Wednesday, March 7, 2012

The Third St Bridge: The "Special Interest" behind the delay

Despite the turn-out, people may have felt Monday night's Third St. Bridge Community Advisory Committee didn't amount to a whole lot in explaining the details of the bridge/dam.  A few explanations were given on bridge size, dam constraints and environmental impacts of the proposed options, but for the most part many questions regarding legal ramifications, emergency response and financial stipulations were deflected and not answered by the committee.  People may have been disappointed that there wasn't a whole lot of substance to the presentation or responses to important questions, but it appears it was intended to be that way.

Media Borough Council, through the creation of the CAC went to great lengths to draw attention to Third St. Bridge and have everyone objectively submit their input.  Mayor, Bob McMahon even went as far as to use the Emergency Notification system to have calls placed to residents announcing last night's meeting.  The system's only been used twice in it's existence, which seemed odd to use for a meeting on a bridge.  But, this was a big night and people were going to get their chance to speak openly about a bridge that's been closed for 16 years, or so we thought.

Was it all a setup?
The theatrics at the meeting made it seem that everyone gathering in groups afterwards would have shared input on the bridge.  What people weren't told when they huddled into their breakout sessions was that borough council already had their own agenda for the Third St. Bridge.  I spoke about that in my last post, but here's further evidence:

Yesterday I received a document from Borough Hall listing the names of individuals who signed a petition circulated by the Friends of Glen Providence Park.  The significance of this relates to fact that a signature on this petition clearly supports a greenway/bike patth as defined by the third item on the page : "Create a pedestrian/bicycle greenway on the Third Street Bridge, open to emergency motor vehicles only"

From www.boroughcouncil2011.com
So, if your recommendation on Monday night was for a greenway, you might be in luck.  If not, your time may have been wasted.  On the document I received, three councilman, who were candidates at the time last October, signed the FROGs petition :  Kent Davidson (His wife co-founded FROGS), Paul Robinson (Chair of CAC) and Brian Hall (Council President). It's also important to point out that former councilwoman Debbie Krull signed the petition and is Co-Chair of the Media Borough Democrats who  currently control a full majority on borough council.    

By manipulating the CAC, It's a apparent that borough council "stacked the deck" for a greenway all along.  Paul Robinson was not only made Chair of the committee, but outspoken representatives of FROG (at least two) were also appointed to take part.  In fact, one committee member who in good faith trusted the process, resigned due to what he thought was unfair treatment and conduct by the the FROGs special interests.  I heard yesterday there may be another resignation submitted for similar claims.  The resignation "letter" I was told by borough council didn't exist, and was questioned on what I knew about it,  in fact did!  Last Sunday I met with the person who sent the "letter" to borough council!  

Democracy in action, if you know the right people.

 "You have come to trust us to fight against outside influence and to do what is best for our borough"
Even at the meeting people were stopped from publicly speaking on positions that support a bridge with traffic.  A retired fireman spoke of the need for the bridge and how important a few minutes  can be in medical and fire emergencies.  Apparently, he was told by borough council not to make those statements?  WHAT?

 Based on this conduct and the overwhelming facts related to the special interests on the CAC, I would recommend that NONE of their considerations on Third St Bridge be considered from this committee.  Doesn't appear to me that borough council cares about safety, convenience, commerce or the well being of the community, but are more concerned with delivering a "kick back," or in this case a "greenway" to the special interests of a few.

The biggest fight is yet to come:
Whatever recommendation Borough Council comes up with, other than what is stipulated in the settled agreement, will have to be re-visited by the two other parties - Broomall Lake and the Delaware County. I intend to meet with both of them to present my findings on the conduct of Media Borough council.

This agreement which was settled last year by Judge Proud entails fixing the dam and including a road with vehicular traffic.  The settlement last Summer also allowed for a grant of $650,000 from the state which provided the last piece needed to have this project 100% financed.

With the financing in place, the dam/bridge repair could begin in months;  it just needs an approval from a borough council that may have political obligations to a special interest group that doesn't want the bridge.

Tedman


69 comments:

  1. Such a shame that our current council only has the interests of themselves and a select few of our town on their agendas....corruption at its finest

    ReplyDelete
  2. When did Mother Earth become a special interest group?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How do you know its not "Father Earth" you sexist, wealthy, mcmansion living, country club member, sorry excuse for a republican voter. Hope and CHange for Media.

