Crime Wave Hits the East End
POTTSTOWN, PA – While running errands around town the other day, we noticed quite a number of anonymous flyers posted illegally on utility poles throughout the Sixth Ward in a misguided attempt to keep Rupert Elementary School open, at a massive tax cost to Pottstown taxpayers. Here is one example and here’s another. Like we said, they were plastered all over the east end of town…like a bad rash on a hot summer day.
According to Item 2 of Section 704 (Prohibited Signs), Part 7 (Signs), of Chapter 27 (Zoning) of the Borough of Pottstown Ordinances, this form of egotistical literature is strictly prohibited in Pottstown. It is unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to erect any sign in Pottstown unless it is specifically permitted. Unlawful signs include, but are not limited to: “Signs attached to rocks, utility poles, parking meters, traffic signposts, traffic signals or control devices, street signs, or historical markers.” (and if you don’t believe us, look it up online for yourself on the borough website)
You know what’s funny though…even though the signs were for saving Rupert and Franklin Elementary Schools…there was not one sign posted anywhere around Franklin (and we drove around quite extensively looking for one). Isn’t that interesting? So…the Save Rupert/Franklin flyers were only posted in the Sixth Ward around Rupert. Hmmm. Makes you stop and think, doesn’t it? Do folks living in the Sixth Ward really care about other neighborhoods in Pottstown? Hell, they couldn’t even leave their own neighborhood to go to the north end to post their illegal flyers around Franklin. We guess if their efforts are successful, we’ll know which neighborhood to send the increased tax bills to.
So, now we have yet another group of organized criminals to deal with in Pottstown (call us crazy…but there is a documented criminal running for office in Pottstown this November…maybe that’s a larger part of the organized crime effort behind this latest string of activity).
Who has a known and lengthy history in Pottstown for penning anonymous literature? For anyone who reads this site with some form of regularity, the identity of that individual is certainly not anonymous.
Who organized and implemented the covert mission to whip Pottstown residents of the Sixth Ward into a frothing hot mess? Hmmm. The list of possible perpetrators has been narrowed down to a few known individuals. Maybe it was George Wausnock and his employee, Pottstown School Board member Valerie Harris. After all, Mr. Wausnock has a long rap sheet of trying to save Rupert from its inevitable razing (at an extreme cost to Pottstown taxpayers).
Or maybe it was Pottstown School Board member Thomas Hylton, who has been hyperfocused for over ten years on keeping Rupert open at any cost to Pottstown taxpayers…his obsession with keeping Rupert open is eerily similar to one who suffers from an untreated mental disorder, don’t you think? While Mr. Hylton hollowly pledged to be a “practicer of fiscal responsibility” when he bought his school board seat almost two years ago, he is now getting ready to spend anywhere from $13-33 million dollars that the school district simply doesn’t have in order to keep the district’s five 40+ year old elementary schools open. Do you like higher taxes folks? If so, then Tom (and any of his sponsored school board candidates) is your poster boy for higher taxes in Pottstown. The numero uno excessive spender of them all is just anxiously waiting (and we do mean anxious) to spend tens of millions of your tax dollars to initiate his fiscally disastrous band-aid fix of Pottstown’s five elementary schools, while fiscally irresponsibly refusing to close a single one. And Hylton claims to be a fiscally responsible citizen? Really? He’s just another hollow politician with no basis in reality stumping another hollow pledge.
This is really getting old.
I live in the sixth ward and I do know who posted these handbills. And it was not Ms. Harris or Mr. Wausnock. It was a neighbor who has 2 kids at Rupert. I do support closing 2 schools and combining the 3 others. Rupert should be torn down and the property divided up for Single family homes, not apartments like what was done at Jefferson. My daughter, who just graduated from college, attended Rupert for all her elementary education.
The names of the criminals should not be protected, they should be outed so the authorities can take the appropriate action.
East1ender, could you e-mail me the names of your neighbors who posted the flyers? I want to include their names in the lawsuit my husband and I plan on filing. I’m also including Tom and Frances Hylton (dba Pottstown Citizens for Responsible Government) and select members of the school board (who rubber stamp Tom Hylton’s voting record) in the suit.
