a piggy bank to be raided in order to bail out the County budget. The Commissioners have tried but failed to provide a compelling reason to sell the Parkhouse Geriatric Facility. They have not even attempted to make the case for the sale of 220 acres of Open Space.
<br>
</br>
The Montgomery County Commissioners are trying to pretend that they still value Open Space by splitting legal hairs over the definition of what is and is not considered Open Space. This not only ignores the spirit and intent of the Open Space program, but more importantly, it ignores the Montgomery County Planning Commission documents that clearly define the property surrounding Parkhouse as Open Space.
<br>
</br>
I can understand the argument for privatizing the geriatric center, but there is no need to include the land if, as the County says, they simply want to get out of the geriatric business.
<br>
</br>
In August 2012, Dr. Scott Rifkin of Mid-Atlantic Health Care sent an e-mail to Commissioner Josh Shapiro to express his interest in purchasing the Parkhouse facility and grounds. Six short months later, in February 2013, the Montgomery County Commissioners took the first official step required to sell the Parkhouse by voting to issue the County’s RFI. After an evaluation of all bids was conducted by a working group consisting only of county employees hand-picked by the Commissioners, this process ultimately concluded with the Commissioners agreeing to sell Parkhouse to none other than Mid-Atlantic. As the Logan Square Studio Center began sliding towards its inevitable bankruptcy and the consequences of that poor investment began to become apparent, one must wonder if the Commissioners’ sudden interest to exit the geriatric care business was sparked by Dr. Rifkin’s e-mail to Josh Shapiro.
<br>
</br>
Dr. Rifkin himself told Upper Providence Township that the $3 million line item for the land on the County-distributed Terms of Sale distributed on October 8, 2013 is simply a place holder and not reflective of the actual value of the land. Furthermore, he told Upper Providence Township that he was asked by the County to increase his original bid because of all that he was getting. One must wonder why Mid-Atlantic, an organization that maintains it is not in the land development business, would allow the County to drive up the price on the deal based on the inclusion of land that Mid-Atlantic claims it doesn’t need or have any “set plans” for.
<br>
</br>
Meanwhile, the County continues to insist that the Parkhouse sale is a “done deal” while simultaneously refusing to release the terms of the sale because the sale has not been “finalized.”
<br>
</br>
All of this, while proclaiming at every turn that this process has been “transparent.”
<br>
</br>
There was a time in recent memory when words used to mean something in Montgomery County, too.
<br>
</br>
Lisa Mossie<br>
Vice Chairman, Board of Supervisors<br>
Upper Providence Township<br>
</blockquote>Lisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-11373306687258790602013-12-29T12:41:00.003-08:002013-12-29T16:06:43.229-08:00How the Grinch sold Parkhouse<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-drml9HiT8O4/UsBTwN4r5hI/AAAAAAAABt0/wRqXF9PNNbg/s1600/Cindy+Lou+Who.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" closure_lm_373399="null" gua="true" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-drml9HiT8O4/UsBTwN4r5hI/AAAAAAAABt0/wRqXF9PNNbg/s1600/Cindy+Lou+Who.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Commissioners, why? Why are you selling our open space? Why?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
At the end of November, Dr. Scott Rifkin, the principal of Mid-Atlantic, contacted me requesting a one on one meeting. For a number of reasons, I thought that a meeting of this nature was a bad idea, not the least of which is that I believe that the last thing that would be beneficial for Upper Providence in a transaction that has been characterized by a lack of transparency is yet another meeting behind closed doors. I suggested instead that Dr. Rifkin attend a public meeting of the Upper Providence Township Supervisors where the public could attend as well. Citing concerns that a large public meeting would seem too much like a "political event" where citizens would get caught up in their emotions and that large public forums "lend to grandstanding and posturing," Dr. Rifkin insisted on a much smaller delegation. Dr. Rifkin was particularly concerned about the press being in attendance and insisted in more than one correspondence that the press should NOT be invited because of "political posturing and grandstanding." <br />
<br />
As a compromise, I offered for our first meeting the Upper Providence staff meeting, which is a typically a lower-key, but still publicly advertised meeting where all three Township Supervisors would be present. I also insisted on having one or two members of the public present as well. Dr. Rifkin agreed to come to our staff meeting on December 18. <br />
<br />
I asked for two volunteers from the community to be present at the staff meeting. Ray Emrich and Joe Haney volunteered. In the days leading up to the meeting, I heard from several additional residents who wished to be included in the meeting, but, as I explained in my responses to them, I had given my word to Dr. Rifkin that this meeting would be limited to two members of the public. As this was our first meeting with Dr. Rifkin, I thought it was of the utmost importance to establish this relationship in good faith by honoring my word and I did not want him to feel "ambushed." Our complaint, after all, ultimately is not with Dr. Rifkin, but with Montgomery County. Every member of the community I spoke with agreed that this was the best way to proceed. <br />
<br />
Dr. Rifkin showed up one hour late for the meeting, explaining that he got lost on the way to the Township building, which is literally 1.4 miles away from Parkhouse and on the same road as his proposed $39 million investment. <br />
<br />
Below is the update I sent to the community regarding the December 18 meeting: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>
-----Original Message----- From: Lisa A. Mossie To: XXXXXX Sent: Wed, Dec 18, 2013 5:04 pm Subject: Parkhouse Update <br /><br />Hello Everyone, <br /><br />Township staff and Ray Emrich met with Dr. Scott Rifkin today. I feel that we gained very little new information today, but did establish a working relationship with Dr. Rifkin and by association, Mid-Atlantic Healthcare. Dr. Rifkin suggested that a small committee be designated to meet on a regular basis to discuss the Parkhouse land going forward. More on that in the coming days as it takes shape. I would like to have one or two representatives from the Community included in this group. <br /><br />Dr. Rifkin’s remarks centered upon Mid-Atlantic’s ability to run Parkhouse at a profit. He gave us a lot of background on his operations and the history of his company and some contacts we could call to gather information on Mid-Atlantic. He emphasized that he is not a developer. He stressed that it was important to him to have a good relationship with the Community he serves. <br /><br />Dr. Rifkin gave us assurances that Mid-Atlantic has no current plans to develop the land, and he says that they are at least a year or two away from even considering doing anything with it. His immediate concern is addressing the operations and efficiencies of the senior center. Some intriguing ideas were tossed about for the land, most of which involved the preservation of the majority of it as open space. The concern I expressed to Dr. Rifkin was the public’s loss of access to the land once it comes into private ownership. Dr. Rifkin acknowledged this concern and until his development plans are finalized, expressed only one reservation regarding allowing continued public access to the land, and that was one of liability insurance, which I agree, is a legitimate concern for Dr. Rifkin once he owns the land. <br /><br />When asked directly, Dr. Rifkin stated that the land was NOT critical to maintaining the ongoing operations of the senior center and that he had no plans to “flip” the land once taking ownership. I asked him if he did end up selling the land, would he consider giving he Township the right of first refusal, which he said he probably would. <br /><br />Dr. Rifkin did state that the purchasing agreement with the County has been signed and that he personally saw no reason why the county would not release the terms of the sale, but he could not give us those details as it was proprietary of the County. Dr. Rifkin says he purchased the land because the County did not offer the purchase of the facility without it. <br /><br />I told Dr. Rifkin that while I believe it is important that we establish the group to work with Mid-Atlantic going forward, the Township’s position is that the property is Open Space and that we will continue to fight the county to keep the land in public hands. The county and the township have both designated and assumed the land around Parkhouse would remain open space; the Township’s comprehensive plan, which has been widely recognized for its excellence, will be essentially nullified if this 220 acres of open space is developed. <br /><br />Ray, please feel free to add your impressions or anything you think I may have missed. <br /><br />Lisa Mossie </lmossie></blockquote>
<br />
<br />
It came as a somewhat unpleasant surprise to me and several members of the community to have the following email arrive in our inboxes on Christmas Day: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>