      Delete
    2. I think the above comment by anon @ 8:59am can best be explained with a well known scene from "A Christmas Story":

      Ralphie: Oooh fuuudge!

      Ralphie as Adult: [narrating] Only I didn't say "Fudge." I said THE word, the big one, the queen-mother of dirty words, the "F-dash-dash-dash" word!

      Mr. Parker: [stunned] *What* did you say?

      Ralphie: Uh, um...

      Mr. Parker: That's... what I thought you said. Get in the car. Go on!

      Ralphie as Adult: [narrating] It was all over - I was dead. What would it be? The guillotine? Hanging? The chair? The rack? The Chinese water torture? Hmmph. Mere child's play compared to what surely awaited me.

      Delete
    3. Response to:
      "How do you know its not "Father Earth" you sexist, wealthy, mcmansion living, country club member, sorry excuse for a republican voter. Hope and CHange for Media."

      What is wrong with you? Are you serious with this response? I hope you are an adolescent or a child otherwise we have more serious issues in Media than this bridge. Address the issue. Don't display your anger/ignorance toward people you know nothing about. If you haven't figured this out yet, it makes you look foolish and no one will ever take you seriously.

      Delete
    4. How dare you accuse me of being angry or ignorant. Just because i don't sound or look like you-- you have no right to tell me what to do. You are totally out of line, now I'm so upset i have to go meditate, or do some yoga, or sit in the sun in the park and absorb some positive karma from the trees and animals. Can't even imagine doing that with the sound of cars going over the bridge. Dam stop this dam.

      Delete
  3. This is almost comical at this point. There is currently a bridge and money to fix it. Move on.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. and a court order stipulating to do just that

      Delete
  4. SO MUCH FOR "OPEN GOVERNMENT" gosh Kent you ran the table....secrets, last minute changes, back room deals. As for Mr. Hall the "trained problem solver and listener"..... i hope you can hear this..A judge signed an order as an attorney i would hope you can understand that an agreement is in place. Fix the bridge and move on. Hey Paul you get your prescription checked yet????

    ReplyDelete
  5. I love how Kent ran with the slogan of no secrets, no last minute policy changes, back door meetings...bunch of bologna, of course he doesn't want the bridge fixed, he lives right there! Fix the bridge and move on people, this is crazy!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd put $ on betting that Larry M also lives right there, or wants to. And that they are friends. And that they all belong to the pool club. That is just what this whole thing wreaks of: an exclusive club

      Delete
    2. No, I'm an East Ender, skeptic! I am friends with Kent & Brian though. They are doing a great job.

      Delete
  6. And while we're at it, all the petitions that were signed to keep Nativity BVM school open and independent should immediately be destroyed as we do not allow the residents of Media to disagree or question any decisions that have been made that concern them.

    Is this really any different?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The special interest group is more than 500 people. This is not a small handful of neighbors.

      How quickly we forget the wise words of a former council member. "You never do wrong, doing what the people want".

      Is it time for a referemdum?

      Delete
    2. I think a referendum would be great over 500 people signed a petition given to congressman sestak to get grant money to open the bridge for cars. And they all vote

      Delete
  7. I don't get the hold up....a decision was already made, let the work begin! Before it costs us taxpayers even more money!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'll explain the "hold up"....

      Borough residents got "held up" by a takeover coup last time around that put the swim club in the driver's seat. That all changed with the last election, and now we're left with a mess to untangle.

      While just about everyone else in town is considering and trying to weigh our many options, the Swim Club has clammed up, only to insist "there is an agreement in place". What they don't seem to realize is that that agreement is unfunded (no "wonership" means no PennDOT funds), that it has no time limit (we're workin' on your bridge there, swim club!), and it specifies no height for the dam...no height, get it!? Even two orthree feet lower than that pond is now means not much lake.....

      Delete
  8. Yeah Brian and kent are doing a great job its a shame we can't see it through the smoke filled back room where the decision has already been made to change the design. Larry M is typical of the know nothing blind supporters of this light weight regime supporting this debacle.
    I guess Brian, Paul, Sonica Mimpson, and E Stein have all changed their minds from supporting the current design to whatever deal was made in the smoke filled back room where the decision has already been made. It is better than the past when they did nothing for 16 years but claim to fight against dam ownership.
    Good idea to ignore the court order giving ownership to county and Broomalls and throwing the whole issue open again typical of the patronizing politicians now on council.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe the hold up is an attempt to minimize the damage the illicit republican hunta saddled Media with?