I hate having to involve the legal system, but these people just don’t get it and I’m sick and tired of my skyrocketing taxes. We have too many elementary schools and we need to close and consolidate. Closing schools will save Pottstown taxpayers a TON of money. Having to pay 5x salaries and building maintenance of old school buildings is a waste of my taxpaying money and it’s time to take a legal stand against those creating the stall tactics.
My e-mail address is [email protected].
And what kind of lawsuit? While I agree with the vast majority of what goes on here, this is where I draw the line. Just because these people disagree with our thinking, does not make them the bad guy. Elections are coming this fall, THAT is where the fight is! What other people read here, espically this page, will only reinforce any opinion that this group is extreemist. Remember the SOS buttons that were worn the last time Rupert wasw to be remodelled. It was right before the Middle School was started. You could not find a seat in the all purpose room. I remember because I was on the PTA. I disagreed with them, but they handled it the right way. Mr. Leflar should remember that, as our children attended Rupert at the same time.
I don’t agree with Mr. Hylton. But I will defend his right to say what he wants. If he publishes an advertorial, I can choose not to read it. I have said before, let’s raise some money and publish our opinion. But when people read today’s installment, where we want to start a lawsuit, and calling people with different opinions “criminal” then Save Pottstown has lost it’s credibility. This group will go the way that “the Pottstown Alliance of Resident Taxpayers” went, it just fizzled out.
I don’t want to see that happen, I think there are some good people here, but we need to step back and refocus our efforts to improve our children’s education with an affordable budget.
So it’s okay for Tom Hylton to threaten to sue the school district (numerous times as he’s done in the past), but when I propose naming him and his wife in a lawsuit, I’m labeled an extremist?
I think the people wanting to keep Rupert propped up are the extremists in this town.
Thank you everyone for the e-mails of support. I’m so surprised at how many other taxpayers of Pottstown are as fed up with Tom Hylton as my husband and myself are. The Mercury really is pulling the wool over everyone’s eyes about Tom Hylton. The majority of taxpayers really do no support him or his extreme (and costly!) ideas.
Thank you!!
But eastender, one of the candidates that Hylton has put forth really has a criminal record. It’s not SP or anyone else making unverified statements. You can look his record up on web, it’s a known fact.
You have so vehemently spoken up for Hylton’s right to say whatever he wants but you flip out at the idea of ljohnson filing a lawsuit if they choose to? What’s the difference? They have the same right to file suit as Hylton has to spread his propaganda. I don’t understand why that ruffled your feathers?
It’s not Hylton as much as this statement “East1ender, could you e-mail me the names of your neighbors who posted the flyers? I want to include their names in the lawsuit my husband and I plan on filing.”
So a citizen wants to voice their opinion and put up a flier to organize a meeting, you want to include that person in a lawsuit? I think we are on the same goal just different methods.
I don’t post much, but I do read this blog whenever there is an update. What I’m confused about is how closing the schools is going to save money. The article in the “Fishwrap” showed taxes going up, not down. So, I must be missing something. While I do agree they need to make a reduction and that should save money, why are the taxes slated to go up? Can anyone help clue me in? From what I read, no savings would come about until after 2020. Who knows what will happen then. The cost of the upgrades seem to defeat the purpose of closing the schools to save money. Sorry for not knowing the answer already, I’m not trying to stir up trouble. I just want to understand. Maybe I’m not seeing the big picture.
Oh, just to state again…I do agree reducing the number of schools. I don’t see it as a cost savings though. I feel that it will help the educational and operational part of it. So, I suppose my support is not so much financial at this point. I do not use the district to educate my child even though we live in the district and pay taxes here. Just wanted to throw that out there- since I’m not involved in the schools, I’m not as educated as I should be.
It amazes me that some school board members will make this decision based on buildings. Buildings! Not tax savings, not a better educational product, not improved efficiency, but buildings.