To the Lower Providence Community <br />
<br />
It has come to my attention that a rally regarding the Parkhouse land issues is planned for this week. This seems to be more motivated by political career building than to any attempt to solve substantive issues. <br />
<br />
On December 18, I met with the entire leadership team of the township in a meeting. The tone of the discussions were positive and there was an open discussion of the community's interests regarding Parkhouse and the associated land. I found the discussion to be positive and the tone to be congenial and aimed at finding the best possible outcome for all parties. The elected officials as well as staff and local residents attended. <br />
<br />
At the meeting, I made it clear that Mid-Atlantic Health Care is a provider of high end skilled rehabilitation and nursing home care. Our focus is on patients not development and that we have no set plans for the land. We also offered to meet with an ongoing committee from the community to plan together how the land is best used. We even offered to keep the land available for public use if the township could help us solve legal liability issues. I walked away from the meeting believing we had agreed on these first steps and that we would work together on these issues. <br />
<br />
I am, therefore, somewhat surprised that a public protest is scheduled. The purchase agreement has been signed by MAHC and the County. The sale will close at the end of a very short due diligence period. The property, which was never designated by the County as permanently preserved "open space", will be privately held. As the property owner, we care deeply about our relations with the community and have held out the olive branch and asked for planning assistance and a collaborative effort. Other than political career building I can't understand the motivation of the protest organizer. I sincerely think this is an occasion where more will be accomplished with collaboration than with confrontation. I look forward to meeting with the committee discussed at the previous meeting and to working with the solicitor to address liability issues so the land can stay in use. My email is xxxxxxxxx@gmail.com for anyone who wishes to reach out to me directly for further discussion or information. <br />
<br />
Have a wonderful holiday season, <br />
<br />
Scott Rifkin, M.D. Managing Partner MAHC <br />
<br />
Sent from my iPad Sent from my iPad </blockquote>
<br />
<br />
I received a duplicate email immediately thereafter addressed "To the Upper Providence Community." Apparently, the press-shy Dr. Rifkin also sent his letter to the local media. That evening, <a href="http://www.timesherald.com/general-news/20131226/montgomery-county-residents-to-protest-parkhouse-sale">the Times Herald posted the following story</a> to their website: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>
COURTHOUSE — A group led by Upper Providence Supervisor Lisa Mossie will plans (sic) to protest the sale of the Parkhouse facility in Upper Providence outside of the Montgomery County Courthouse Saturday at noon. <br />
<br />
Along with protesting the sale of the facility itself, the group is also opposed to the sale of the 220 acres surrounding Parkhouse. Mossie and opponents of the sale say the area is protected open space. <br />
<br />
The county maintains the land was never designated as open space and just went undeveloped while the county owned it. <br />
<br />
In a letter to the residents of Upper Providence, CEO of Mid-Atlantic Health Care Scott Rifkin said he was unsure why a protest is happening when he’s done all he can to work with the township. <br />
<br />
Rifkin also stated he has no plans to develop the land and is trying to work with Upper Providence officials to keep the land open to the public. <br />
<br />
“Our focus is on patients, not development, and that we have no set plans for the land,” Rifkin wrote in an email to Upper Providence residents. “We also offered to meet with an ongoing committee from the community to plan together how the land is best used. We even offered to keep the land available for public use if the township could help us solve legal liability issues.” </blockquote>
<br />
<br />
I responded to Dr. Rifkin the following day: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>
Dear Scott, <br />
<br />
If you wanted to address the residents of Upper Providence, it seems to me that a far better option than emailing people on Christmas would have been to appear at a Monday evening Township meeting as I originally suggested when you first proposed to meet . I’m not sure from whence you have discerned the motives of the rally, which was suggested and organized by one of our residents, but in Montgomery County, where the landscape is littered with the lives and political careers of those who have found themselves on opposite sides of the issues, there are far easier and safer ways to engage in “political career building” than taking on the current County administration. <br />
<br />
That being said, I reiterate my remarks that I made to you on 12/18: The land surrounding Parkhouse that you propose to buy is Open Space and should never have been offered for sale by the County. There is plenty of Montgomery County Planning Commission evidence to back this up. I believe that the sale of Open Space by the County constitutes a breach of the public trust and I would prefer to see this land remain publicly owned. <br />
<br />
As I recall, I told you I intended to fight for the land and even said that I hoped you wouldn’t take it personally. The rally should not be a surprise to you at all. <br />
<br />
Lisa Mossie </blockquote>
<br />
<br />
Dr. Rifkin's reply to me was: <br />
<blockquote>
Lisa, <br />
<br />
Thanks for the nice note. Not taking it personally. <br />
<br />
I am working with the assumption that the sale will go through and that I will need to work closely with the township leadership to find common ground. Contracts have been signed. <br />
<br />
I appreciate the offer to participate in a Monday night meeting but find that such meetings rarely solve issues. There are just too many folks to take the time and attention to detail needed to solve these issues. However, once we have worked together on the issues and found common ground then I'd be happy to go hand in hand with leadership to discuss that common ground with the public. <br />
<br />
Lisa, as for the Christmas email, that may not be great timing by our folks but I don't think anyone had to open it on that day. I am Jewish and must admit that I have received many an email from some non-jewish person on a high holiday. I simply wait for the holiday to be over. I'm never offended as I don't assume that Christians pay much attention to our holidays. <br />
<br />
I am eager to meet with you and the Township staff whenever you are ready to discuss two basic issues. One, how we keep the land open to folks who wish to use it in the next few years. Two, how we plan the possible uses over the long term. Your solicitor seemed open to a discussion of liability so we can keep the land open immediately. We obviously don't want someone hunting to shoot someone walking a dog and then be held liable. Let me know when is good to meet. <br />
<br />
Thanks and hope your Christmas was wonderful, <br />
<br />
Scott </blockquote>
<br />
<br />
Dr. Rifkin has insisted on several occasions that he is not a political man and has no desire to get in the middle of a political battle. Nevertheless, it appears that is exactly where the County has put him. The insistence that the resistance to this sale is about political career building and not about the loss of precious Open Space, and the County Commissioners' breach of the public trust in selling it, is a canard that I have heard several times. It's insulting and hurtful to the residents of Upper Providence, who deserve to have their concerns taken seriously and not spun into a media message in an attempt to pretty-up the ugly facts about this sale.
<br />
<br />
My advice to Dr. Rifkin, in this somewhat "open letter" to him, would be that he should stop taking political cues from One Montgomery Plaza. Recognize that the outrage over the County's betrayal of the taxpayers is real. When one sends an email with the subject line, "Parkhouse" on Christmas day, understand the community's emotional connection to this property, recognize that most people get their emails on their phones (or iPads) and know that they will open that email immediately. <br />
<br />
The residents of Upper Providence understand that there would be no "issues to resolve" if the land remained in the hands of the public. Their complaint is not with Mid-Atlantic or Dr. Rifkin; it is with the County Commissioners who should never have put Open Space up on the auction block. Lisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-68464253856680407512013-12-22T12:21:00.000-08:002013-12-22T12:39:07.254-08:00Evidence that the Parkhouse acreage is Open SpaceImmediately following the Montgomery County Budget Hearing on December 12, the Chairman of the Montgomery County Commissioners, <a href="http://www.pottsmerc.com/general-news/20131213/residents-object-to-parkhouse-sale-at-montco-budget-hearing">Josh Shapiro, stated that</a>, with regards to the 220 acres surrounding Parkhouse,
<blockquote>
"[T]he term open space is being used 100 percent inaccurately. It is not county-protected open space and the county is the only entity that can deem it to be open space."</blockquote>
Perhaps Mr. Shapiro may want to revise that "100%" estimate down. Considerably.