      Delete
  9. Conspiracy Theory II "The Bridge over the Dam". Republican and Democrat operatives accuse each other of unspeakable crimes. The county, the club and the borough bitch and moan until the dam collapses. Oh the humanity!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nice. I love it! A clear interpretation of the events that unfold in front of us.

      Delete
    2. The damn is built like those 3oo and 400 year old buildings and structures in Europe. It just ain't going anywhere while the people of Media call one another names and I hope they have the money to change a court decision before the money dries up and we keep the structure we have.

      Delete
    3. "The damn is built like those 3oo and 400 year old buildings and structures in Europe. It just ain't going anywhere"
      That seawall at Fuchishima is built like houses 300 and 400 year old buildings and structures in Europ....what's that you said...Tsunami warning? Don't worry, we have that seawall, it's built lik....what's that? The Tsunami is higher then the seawall.......

      Delete
    4. No bitching from the County this time--they say let the borough choose--it's our project. And no bitching from the borough, they're looking at the options and doing so on a short schedule. That leaves the swim club..."bithcing"!

      Delete
  10. Hey man, whats all this about a greenway man? Greenway, man, yeah that sounds cool. Maybe we can fly a French flag man, right in the middle of the greenway man. Yeah man, that would be awesome man. I don't know man, it's like I just don't know what word I like to say more man, either greenway or poop. They are both so cool to say man.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Back before the talk of removing the dam ,I remember hearing at a meeting that Penn Dot will only pay for a roadway and Media would be able to decide the traffic flow. Does funding go away if a green way is decided on?

    ReplyDelete
  12. For those of you on here that actually live in Media, you got your survey on the bridge/dam yesterday. Hopefully: a) you all fill it out and send it back and b) we get the results back out.

    For all of you making the "smoke filled room" comments, I don't recall the the prior borough council asking for citizen input via survey. If the current council fails to make the results public and open, that would indicate a problem with open government.

    For the record, I don't want a dam on the creek, because it is costly and unsafe. A natural flow of the creek, running openly under the new bridge, is cheaper to construct and safer to maintain for a long period of time. Any dam, to perpetuate an atrificial lake, has a limited lifetime that would create costly repairs for PA taxpayers sooner rather than later. Also,if that dam fails the volume of water that would come crashing down the creek would likely wash out Baltimore Pike. Doubt me, check the map to see for yourself. Who foots the bill for that? Media Borough's, Delaware County's, and PA's taxpayers do!

    A dam is more expensive to build, costly to maintain, and risky for public safety and taxpayer dollars. I shouldn't need to remind anybody here who studied history about the Johnstown Flood of 1889. All dams are prone to this in areas that are prone to large flood level rainfalls. We've had a few around here in the past several years. In the last decade, rt. 70 in New Jersey needed major repairs and had several sections washed out due to major rainfall that caused flooding that caused several dams to fail. Anybody care to think of Baltimore Pike in those conditions?

    One lane car bridge, two lanes, emergency vehicles only, greenway, etc. is a fair discussion about what the Media community wants and needs. I'm ok with any of the above and I'll be happy to see how the community responds to this. Nobody in the Media community needs the lake and dam, and it puts the economic health of our borough at major risk. The dam needs to go.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How can you post something "for the record" if your posting is anonymous?

      Delete
    2. OK where do you draw the line. Remove a dam on private property because you believe it is unsafe....whats next close the Media McDonalds because the food is unsafe and there are to many fat people in town. Get rid of county Beverage because they sell beer and it is unsafe and causes---DUI's....STOP all restaurants from serving butter, bacon, and sugar????

      Delete
    3. I feel there are flaws in the argument of "where do you draw the line?" First off, there is public funding involved. Secondly, if the dam fails, is the private owner going to be liable for damages to the park or Baltimore Pike downstream? You cannot have it both ways. Either the government funds it and considers its feasibility and safety. If you want government to stop making this decision for you, you shall fit the bill and assume responsibility.
      I do not blame members of the club for wanting to maintain the lake the way it is. They've never known it another way. I wish they would at least consider the value of removing the dam.
      Finally, as for the question of where "the line" is, I've seen this type of logic before. It’s usually applied to social issues and ends up asking the question "What’s next? Will people be able to marry their dog?"

      Delete
    4. NO; not all residents of Media have received a survey. When will they be sent to South Jackson Street? We are borough residents, and we have opinions!