IMHO, the two biggest questions to ask and base a decision from are:
1) What are the future costs to the town in tax dollars? What plan saves us the most future tax dollars?
2) What plan provides for the most efficient, effective educational product for the children?
So I’ll take a stab at your question, readytomove, because my belief is that the recommended 3 school, PK – 5 plan accomplishes the best long-term savings.
While the 3 school plan is 33 million, there is a significant PDE reimbursement so that 33 quickly becomes 24. Let’s figure in a more than generous cost overrun, just for arguments sake, and make it 26 mil for total construction costs of the 3 school plan.
The 5 school maintenance plan has been estimated (estimated, because there are still some figures which aren’t known) as a 13-15 million dollar plan. There is no PDE reimbursement with this (and quite possibly a higher cost of financing.) Let’s add in that same cost overrun and put it at 17 mil for the upgrade costs of the 5 school maintenance plan.
That leaves a high estimate of an upfront 9 million dollar difference between the two plans.
Now, let’s look at the savings. With the 3 school plan, the savings in staff reductions is $750,000 in the first year. That cost was generated using this current year’s salary/benefit numbers. This savings would actually increase each consecutive year (compounding) as teacher salaries/benefits costs are always increasing, which we’re all painfully aware of.
Operating and utility cost savings for the 3 school plan would equal $135,000 the first year. (This figure does not take into account the efficiency savings of improved lighting, newer efficient HVAC systems, etc.) Again, this was calculated using this year’s utility and operating costs and as they also go up every year, this savings would increase each consecutive year.
So, in the first year alone the 3 school plan saves $885,000 in staff, operating and utility reductions and that number actually increases in every consecutive future year. But wait, there’s more! The Plan-Con financing for the 3 school plan may yield a much better rate of financing. With current cap rates, it is very feasible it could be as much as 2% or more. There is a small savings to be had there.
All totaled, the per annual savings of the 3 school plan would be very close to a million dollars. It would therefore take approx. less than 9 years to make up the savings of expending the additional 9 million dollars up front, right now for the 3 school plan. (Coincidentally, 9 years from now is when the highest debt burden of the PERS fiasco will be upon us. Seems to me we would want to be saving the most money possibly come that point in time to keep the tax burden lower than it needs to be.)
To be fair, the 5 school maintenance plan does provide savings, but nowhere near to these levels. The utility savings for the geo-thermal payoff alone are longer than 9 years. And I’ll throw it out there – Mr. Hylton loves to say that his plan would keep these buildings open for 20+ more years but not Crabtree Rohrbaugh or any structural engineer has yet to professionally opine that sentiment.
Look at all the improvements you’re getting with the 3 school plan that you aren’t with the other: ADA compliance, multi-purpose rooms to accommodate PE and lunch, Pre-K rooms for a max of 20 students, classrooms for a max of 25 (classroom max is higher with the other plan), decent library, art, music and computer rooms. All of these things for lesser future tax dollars than keeping the current status quo.
Mr. Hylton loves to dangle the fact that Pottstown is the 7th highest taxed district in the State. His plan of “light maintenance” on 5 schools does nothing to help that figure. It is a band-aid for a system that has failed us when what we need is a shift towards a more efficient system. The 3 school plan gives us an opportunity to realize better efficiency in schools that attract people and includes significant future cost reductions.
We may never see taxes go down, but we can make the right choices to slow their impending rise in the future.
A wise Superintendent recently said, “It takes courageous leadership from individuals in the community as well as those in official positions of leadership to focus on the issues that continually keep this community from reaching its potential.”
Truer words were never spoken.
Thanks Even Keel,, you have put things into clearer perspective for me too. It is convoluted and difficult to grasp all the intricacies when it is presented piece meal in the press. Further complicated by the smoke and mirrors put out by Hylton and the fishwrap.
Many thanks Even Keel for the information! I really appreciate you taking the time to post it. It is a big help.
ljohnson, did you file your lawsuit yet?
We did meet with our lawyer last week. I’ve been requested not to comment on its progress.
Thank you again to everyone who sent me e-mails. I just can’t believe the amount of support out there.