The map below is the Montgomery County Planning Commission Future Land Use map from 2005:
<br>
<br>
<object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000"
width="365" height="400"
codebase="http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/current/swflash.cab">
<param name="movie" value="https://acrobat.com/Clients/current/ADCMainEmbed.swf" />
<param name="quality" value="high" />
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
<param name="bgcolor" value="#202020" />
<param name="allowScriptAccess" value="sameDomain" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<param name="flashvars" value="d=Gojz1LbYxWl*6TqXOCNF9A" />
<embed src="https://acrobat.com/Clients/current/ADCMainEmbed.swf" quality="high" bgcolor="#202020"
width="365" height="400" align="middle"
play="true"
loop="false"
quality="high"
wmode="transparent"
allowScriptAccess="sameDomain"
allowFullScreen="true"
type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
flashvars="d=Gojz1LbYxWl*6TqXOCNF9A"
pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/go/getflashplayer">
</embed>
</object>
<br>
<br>
The pdf below is an except from the Montgomery County Planning Commission's Comprehensive Plan dated 2005:
<br>
<br>
<object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000"
width="365" height="400"
codebase="http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/current/swflash.cab">
<param name="movie" value="https://acrobat.com/Clients/current/ADCMainEmbed.swf" />
<param name="quality" value="high" />
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
<param name="bgcolor" value="#202020" />
<param name="allowScriptAccess" value="sameDomain" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<param name="flashvars" value="d=vaIns9cLqRZJ9bvmgRIbZg" />
<embed src="https://acrobat.com/Clients/current/ADCMainEmbed.swf" quality="high" bgcolor="#202020"
width="365" height="400" align="middle"
play="true"
loop="false"
quality="high"
wmode="transparent"
allowScriptAccess="sameDomain"
allowFullScreen="true"
type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
flashvars="d=vaIns9cLqRZJ9bvmgRIbZg"
pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/go/getflashplayer">
</embed>
</object>
<br>
<br>
The map below is the 2005 MCPC Montgomery County Rural Resource Areas
<br>
<br>
<object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000"
width="365" height="400"
codebase="http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/current/swflash.cab">
<param name="movie" value="https://acrobat.com/Clients/current/ADCMainEmbed.swf" />
<param name="quality" value="high" />
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
<param name="bgcolor" value="#202020" />
<param name="allowScriptAccess" value="sameDomain" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<param name="flashvars" value="d=BsIESc9Muhh3--DUwDg10g" />
<embed src="https://acrobat.com/Clients/current/ADCMainEmbed.swf" quality="high" bgcolor="#202020"
width="365" height="400" align="middle"
play="true"
loop="false"
quality="high"
wmode="transparent"
allowScriptAccess="sameDomain"
allowFullScreen="true"
type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
flashvars="d=BsIESc9Muhh3--DUwDg10g"
pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/go/getflashplayer">
</embed>
</object>
<br>
<br>
The map below is the Montgomery County Planning Commission Future Land Use plan dated 2010:
<br>
<br>
<object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000"
width="365" height="400"
codebase="http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/current/swflash.cab">
<param name="movie" value="https://acrobat.com/Clients/current/ADCMainEmbed.swf" />
<param name="quality" value="high" />
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
<param name="bgcolor" value="#202020" />
<param name="allowScriptAccess" value="sameDomain" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<param name="flashvars" value="d=NYQ7IjBGIZ00k6S95ExMQQ" />
<embed src="https://acrobat.com/Clients/current/ADCMainEmbed.swf" quality="high" bgcolor="#202020"
width="365" height="400" align="middle"
play="true"
loop="false"
quality="high"
wmode="transparent"
allowScriptAccess="sameDomain"
allowFullScreen="true"
type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
flashvars="d=NYQ7IjBGIZ00k6S95ExMQQ"
pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/go/getflashplayer">
</embed>
</object>
<br>
<br>
Montgomery County defines their <a href="http://www.montcopa.org/index.aspx?NID=1106">Open Space Plan on their website </a>thusly: <blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Open space. Natural areas. Farmland. Scenic views. Historic properties.These important resources are essential to Montgomery County’s high quality of life.Yet, as the county is developed, these landscapes and heritage resources are lost.Our county has an abundance of beautiful and important natural assets, including rolling farmland, historic properties, scenic streams, and wooded ridges, that should be preserved for future generations.While 28,000 acres of these assets had been permanently preserved by 2000, this only represents 9 percent of the county's total area.
<br>
<br>
Recent development has put pressure on the remaining unprotected resources.If current development trends continue, more of these assets will be lost than necessary for normal growth and development. Open space and cultural resources provide recreational opportunities, improve the environment, and add to everyone’s enjoyment of everyday life.In addition, these resources have a strong economic impact, both directly through tourism and farming and indirectly by making the county a more attractive place for workers and businesses.The Open Space, Natural Resources, and Cultural Resources Plan is an important element of the county's comprehensive plan.It focuses on preserving and interconnecting critical open spaces and natural areas, expanding county trails, increasing farmland preservation, and preserving historic properties. </blockquote>
<br>
<br>
On Page 116 of the <a href="http://www.montcopa.org/DocumentCenter/View/3316">Montgomery County Open Space, Natural Resources and Cultural Resources Plan</a>, Parkhouse and the Upper Schuykill Valley Park are discussed in depth:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote>
An existing master plan for this park focuses on three objectives: protection and enhancement of the park’s significant natural resources through promotion of environmental stewardship, preservation of land necessary for park activities, and implementation of a continuous trail network centered around the park. The recent emphasis on the Schuylkill Greenway makes the park a regional hub for river recreation, environmental education, and interpretation of the agricultural heritage of the county’s river corridor. For this reason, the master plan should be updated to address the additional opportunities presented by this greenway relationship.
<br>
<br>
Upper Schuylkill Valley Park’s most significant natural feature and scenic resource is the Schuylkill River (1). The park’s location along the riverbank provides both visual and physical access to the river. Motorized boats in the Black Rock Dam Pool have caused considerable erosion of the riverbank. Boats access the river from the Pennsylvania Fish Commission’s boat launch across the river from the Upper Schuylkill Valley Park. A riparian restoration project currently underway along the river will protect and enhance the natural and scenic qualities of the park’s waterfront. The county should work with Chester County and the Fish Commission to manage use of the river and to develop additional protection and restoration strategies for the riverbank.
<br>
<br>
<b>Upper Schuylkill Valley Park is bordered and buffered from surrounding development by farmlands belonging to the Montgomery County Geriatric Center (2). Loss of any of these lands would impact the park’s scenic views and unique agricultural character. All of the property associated with the Geriatric Center extends the park’s open space and should be permanently preserved and maintained as an example of farming practices in an otherwise suburban area. </b>
<br>
<br>
The proposed Schuylkill East Trail, synonymous at this location with the Schuylkilloop Trail, will pass through the park and will be a spine for local connections to Upper Providence Township’s community park, the Schuylkill Canal Recreation Area at Mont Clare, and adjoining neighborhoods and corporate campuses. This more regional focus provides an opportunity to adaptively reuse an uninhabited farmstead (3) located at the lower end of the park as an interpretive facility and visitor center.
<br>
<br>
A future project called Schuylkilloop Gateway will create a river hub that is accessible to visitors of all ages and interests. Because this section of the river includes scenic ravines and bluffs, any opportunities to protect views, buffer natural resources, or enhance the Greenway in this area should be considered high priority for acquisition and protection, especially the riverfront portions of the former Malickson and Rivercrest properties, both now under development (4). In addition, properties that could fill gaps between county-owned parcels farther west along Dreibelbis Road (5) should be considered of primary importance.</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
On page 6 of the deed for the Puhl tract, linked below, it clearly states that "the Open Space Department and the Montgomery County Geriatric and Rehabilitation Center recommend the acquisition" of the parcel and that the "Open Space Department recommended an offer of $89,000" and "it is in the best interest of Montgomery County to attempt to purchase this property in lieu of condemnation rather than proceed through condemantion proceedings."
<br>
<br>
<object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000"
width="365" height="400"
codebase="http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/current/swflash.cab">
<param name="movie" value="https://acrobat.com/Clients/current/ADCMainEmbed.swf" />
<param name="quality" value="high" />
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
<param name="bgcolor" value="#202020" />
<param name="allowScriptAccess" value="sameDomain" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<param name="flashvars" value="d=KBPzi4yLpYaLjUybm5m3PA" />
<embed src="https://acrobat.com/Clients/current/ADCMainEmbed.swf" quality="high" bgcolor="#202020"
width="365" height="400" align="middle"
play="true"
loop="false"
quality="high"
wmode="transparent"
allowScriptAccess="sameDomain"
allowFullScreen="true"
type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
flashvars="d=KBPzi4yLpYaLjUybm5m3PA"
pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/go/getflashplayer">
</embed>
</object>
<br>
<br>
Finally, linked below is the Montgomery County Planning Commission review letter sent in response to Upper Providence Township's Open Space ordinance, proposing to re-zone the Parkhouse parcel as Open Space. The review letter is dated May 17, 2013. This review letter states that rezoning of the Parkhouse parcel as open space "is not consistent with current County land use planning objectives," however, it goes on to say that the rezoning this parcel as open space is consistent with Upper Providence Township's Comprehensive Plan Update (2010) and Open Space Plan (2006), both of which were reviewed and approved by the Montgomery County Planning Commission at the time of their adoption by the Township.