      Delete
    5. "OK where do you draw the line. Remove a dam on private property because you believe it is unsafe....whats next close the Media McDonalds because the food is unsafe and there are to many fat people in town. Get rid of county Beverage because they sell beer and it is unsafe and causes---DUI's....STOP all restaurants from serving butter, bacon, and sugar????"
      YEAH and what if I want to hord black powder and play with matches while sitting on an open keg? You sound like one of the RonPaul idiots.

      Delete
  13. For the record: Media Beverage is within 500 feet of media school.

    ReplyDelete
  14. COST OF THE BRIDGE DOES NOT OUTWEIGH ITS BENEFITS.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Media Borough and the CAC will soon be in contempt of the court order and stipulation dated may 26, 2011. The order clearly states that this is settled, discontinued and ended.

    The court order states:

    As part of the project Plantiff Borough will make such improvements as is necessary to reestablish the west third street roadway across the dam as an open thoroughfare for vehicular and pedistrian traffic.

    It is hereby further provided that this stipulation and order shall constitute a full final and unapplealable resolution of facts and legal issues raised in or encompassed by or that could have been raised in or encompassed by the above captioned matter and that the above capationed action is SETTLED, DISCONTINUED, AND ENDED.

    Why does Media Borough continue to try to protect the interests of the minority of the population at the expense of all Borough taxpayers. And let me remind you all that the residents of Delaware County and Upper Providence have as much say thru our local governments as the Media Borough Council, CAC and minorty of the Borough residents that oppose this court order.

    Does Media Borough or the CAC believe that Delaware County and or the Broomall Country Club will change their minds based on the desire of Media Borough and the CAC to have a bridge with a greenway only? I think not, they have waited far too long for resolution.

    The case is resolved according to Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County. The only place it is not resolved is in the backroom of the Media Borough Council as well as minds of the CAC and minorty of residents that oppose the court order.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. never throught i would say this: i look forward to delaware county government saving us from the decisions of our own borough council

      Delete
    2. Dealware County says (correctly) that it's up to us. They just don't want to have to pay for it!

      Delete
  16. First, if the people making up that group are directly impacted by the project (e.g., they live near the project, would use the bridge/dam/park daily,etc.), I'm lost as to why their interests are "special" in a negative way. Second, Media Borough residents voted IN the Democrats who openly questioned the current 3rd St. deal. I think the majority has clearly spoken on the matter.

    Can't people be constructive and find a way to utilize the available funding to meet the needs and concerns of the residents who will be most directly affected by this project? That's real leadership--finding a win-win instead of griping and whining and namecalling when you don't get your way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No one reading these comments should buy your argument for a second. Voters in this town vote for letters over people and issues. Always have always will. Combine it with the small percentage who show up in a municipal election year and you can't accurately state "the people" in any election related statement. You proved it clearly in many elections and your "outrage" over what two of your "letter" candidates did over a year ago cemented your legacy of refusing to do any due dilligence when necessary.

      Delete
  17. As a retired person it's tough to watch this borough council run the risk of losing current funding and climbing an uphill legal battle again. Our tax dollars are at stake. We lost alot of trees when they built parks edge. This project is going to cost much less in trees.C'mon people.

    ReplyDelete
  18. A bridge connects two points. The special people, those on the borough side, think their needs and wants outweigh those who live on the other side. The people living on the Upper Providence side of the bridge send their children to Media Elementary School, frequent the businesses in Media, and contribute to borough taxes. They have an equal right for fair access to downtown media.

    The park is also part of Delaware County, as much as those FROG members believe that they own the park and are responsible for it. The tax dollars collected for park funding is coming from those residents in Delaware County, not just Media Borough.

    To think 500 votes for a greenway is the majority is ridiculous. Those that are affected are also the 3000+ residents of upper providence township, Delaware County, not just the 500 or so who do not want the bridge/road repaired.

    Yes, I know, all you Borough Residents and those that are trying to save the park have agreed for emergency vehicles to be allowed on your greenway as a comprimise. By adding another lane (6 feet wide) will only affect the area impacted by 6 more feet. Is being green and enviromentally conscience what you are looking to protect or are you looking to protect the peace and quiet you have had for the last 17 years while this project has been stalled by the borough what you are looking to protect?

    Your peace and quite is at an impact to every other resident on all other streets that access Media but then again, we have council members that live on this street so that makes the 500 people's voice that much louder. You are not the majority and your interests, on council or not, are no more important than all the others that have been affected for the last 17 years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said ano 10:04!