<br>
<br>
<object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000"
width="365" height="400"
codebase="http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/current/swflash.cab">
<param name="movie" value="https://acrobat.com/Clients/current/ADCMainEmbed.swf" />
<param name="quality" value="high" />
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
<param name="bgcolor" value="#202020" />
<param name="allowScriptAccess" value="sameDomain" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<param name="flashvars" value="d=ylsigtWvlGCgNmiGOQ1-gw" />
<embed src="https://acrobat.com/Clients/current/ADCMainEmbed.swf" quality="high" bgcolor="#202020"
width="365" height="400" align="middle"
play="true"
loop="false"
quality="high"
wmode="transparent"
allowScriptAccess="sameDomain"
allowFullScreen="true"
type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
flashvars="d=ylsigtWvlGCgNmiGOQ1-gw"
pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/go/getflashplayer">
</embed>
</object>
<br>
<br>
According to the evidence, which, I remind you, is 100% supplied by Montgomery County, the only thing that is being represented "100% inaccurately" is the that the acreage that Montgomery County Commissioners are selling is NOT Open Space.Lisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-17134389034855649042013-12-17T17:11:00.002-08:002013-12-17T17:11:53.178-08:00CBS3 picks up the Parkhouse story<script src="http://CBSPHL.images.worldnow.com/interface/js/WNVideo.js?rnd=902201;hostDomain=video.philadelphia.cbslocal.com;playerWidth=400;playerHeight=300;isShowIcon=true;clipId=9639864;flvUri=;partnerclipid=;adTag=News;advertisingZone=CBS.PHILLY%252Fworldnowplayer;enableAds=true;landingPage=;islandingPageoverride=false;playerType=STANDARD_EMBEDDEDscript;controlsType=fixed" type="text/javascript"></script><a href="http://video.philadelphia.cbslocal.com/" title=""></a><br />
<br />
Story below from <a href="http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2013/12/16/officials-in-montgomery-county-finalizing-plans-to-sell-nursing-care-facility/#.Uq-5pF8wTKg.email">CBS3</a>:<br />
<br />
By Steve Patterson<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
ROYERSFORD, Pa., (CBS) – Montgomery County Commissioners say they’re in finalizing plans to sell a large nursing care facility, while opponents are getting vocal on worries about privatizing care and how the company will use the land around the site.<br />
<br />
County officials want to sell the Parkhouse, a nursing home that houses some 500 residents, employs nearly 700 people and sits on about 200 acres of land. The deal is set at $39 million from the private Maryland company: $36 million for the facility and $3 million for the land.<br />
<br />
“The fear is that if it goes into private hands, we wont be able to guarantee it remains this pristine space,” said Upper Providence Township Supervisor Lisa Mossie. She is leading the opposition charge for the County to provide more reasoning on their decision and more assurance about what happens when the property changes hands.<br />
<br />
“My concern is that the motivation of this sale is not so much to privatize this, as it is to fix a budget problem that Montgomery County already has…. to plug a hole,” she said. “And when that is your motivation, then I question everything about it. You have to.”<br />
<br />
Upper Providence Resident Sharon Gehman placed her mother in the facility 13 months ago and is now worried about how care will change when the facility becomes privatized.<br />
<br />
“We’re being assured by the commissioners and Mid Atlantic that nothing will change,” she said. “My fear is that the quality of care will change. The staff here is exceptional and you always have to worry that when something’s being privatized, something will change. These assurances don’t feel real.”<br />
<br />
County Commissioner Josh Shapiro says a private company will only improve care, resolve debt and ease the burden on taxpayers.<br />
<br />
It’s a very small minority that’s misconstruing the facts purposefully to try and create hay where there is none,” he said. “At the end of the day, our residents are going to be better off, employees will be protected and the community will benefit from having this back on the tax rolls.”<br />
<br />
The finalized date is currently set for January 31st.</blockquote>
Lisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-2516266395817221922013-11-29T15:33:00.000-08:002013-12-03T17:39:30.228-08:00Just how high are the stakes on the Parkhouse sale?In a word: <b>HUGE</b>.<br />
<br />
Since the sale of Parkhouse "pervades every aspect" of the 2014 Montgomery County budget, it's worth taking a look at the single biggest budget issue that Montgomery County faces:<br />
<br />
Logan Square Shopping Center, aka "<a href="http://www.gspacedesign.com/xstudiocentrenorristown/norristownStudios.swf">Studio Centre</a>," aka "Norristown Centre," aka Giant Economic Development Boondoggle.<br />
<br />
Back in June of this year, Natalie Kostelni penned an article for the <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/print-edition/2013/06/21/how-montgomery-county-gambled-and.html?page=all">Philadelphia Business Journal </a>chronicling the tragic history of the Norristown Studio Centre, the too-good-to-be-true project that was going to single-handedly undo years of mismanagement and economic decline in Norristown. Like the quick fix that project promised, the County Commissioners are looking for a similar quick fix to fill the $24.5 budget hole that the project created. Kostelni's article (linked <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/print-edition/2013/06/21/how-montgomery-county-gambled-and.html?page=all">here</a>) is worth reading in its entirety, but for a sense of scale as to how dire the County's fiscal crisis is as a direct result of this project, this passage is worth quoting at length:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>The county finds itself on the losing end of the deal even though it had been warned. A March 18, 2009, memo from John F. Nugent, the executive director of the Montgomery County Redevelopment Authority, questioned why the county was committing so much money toward the project and why it would enter into an arrangement in which the county would be subordinate to the primary lender. Regardless, the commissioners signed off on the agreement.<br />
<br />
“We were told by our experts allowing the first lender to have a higher priority than the county was needed to have the deal happen,” said Joe Hoeffel, who was serving as a county commissioner at the time and fully supported Studio Centre. Hoeffel contends that in spite of the county being on the hook, the money helped keep USM Services and its jobs in Norristown.<br />
<br />
“There are 400 jobs and a Class A office building and a parking garage,” Hoeffel said. “That’s why I call the project a successful job creator for Norristown.”<br />
<br />
Bruce L. Castor Jr., who was a commissioner then and currently holds the same post, also backed the project.<br />
<br />
“I liked that the tax credit would bring glitz and glamour to the northern end of Norristown,” Castor said. “That was a Rendell thing and I thought it was a good idea.”<br />
<br />
However, Castor said he didn’t know he was signing off on a deal that put the county funds in such jeopardy. He blames Hoeffel, a political nemesis, for the situation.<br />
<br />
Josh Shapiro, a current county commissioner, said attempts were made to renegotiate the county’s secondary position after the fact, but that was rejected by the lender.<br />
<br />
Bleak Future<br />
<br />
Montgomery County District Attorney Risa Vetri Ferman is also looking into the matter. This is based upon recent public disclosures about decisions and actions undertaken by the past commissioners related to the Logan Square project, she said in an email. It is also prompted by a December 2011 report issued by a Montgomery County Investigating Grand Jury that addressed the conduct of some county government officials and employees and allegations of political corruption.<br />
<br />
In the meantime, the foreclosure process is expected to take six to nine months and has left the county reeling. It recently put forth a bond issue and its exposure on the Logan Square debacle was listed as a liability.<br />
<br />
Also of concern is how the situation will affect the amount the county and Norristown receive from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and its Community Development Block Grants funds. Since HUD loans were part of the funds given to Studio Centre and the project is unable to generate enough money to make payments on the loan, the payments will come from future CDBG money earmarked for the county and Norristown.<br />
<br />
Translation: This one deal could haunt Montgomery County over the long term. The county is also dealing with the reality that it may not realize any return from the money it gave the developer for Studio Centre and even recoup any of the $24.5 million.<br />
<br />
“We will follow whatever options and legal remedies that we have,” said Uri Z. Monson, chief financial officer for Montgomery County.</blockquote>"Whatever options and legal remedies" clearly includes the sale of Parkhouse and apparently <b>only</b> the sale of Parkhouse. With it's $39 million price tag, that neatly fills the hole created by Studio Centre with enough left over to pay down the existing $8 million in debt on Parkhouse and the $6.23 million on outstanding contracts. <br />
<br />
Adding insult to injury is the fact that the County <a href="http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/20130919_Montco_bracing_for_more_belt-tightening.html">must pay $528,000 in annual interest payments </a>alone on the Logan Square loans.<br />
<blockquote>A $528,000 interest payment on a redevelopment project that foreclosed in May. The county-guaranteed loan for Logan Square - better known as the former Sears shopping complex at Markley Street and Johnson Highway in Norristown - will cost the county $9.4 million through 2030.<br />
<br />
Another failed investment in Norristown, this one in a sewer project, will cost the county $110,000 in 2014, according to Monson.<br />
<br />
Those two projects, approved under the previous administration, have also cut into the 2013 budget. The county recently made an $8,883 payment for the sewer project, and the county Redevelopment Authority made a $363,362 payment for Logan Square.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<a href="http://www.mainlinemedianews.com/articles/2013/08/19/main_line_times/news/business/doc521232ef07b05703892465.txt">Moody's downgraded Montgomery County's bond rating in August</a>. Another downgrade would raise the interest rate.<br />
<br />
It's not only in the County's fiscal best interests to plug this budget hole as quickly as possible, but it would be best for all parties involved in the original transacation to make this project disappear down the memory hole as quickly as possible. <br />
<br />
Because, where did that $59 million go?<br />
<br />
It did not go into paving the parking lot, I can tell you that much.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-B2UM6S-Y7IA/UpEmHNdITkI/AAAAAAAABr4/EcDiY_ju3O4/s1600/IMG_0437.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" closure_lm_812819="null" height="240" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-B2UM6S-Y7IA/UpEmHNdITkI/AAAAAAAABr4/EcDiY_ju3O4/s320/IMG_0437.JPG" width="320" wta="true" /></a></div><br />
As a matter of fact, other than the renovated Sears building and the parking garage, it's difficult to see where, in fact, that money went. Montco resident Walter Interrrante filmed the "before" images back in 2007:<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/ZuSrC07qAiU" width="420"></iframe><br />
<br />
Here is the "after" image, taken today, 11/23/13:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-B2UM6S-Y7IA/UpEmHNdITkI/AAAAAAAABr8/NZK8X6fLSQI/s1600/IMG_0437.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" closure_lm_812819="null" height="240" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-B2UM6S-Y7IA/UpEmHNdITkI/AAAAAAAABr8/NZK8X6fLSQI/s320/IMG_0437.JPG" width="320" wta="true" /></a></div><br />
On October 31, 2013, <a href="http://articles.philly.com/2013-11-01/news/43563367_1_foreclosure-suit-parcels-sheriff">the Logan Square property was sold </a>to the developer for $8,000 dollars. <br />
<blockquote>Logan Lender, a Wayne firm, bought the two parcels for a total of about $8,000 after filing a foreclosure suit in Montgomery County Court in May against Johnson & Markley Redevelopment, a New Jersey firm led by developer Charles Gallub.<br />
<br />
The 24.5-acre property sold as two parcels, which includes where USM, a facilities maintenance company, has offices. Together, the parcels were valued at about $37 million, reflecting Logan Lender's investment.</blockquote><br />
It's worth noting that just this year, the <a href="http://www.timesherald.com/general-news/20130910/lafayette-street-corridor-project-underway-in-norristown">Montgomery County Commissioners broke ground </a>on yet another economic development project that would, as Commissioner Leslie Richards said, "change the way Norristown is perceived." <br />
<br />
Where have we heard this before? <br />
<br />
The project got started with $11.5 million this year. An additional $20 million contract is slated to be awarded in August 2014 and a third $20 million contract is due to be awarded in late 2015 for this project. <br />
<br />
Am I missing something here? If it was an economic development project that dug Montgomery County's fiscal hole, then shouldn't economic development funds be used to dig them out? Surely, the County should not be "investing" in economic development projects until it cleans up the mess from the last project. <br />
<br />
And it certainly shouldn't be using Upper Providence's open space to do it.<br />
<br />
Look, I get that the current County Commissioners inherited a mess from the previous Board. Lord knows, they can't sit in a meeting together for five straight minutes without reminding everyone of that. The fact remains, however, that they all ran for office with a full understanding what they were getting into. And it's more than a little troubling that <a href="http://www.timesherald.com/general-news/20130910/lafayette-street-corridor-project-underway-in-norristown">many of the same names that were floating around the groundbreaking </a>of the Lafayette Street Corridor project were floating around during that fabulous Studio Centre proposal.<br />
<br />
Montgomery County does some things very well: Parkhouse is a five-star facility that serves the County's most vulnerable aging adult population. Since 1993, Montgomery County has preserved acres and acres of open space and farmland.<br />
<br />
The County should not trade funds earmarked for things they do well to pay for things they do very poorly.Lisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-29222837289504880362013-11-28T21:59:00.000-08:002013-12-09T22:21:49.607-08:00Right To Know Request Library <br />
Following are the Right to Know requests (and responses) on record to date (other than those filed by Upper Providence Twp). As of today's date, even though the winning bid was to have been disclosed weeks ago, Montgomery County still has not made it available to me or anyone else for public viewing. How are we supposed to ask questions about it if we can't see it what's in it? <br />
<br />
Right to Know Requests #1 and 2 for winning bid/proposal, and appeal of same to PA Office of Open Records:<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="340" src="//e.issuu.com/embed.html#1929198/5948233" width="525"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
PA Office of Open Records - Receipt of Appeal (Appeal #1):<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="340" src="//e.issuu.com/embed.html#1929198/5948273" width="525"></iframe><br />
<br />
Kearney supplement to record - Appeal #1 to PA Office of Open Records, for RTKs #1 and 2: <br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="679" src="//e.issuu.com/embed.html#1929198/5948288" width="525"></iframe><br />
<br />
Montco's supplement to the record (Appeal #1 to PA Office of Open Records, for RTK's #1 & 2):<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="340" src="//e.issuu.com/embed.html#1929198/5948372" width="525"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
<br />
Final Determination of Appeal #1 from PA Office of Open Records:<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="340" src="//e.issuu.com/embed.html#1929198/5948419" width="525"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
Post-Final Determination correspondence:<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="340" src="//e.issuu.com/embed.html#1929198/5948544" width="525"></iframe><br />
<br />
RTK #3 for Puhl Tract - deed and resolution from 1983 (the only Right to Know request Montco granted, probably because they didn't realize it was requested in conjunction with the Parkhouse matter):<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="340" src="//e.issuu.com/embed.html#1929198/5948551" width="525"></iframe><br />
<br />
RTK #4 for the Mid-Atlantic proposal plus Appeal #2 to PA Office of Open Records:<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="340" src="//e.issuu.com/embed.html#1929198/5948563" width="525"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
RTK #5 & county response - email sweep: <br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="340" src="//e.issuu.com/embed.html#1929198/5948571" width="525"></iframe><br />
<br />
RTK #6 and Montco's response - other 9 proposals:<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="340" src="//e.issuu.com/embed.html#1929198/5948587" width="525"></iframe><br />
<br />Janice Kearneyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14553607607225403569noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-12920115971904044512013-11-28T17:48:00.000-08:002013-11-29T03:32:26.914-08:00Timeline of Significant Events in the Parkhouse sale<b>February 21, 2013 </b>The County's RFI for Parkhouse was issued. It was "exploratory" in nature and no mention of the surrounding land was included in the original RFI posted on <a href="http://webapp.montcopa.org/purchasing/currentspecsrfps/SpecDetails.asp?Num=132">Montco's website</a>: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>The County of Montgomery is soliciting proposals of interest from qualified individuals or entities in the private sector (not-for-profit or for-profit) to purchase, lease, or form a public/private partnership for the County owned and operated nursing care and rehabilitation facilities known as Parkhouse, Providence Pointe, Riverview Adult Day Health Services, and Montgomery Meadows Independent Living Suites.</blockquote><br />
<b>March 2013 </b>Upper Providence learned of the possible sale of Parkhouse via various news reports about the County's issuance of a "Request for Information" ("RFI"). At the time, the Township Planning Commission was working on various "cleanup" of zoning ordinances, including the Institutional Overlay ("IN") and the designated open spaces in our Township, both of which apply to the Parkhouse parcels. <br />
<br />
<b>March 26, 2013 </b>Two Township applications were initiated. One to update Upper Providence's zoning map to include several parcels of Township-, County-, and State-owned land in the Open Space Conservation ("OSC") district and another to clean up several housekeeping issues with the IN institutional district.<br />
<br />
<b>May 17, 2013 </b>Upper Providence received the <a href="https://files.acrobat.com/preview/13bfc9b2-f572-4919-aa50-34a7a2b8d38f">Montgomery County Planning Commission review letter dated May 17, 2013 </a>with comment on the Township's intention to re-zone the aforementioned public spaces. The MCPC letter (linked <a href="https://files.acrobat.com/preview/13bfc9b2-f572-4919-aa50-34a7a2b8d38f">HERE</a>) recommended re-zoning all County, State and Township spaces, except the Parkhouse parcels, stating that <br />
<br />
<blockquote>...the Open Space Conservation District may is not (sic) consistent with current County land use planning objectives. We point out that the R-1 Residential-Agricultural District zoning may be more in keeping IN/R-1 District zoning than OSC zoning, <b>which does not allow development </b>(emphasis mine). Permitted uses in the OSC District include open space preserves, wildlife sanctuaries, forest or woodland preserves, and reforested land<br />
<br />
Accordingly, the MCPC recommends that these two particular properties, with its on-site geriatric facility, be removed from this list. We find that classifying the other, remaining County-owned parcels listed in this ordinance as OSC Open Space Conservation is appropriate and consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan. </blockquote><br />
It should be noted that the County review letter goes on to further recommend that rezoning ALL of the properties listed in the ordinance were found to be consistent with the Township's 2010 Comprehensive Plan Update and the Township's Open Space Plan, both of which were reviewed and approved by the County at the time of their adoption. It is safe to conclude from this letter that the County's objectives for this land changed at some point between July 19, 2010, which is the date of <a href="http://www.uprov-montco.org/pdf/forms/Comprehensive%20_Plan_2010.pdf">Upper Providence's Comprehensive Plan update</a>, and sometime in 2013.<br />
<br />
<b>June 6, 2013 </b>Montgomery County issued the "Request for Proposal" ("RFP"). A copy of the RFP, without the map, was provided to Upper Providence by Montgomery County on <b>July 22, 2013 </b>and that copy is linked <a href="https://files.acrobat.com/preview/6cf4eeeb-64a1-42da-b3ac-44d4c53da412">HERE</a>.<br />
<br />
The RFP states,<br />
<br />
<blockquote>The County is willing to consider all proposals, which could include, but is not limited to, the purchase of one, two or all of the Parkhouse facilities and related/other assets, including the land on which Parkhouse is located.</blockquote><br />
<b>July 16, 2013 </b>Upper Providence Township's first direct contact with Montgomery County. Representatives from the County indicated that they had received several responses to the RFP but did not offer details when asked. Montgomery County officials expressed concern about the Township's pending OSC and IN ordinances.<br />
<br />
<b>August 19, 2013</b> The Township held hearings on the OSC and IN ordinances as part of the regular work session. The Board of Supervisors passed both of these ordinances by unanimous vote over protests from County officials present at the meeting.<br />
<br />
<b>October 3, 2013</b> Upper Providence Township staff met with County representatives to introduce the proposed subdivision of the park from the main parcel west of Route 113. The County questioned a "natural subdivision" by right because of Route 113.<br />
<br />
<b>October 8, 2013 </b>Representatives from Upper Providence Township attended a meeting at One Montgomery Plaza where the "Working Group" of County employees assigned to evaluate the bids for RFP makes a presentation to the County Commissioners. A presentation from Dr. Scott Rifkin, of Mid-Atlantic Healthcare, LLC is also included.<br />
<br />
<b>October 17, 2013 </b>Montgomery County Commissioners vote unanimously to approve the sale of Parkhouse to Mid-Atlantic Healthcare LLC<br />
<br />
<b>November 3, 2013 </b>County representatives meet with the Upper Providence Board of Supervisors and is advised by the Board that a sub-division application should be submitted for the requested sub-division on Route 113. Upper Providence Planning and Zoning is instructed to place the application on the next available Planning Commission Agenda.<br />
<br />
<b>November 12, 2013 </b>Montgomery County submits sub-division plan.<br />
<br />
<b>November 13, 2013 </b>Upper Providence Planning Commission reviews plans and tables action to December 11, 2013.<br />
<br />
<b>Upper Providence Township did not receive any kind confirmation of the intent to sell this land from the County until the RFP was issued in June, however the MCPC letter of May 17, 2013 piqued my suspicions in May. What no one knows at this point, not the public or the Township, is what Mid-Atlantic intends to do with that land now that they have been awarded the bid. To date, despite numerous requests to the County, including records requests under Pennsylvania’s Right to Know Law, the terms of the winning bid have not been disclosed to Upper Providence Township or the public. <br />
<br />
Upper Providence's request is simple: if the land is not critical to the successful operation of Parkhouse by Mid-Atlantic, would the parties consider altering the terms of the deal to exclude the land from the sale or offer to dedicate it to the Township? If the land is critical to the successful operation of Parkhouse by Mid-Atlantic, Upper Providence would appreciate the disclosure of the plans for that land. </b>Lisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-82211661776384782892013-11-27T18:23:00.000-08:002013-12-09T18:27:08.091-08:00"New signs will 'brand' Montgomery County public facilities"<a href="http://www.timesherald.com/general-news/20131203/new-signs-will-brand-montgomery-county-public-facilities">Times Herald 12/3/13:</a><br />
<blockquote>NORRISTOWN — The Montgomery County Board of Commissioners voted unanimously Tuesday to hire a company in Georgia to create signs that will be hung around public places in the county. <br />
<br />
The commissioners approved a payment of $44,830 for the signs, which are being designed by Creative Impressions of Norcross, Ga. Forty-six signs will be placed across the county at various public places. <br />
<br />
“I think it’s important if county tax dollars are going to sustain these sites, that people know they are walking into a Montgomery County facility,” commissioners Chairman Josh Shapiro said. <br />
<br />
There are no final designs yet, and commissioners have seen preliminary sketches. What exactly will go on the signs is still being worked out.</blockquote><br />
Revealed here for the first time is the sign design the County Commissioners have decided upon in order to identify public spaces owned by Montgomery County:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-htSxdadJxOA/UqZ50_JBnlI/AAAAAAAABtQ/fEEMzoGXNWQ/s1600/forsale.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" closure_lm_812314="null" dua="true" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-htSxdadJxOA/UqZ50_JBnlI/AAAAAAAABtQ/fEEMzoGXNWQ/s1600/forsale.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<blockquote>The 46 signs will cost just under $1,000 each. Shapiro said the commissioners’ plan on having them installed by county employees which will save the county money.</blockquote><br />
Additional money can be saved by simply selling off the County places.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Lisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-63984149742549793862013-11-22T18:20:00.000-08:002013-11-22T18:24:29.754-08:00Most. Transparent. Administration. EVAH.What follows is the County's response to Upper Providence Township's Right to Know request: <br />
<blockquote><br />
Dear Mr. Skypala: <br />
<br />
Thank you for writing to the Montgomery County Open Records Office with your request for information pursuant to the Pennsylvania Right-To-Know Law (“RTKL”). <br />
<br />
On November 21, 2013 we received your request. Please be advised that we require additional time to respond to your request, pursuant to 65 P.S. § 67.902. <br />
<br />
This right is being asserted for the following reasons: <br />
<br />
a. a legal review is necessary to determine whether the record(s) is a record(s) subject to access under the Act; <br />
b. to determine if the request requires redaction of a public record(s); and <br />
c. bona fide staffing limitations (in retrieving and reviewing the record(s) requested). <br />
<br />
We presently estimate that a response will be available no later than, December 21, 2013. <br />
<br />
Natasha Taylor-Smith, Esquire <br />
Assistant County Solicitor <br />
Montgomery County Solicitor’s Office <br />
P. O. Box 311 Norristown, PA 19404-0311 <br />
Ph: 610-278-3033 <br />
Fax: 610-278-3069 <br />
NTaylors@Montcopa.org </blockquote><br />
Considering the State Office of Open Records has already directed Montgomery County to release this document to Janice Kearney, you'd think they'd have it pretty close at hand. Lisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-67952828600020685282013-11-22T15:51:00.000-08:002013-11-28T17:50:37.303-08:00Historic Parkhouse Established 1807<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7-vWmtmI4YM/UpaDf1XhWeI/AAAAAAAABso/plO2v9hbCnI/s1600/PA_Montgomery_phPC.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" closure_lm_63825="null" dua="true" height="199" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7-vWmtmI4YM/UpaDf1XhWeI/AAAAAAAABso/plO2v9hbCnI/s320/PA_Montgomery_phPC.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
<a href="http://www.pottsmerc.com/general-news/20130908/parkhouse-upper-providence-boasts-rich-200-year-history">Parkhouse, Upper Providence, boasts rich, 200 year history</a><br />
By Jenny DeHuff, Pottstown Mercury, September 9, 2013<br />
<br />
<blockquote>UPPER PROVIDENCE — It began as almshouse for the less fortunate, but the Parkhouse nursing care facility in Royersford has come a long way since it opened its doors in 1808. <br />
<br />
On June 7, 1808, Thomas Jefferson was president and Pennsylvania’s second governor, Thomas McKean, was nearing the end of his third term. Parkhouse, then known as the county almshouse, opened that day to serve a vast number of Pennsylvanians in need of charitable housing. <br />
<br />
According to Sally Hawk-Jones, director of activities for Parkhouse Providence Pointe, Montgomery County purchased the land from Abraham Gotwaltz in 1806. It was on 256 acres at the time, which later grew to 296, close to where it stands today. <br />
<br />
The Parkhouse complex itself comprises three main buildings. The oldest, referred to as the West Building, dates back to 1872. The cornerstone of the centrally located building is marked “1900,” and the North Building, and youngest, was erected in 1972. <br />
<br />
Today, they are known as Montgomery Meadows, Parkhouse Pointe and Riverview Meadows, and together they offer independent living suites, short- and long-term rehabilitative care and adult day health services, respectively. <br />
<br />
“It was an almshouse, a house for paupers, essentially,” Hawk-Jones said. “So the county started building almshouses because it was the county’s charge to take care of the indigent. That’s how it all got started. Prior to that time, money was made available to take care of people who had nothing. State government, by way of the townships, used the money to take care of the people in the community. It kind of makes me think about the old Charles Dickens (philanthropy).” <br />
<br />
The almshouse was entirely self-sufficient, Hawk-Jones said, having gardens to grow its own vegetables, stables to keep horses and other farm buildings, such as a unique barn known as the Sweitzer barn, which was unusually large for its type in that day. <br />
<br />
The almshouse building was leveled to the ground by fire in 1821 and again destroyed in a fire in 1872, Hawk-Jones said. Six residents died in the latter blaze. <br />
<br />
The barn, too, and many of the farm-related outbuildings were destroyed by fire in 1867. The large, red barn that exists today was built in the late 1860s. It and other farm buildings across the street (Route 113) from Parkhouse are now part of the county park system. <br />
<br />
Many of Parkhouse’s early residents were of German descent, and a list of its directors and overseers from the early 1800s to today lies within the administrative offices. <br />
<br />
Parkhouse was also recently recognized as a bird habitat with the Audubon at Home Program<br />
More history on Parkhouse can be found at the following links</blockquote><a href="http://www.asylumprojects.org/index.php?title=Montgomery_County_Almshouse">Mongomery County Almshouse - Asylum Projects</a><br />
<a href="http://www.poorhousestory.com/PA_some_account_of_the_poor.htm">Bean's History of Montgomery County PA</a>Lisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-35373134817695990622013-11-22T04:21:00.005-08:002013-11-22T18:27:38.721-08:00Hard hitting investigative reporting on the County budgetOh no. <br />
<br />
Not Montgomery County's controversial budget that uses the sale of Parkhouse and 220 acres of open space to fill a budget hole. No, this hard hitting investigative report is about ergonomic chairs purchased by BUCKS County. <ahref html="" http:="" local="" news="" www.nbcphiladelphia.com="">NBC10: <br />
<br />
<iframe height="1" id="nbcLP232950411" src="http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/templates/nbc_blank" width="1"></iframe><script type="text/javascript">var nbcLP={};nbcLP.aRandomNumber=Math.floor(Math.random()*10000);nbcLP.currentPageLoc=encodeURIComponent(window.location.href);nbcLP.currentSiteLoc=encodeURIComponent(window.location.host);nbcLP.defaultWidth=652;nbcLP.defaultHeight=367;nbcLP.cmsID="232950411";nbcLP.vidPid="9eO04auJfebJ";nbcLP.vidSec="TK";nbcLP.vidSubSec="TK";nbcLP.vidFrame=document.getElementById("nbcLP232950411");nbcLP.vidFrame.style.border="none";nbcLP.vidFrame.width=nbcLP.defaultWidth;nbcLP.vidFrame.height=nbcLP.defaultHeight;nbcLP.vidFrame.scrolling="no";nbcLP.vidFrame.src="http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/templates/nbc_partner_player?cmsID="+nbcLP.cmsID+"&videoID="+nbcLP.vidPid+"&width="+nbcLP.defaultWidth+"&height="+nbcLP.defaultHeight+"&sec="+nbcLP.vidSec+"&subsec="+nbcLP.vidSubSec+"&turl="+nbcLP.currentSiteLoc+"&ourl="+nbcLP.currentPageLoc+"&rand="+nbcLP.aRandomNumber;</script> <br />
<br />
Believe it or not, this story was one of the lead stories on NBC10's morning broadcast. NBC10's intrepid reporters even went to other counties to "investigate" how much other counties spent on ergonomic chairs. Meanwhile, Montgomery County residents can't get the details of the sale that "pervades every aspect" of Montgomery County's 2014 budget. <br />
<br />
<i>(Also, as an aside: It's a little curious that the title of the Montco Memo post I linked here last night was changed from "Sale of Parkhouse pervades every aspect of Montco's 2014 budget" to something more innocuous and "pragmatic." Seems like controlling that spin is pretty important, hmmmm?) </i> <br />
<br />
And lest you think that our local reporters are incapable of filing an RTK request themselves, behold this story from yesterday's <a href="http://www.timesherald.com/general-news/20131120/methacton-school-board-president-petrauskas-asked-to-resign">Times Herald</a>: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>WORCESTER — When the Methacton School Board meeting was opened up for public comment Tuesday night, Winnie Hayes, a former board member and president, called for the resignation of current board president Joyce Petrauskas. Hayes’ request stemmed from information that surfaced on the Internet regarding DUI charges filed against Petrauskas in February 2013 in Clearwater, Fla. The information can be found on http://mugshots.wtsp.com/profile/1538079/joyce-petrauskas. Hayes said she has sent a right to know request for the arrest record from the Clearwater Police Department. <b>The Times Herald has also filed right to know request for the criminal complaint against Petrauskas<i></i></b>.</blockquote><br />
We can argue about the newsworthiness of Joyce Petrauskas' alleged DUI in Florida in another conversation. But isn't the sale of Parkhouse at least <b>AS NEWSWORTHY AS THAT</b>? <br />
<br />
Can some reporter <b>SOMEWHERE </b>start asking questions about this sale before the County jams it through? </ahref>Lisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-67294547264688408662013-11-21T16:07:00.000-08:002013-11-21T16:08:29.547-08:00Sales of Parkhouse pervades nearly every aspect of Montco 2014 budget<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xc4-7qZ1sy0/Uo6fzK7wE0I/AAAAAAAABrU/yYBOQdu914g/s1600/IMG_0421.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" closure_lm_775194="null" height="240" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xc4-7qZ1sy0/Uo6fzK7wE0I/AAAAAAAABrU/yYBOQdu914g/s320/IMG_0421.JPG" width="320" wta="true" /></a></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<a href="http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/montco_memo/County-reveals-371M-budget-proposal.html?c=0.08169665208681487&posted=y&viewAll=y#comments">Montco Memo</a>: </div>
<blockquote>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
The commissioners on Thursday released the 2014 draft budget of $371,473,973 -- an 8 percent reduction from 2013, with no tax increase.</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
(...) </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
The sale of Parkhouse senior center, and to a lesser extent the Human Services Center in Norristown, pervades nearly every aspect of the budget. The county hopes to complete both sales by the end of this year. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
The county had been spending about $45 million a year to operate Parkhouse, but next year expects to spend only $6.23 million on some outstanding contracts. That frees up room in the general fund to provide modest increases to almost every county department, a 1.5 percent raise for all non-union employees, and merit bonuses of up to 1.5 percent. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
The privatization of Parkhouse reduces the payroll by about 400 employees. It reduces energy costs by $1.78 million. It reduces debt service by $19 million. And proceeds from the sales will bring the county's reserve fund up to 11 percent, the recommended level. </div>
</blockquote>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
This only tells half the story. Parkhouse also generates some $47 million in income every year. Add an additional $6.23 million in spending for outstanding contracts and my math has that at a net loss for FY 2014. </div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
The full budget is available <a href="http://montcopa.org/DocumentCenter/View/6136">here</a>. </div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
Read more at <a href="http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/montco_memo/County-reveals-371M-budget-proposal.html#Mt0ly4C0lhbSrZri.99">http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/montco_memo/County-reveals-371M-budget-proposal.html#Mt0ly4C0lhbSrZri.99</a></div>
Lisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-63952426614347487992013-11-19T18:42:00.001-08:002013-12-03T21:15:29.898-08:00Montco to Public: "We have to close the sale in order for you to find out what's in it."<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Lower Providence resident and community blogger/paralegal Janice Kearney has had a Right to Know request (RTK) submitted to Montgomery County regarding Parkhouse since early September. Ms. Kearney's request of the County was simple: disclose the details of the winning bid for the sale of Parkhouse and the names of the other bidders. But it would appear that the County is more interested in playing games and muddying the water than being transparent. Consider the timeline below, and keep in mind, the Right To Know Law is the <strong>minimum</strong> an agency must do. There is nothing precluding them from providing more than what you ask for or faster than the Law states. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Also keep in mind that the County is pushing hard to close this sale by the end of this year. Are they trying to run out the clock?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Her notes follow:</span><br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>September 6, 2013</u></b>
– <span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">I filed original RTK with
Montgomery County seeking information relative to RFP 13-27 (the Parkhouse
request for proposals).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>September 13, 2013
-</u></b> <span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">Montgomery County’s Assistant
Solicitor, Sharon Glogowski (instead of the Open Records Officer) neither
denied nor granted the request, but requested an additional 30 days to respond.
</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>October 2, 2013</u></b>
- <span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">Montgomery County’s Director
of Purchasing, Joseph Coco (not the Open Records Officer) <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>wrote, in response to the 9/6/13 request,
claiming that they could not produce the requested materials because the RFP
had not yet ‘been finalized and cannot be produced at this time’. (I don’t know
why they couldn’t have just told me that on September 13 instead of asking for
more time).</span> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">I was
advised to ‘wait a few weeks to a month, and check back to see when the
contract becomes finalized or [I] could resubmit another RTK request in a few
weeks’ or a months’ time”. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The way the
Right to Know Law works is, if the agency does not formally grant or deny the
request, or ask for an extension of time, within five business days, it’s ‘deemed
denied’. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>October 8, 2013</u></b>
<span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">I filed a second RTK with
Montgomery County because I was aware that a decision had been made as to whom
the bid would be awarded to, and that it was going to be announced at a meeting
scheduled for 10 am October 8. The meeting was indeed held, the winning
bidder announced and it was recommended to the County commissioners that they
sell to this bidder, Mid-Atlantic Healthcare. No other bidders’ names or
proposals were disclosed at the meeting and the winning bid package was not made
available either at the meeting or subsequent to the meeting. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">Also on</span>
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>October 8, 2013</u></b> <span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">I received a response from Montgomery
County’s Office of Open Records indicating that they were considering my two
requests as one and that the ‘information requested will be sent to you as soon
as the RFP is finalized’. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>October 17, 2013</u></b>
– <span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">the Montgomery County Board
of Commissions voted unanimously in a public meeting to accept the proposal of
the winning bidder (Mid-Atlantic Healthcare). They distribute an internal email
documenting same, a press release, and the story is covered in the press.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>October 17, 2013</u></b>
– <span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">Joseph Coco, Director of
Purchasing (not the Open Records Officer) writes and again claims the requested
documents have not yet been finalized and cannot be produced, again advising
that I wait “a few weeks to a month, and check back to see when the contract
becomes finalized or I may instead submit another RTK request in a few weeks or
a months’ time”. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">I responded
via email, asking him to please define what the County means by ‘finalized’ as
the Right to Know Law does not make any such distinction as a prerequisite for
disclosure. Proposals are to be disclosed when the bid is awarded. I am still
awaiting a response to that question. Surely, it cannot mean when all
agreements are executed at the closing of the sale at the end of the year. How
is the public supposed to have meaningful dialogue and ask questions if we
can’t even know what the winning bidder (or other bidders) proposed until after
the sale closes? No one knows whether the winning bidder is proposing to
continue operating the facility as is, what additional operations they might plan,
or what is intended for the 200 acres of adjacent open space and the potential
impact any development of same might have. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">October 22, 2013</span></u></b><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"> – considering this a ‘deemed denial’
situation, I filed an appeal of the deemed denial with the Pennsylvania Office
of Open Records (PA OOR). <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The appeal is
accepted as being filed timely and the Commonwealth begins their review, which
must be completed within thirty days. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As
soon as I filed the appeal, the County turns over the list of names of the
other 9 bidders whose proposals were rejected. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">During the
7-day period in which additional material can be submitted to PA OOR <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>in support of a party’s position, the County
supplements the record with an argument of how they do not need to disclose the
contents of the proposal because the transaction is not “finalized”. I
supplemented the record, making the case that the Law does not have any
requirement for ‘finalization’ as a prerequisite for disclosure. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">November 18, 2013</span></u></b><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"> - <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">PA OOR issues a Final Determination
granting my appeal. However, the Decision fails to recognize, erroneously, that
I did request the proposal itself along with the list of bidders. Despite the
fact that both the County and myself recognized that the proposal was the main
subject of the appeal, and our supplemental arguments dealt with that document,
PA OOR inexplicably exempts the proposal from their determination. It does
direct that the County turn over the list of bidders (which they did upon my
filing of the appeal) and any other records responsive to the request other than
the proposal itself.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">When I
contacted PA OOR and showed them that yes, in two places I had requested the
proposal, they reviewed the matter further. They admitted they were wrong and
that I had requested the proposal, but that they will not revise their Determination
because technically at the time I made the second RTK request the award had not
yet been made. They consider the contract award date to be October 17, 2013 and
direct me to file a third RTK with the County.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">November 18, 2013</span></u></b><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"> – I filed a third RTK with the
County and ask them, in the interest of dealing in good faith, since they could
have made this available anytime since October 17, to waive the 5-day period of
time they are permitted to wait before granting or denying this request. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">The five days goes by without response. Since it's 'deemed denied', I filed another appeal with the PA OOR on <strong><u>November 26.</u></strong> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: x-small;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">In the meantime Upper Providence Township has filed their own Right to Know requests.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><strong><u>November 25, 2013</u></strong> - I filed a Right to Know request for all emails pertaining to the Parkhouse sale between the commissioners themselves, the commissioners and the bidder, and the commissioners and other county employees, as well as the nine rejected proposals.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><u><strong>November 29, 2013</strong></u> - Montgomery County's response to the 11/25 Right to Know requests is to ask for a thirty-day extension of time to determine if they can release them. The PA OOR has already stated that the winning and rejected bids should be disclosed as of October 17, 2013. To date the County has made none of this available.</span> </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<br />Lisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-66850038465366809682013-11-19T16:56:00.001-08:002013-11-19T21:29:38.694-08:00Upper Providence Planning Commission Meeting, Parkhouse Subdivision 11/13/13<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/al_FfOoNfFo" width="560"></iframe>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/-IH0MlgFTuA" width="560"></iframe>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/al_FfOoNfFo" width="560"></iframe>Lisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5258284426045245887.post-45370925389992029712013-11-19T16:54:00.001-08:002013-11-19T21:50:05.132-08:00"If you like your geriatric facility, you can keep your geriatric facility"<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0mBdeYEUVlE/Un982xHkwvI/AAAAAAAABpI/NnPWb3hOH3k/s1600/IMG_0429.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" closure_lm_770853="null" height="240" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0mBdeYEUVlE/Un982xHkwvI/AAAAAAAABpI/NnPWb3hOH3k/s320/IMG_0429.JPG" width="320" zsa="true" /></a></div>
As an Upper Providence Township Supervisor and a resident of Montgomery County, I am troubled by the lack of transparency surrounding the sale of the County’s Parkhouse facility on Black Rock Road. The proposed sale, which the County is rushing to close before the end of the year, includes approximately 220 acres of rolling farmland in my township that has been designated as open space on County planning maps since at least 2005. It was designated as permanently protected open space in the Township’s 2006 Open Space Plan which was then incorporated into the Township’s 2010 Comprehensive Plan. <br />
<br />
As a Township Supervisor, my concern is for the future of this property. Once this gem of open space is transferred to a for-profit entity, its preservation cannot be assured. Why hasn’t the County offered to subdivide off the geriatric facility and keep the balance of the tract preserved as open space? On <br />
<br />
October 8, the County Commissioners heard a recommendation from the “working group” assigned to evaluate the RFP submissions for the purchase of Parkhouse. This group, made up entirely of County employees, recommended that the RFP be awarded to Mid-Atlantic Healthcare LLC. After only eight days of deliberation and no public input, the County Commissioners voted unanimously to sell Parkhouse to Mid-Atlantic for $39 million. During that meeting, the Commissioners spoke often about the happy employees they encountered during their scheduled tour of a Mid-Atlantic facility and gushed about how nice the facility smelled. At no time during the public information session on October 8 or during the regularly scheduled meeting on October 17, did anyone tasked with evaluating this transaction address the fiscal health of Mid-Atlantic Healthcare, LLC. <br />
<br />
Mid-Atlantic Healthcare is a company currently undergoing a rapid expansion, and has, in fact, doubled in size since 2011. Excluding Parkhouse, Mid-Atlantic Healthcare currently owns fourteen facilities in Pennsylvania and Maryland, seven of which have been acquired only within the last two years. They have financed the purchase of at least $106 million for six of these seven homes. <br />
<br />
One of the primary reasons that the Commissioners cited for selling Parkhouse was that, according to County Chief Financial Officer, Uri Monson, the facility loses $2 to $7 million per year. Mid-Atlantic’s rosy presentation on October 8 included assurances that care at Parkhouse would not be compromised, employees would retain their level of seniority and salary and the community would continue to be served by this resource. Dr. Scott Rifkin, the principal of Mid-Atlantic, claims he can save money by joining a group purchasing organization (“GPO”); however, it seems unlikely that this strategy will be enough to not only honor Mid-Atlantic’s lofty promises, but cover the losses that Parkhouse allegedly incurs annually and the debt service of $39 million for the purchase. <br />
<br />
This raises several additional questions: Has Mid-Atlantic committed to retaining a certain percentage of Medicaid beds, or will they abandon the Medicaid patients in favor of private pay insurance to increase their revenues? Will Mid-Atlantic need to develop the balance of the property to make its numbers add up? And if it was as simple as joining a GPO to save that much money, why didn’t Montgomery County attempt to do that before selling? <br />
<br />
On October 30, the site of the once-proposed Studio Center at Logan Square was sold at auction for a meager $8,000, leaving Montgomery County with a gaping budget hole of $24.5 million as second position lien holder on the property. There remain many unanswered questions about the uses of some $61.5 million that was poured into that site for what eventually amounted to the refurbishment of an existing office building. Since no real compelling reason has been given for the urgency of closing the sale by year end, it would be unfortunate to conclude that Parkhouse, and Montgomery County’s most vulnerable low to moderate income aging population who depend upon it, are being sacrificed simply to fill this budget hole. <br />
<br />
There remain too many unanswered questions regarding this sale and I would urge that the County Commissioners slow down and honor their commitment to transparency by allowing for a more public vetting of Parkhouse sale before proceeding further. Lisa Mossiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09218144157649535411noreply@blogger.com0