      Delete
    2. Are all the signatures accurate to 500 borough residents? I know I was asked to sign at the street fair that attracts people from all around the area as well as other states. Has anyone corrected the number to be reflective of "locals" only? I think all the council members that signed the petition should not be allowed to vote on this. Wouldn't that considered some sort of conflict? Oddly enough, the FroG group has never picked up one branch or identified one leaf in the Park until this past year even though they have lived right next to the park for over 10 years! I guess the Park was not important to them until now. How about them picking up all the dog waste so that eveyone can enjoy the park without the stench and piles. I would even provide them with plastic bags and gloves! What a crock this whole situation has spawned. Dirty, underhanded and reeks of politics.

      Delete
    3. There were approx. 850 signatures total; over 500 were borough residents--the other 350 are our customers!

      Delete
  19. The amount of misinformation being spewed on this comment thread is scary. I have owned a home in Media for 13 years (the first being near the park) and I have personally taken part in several Glen Providence clean up efforts stretching back to the early 2000's. Your generalizations and stereotypes of "FroGs" is disconcerting to say the least. Take a happy pill and lighten up. Let the results of the survey that was mailed out speak for itself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Larry M im calling bs on you post. The Friends of the Park group started last year. They never did squat before. If you say you cleaned up the park prove it with documentation dates and times. FROG's don't own the park the County does.
      No survey can over rule the court order.

      Delete
    2. I'll try replying again since you didn't approve my last post. There is no documentation, only my word. People who support the Friends of the Park have been cleaning up Glen Providence Park for a decade now. I don't see why you would think this is BS.

      Delete
  20. This project has not been handled correctly. This is a high profile project (locally) with significant impacts to a portion of our town and a public park.

    The previous borough council (and the design team) should have sought public involvement early, ie during preliminary design of the project. They did not daylight the dam design to the public until the dam alternate was selected and the final design was 60% done. That was a big mistake and was certain to result in residents showing up with pitchforks and torches (and banding together in groups like FROG).

    The current borough council, through the CAC and public meetings, is now trying to get the public involved. It is late in the game to do so, but better late than never. The public/taxpayers should have some say in the result. The best alternate (legally, financially, etc) may be the current dam design. But if the public is not involved, they won't understand this and will of course resent it.

    The claim of this blog post is astoundingly ironic. The previous council did not get the public involved at all in the dam replacement process, and the current crapstorm is the result. The new council is seeking public input and this blog claims back room dealing and special interests.

    Look, I'm sure the previous council was doing what they thought best for the borough. They wanted this dam issue resolved and behind us. They got the court order and moved on. And I appreciate that. I don't think they intended to pull one over on the people with this project. But they were unprepared and/or unexperienced with this sort of project and did not handle it correctly. So it goes.

    I have to say, I voted for this blog author, because he seemed to care about the borough. This post shows, unfortunately, that he is more concerned with attacking his opponents. (And a poorly reasoned attack at that.) I was hoping for better.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well put, anon 3:53....

      One clarification: previous council felt this would be good for the swim club's leadership (who are the ones who will one day cash out), and for their own (County) political ambitions. Since the project was "Fully funded" and they had the votes....well, all other bets were off.

      Taking great pride in having accomplished "things that cannot be undone", they have left us with a defective agreement, an ominous liability, and a terrible plan.

      Think this bears revisiting!?

      Delete
  21. "A retired fireman spoke of the need for the bridge and how important a few minutes can be in medical and fire emergencies. Apparently, he was told by borough council not to make those statements? WHAT?"
    What indeed, because it didn't happen. I was there and this gentleman spoke at length regarding times for response to emergencies. This "blog" and allot of comments sound remarkably like the mentality of the republican coup that usurped the will of the people of Media and had to be evicted by another OVERWHELMING surge of outraged voters this last election.
    It would appear the blog master and allot of his friends who commented still have a problem with the fact they are a distinct minority and when democracy isn't stolen they lose.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Hey man, I think we all need to chill out here. A greenway would be cool man. Maybe we can bring back the may day celebrations of yesteryear and march right over the greenway. That Carl marks man was a righteous dude. He had great ideas man. Long live commune living! Greenway for all man. It is the right of the working class man. let's unionize and build the greenway man. Greenway man, greenway. That is what I am talking about man. Right on.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SadHowMuchPeopleLikeToHateThoseTheyDoNotUnderstandMarch 12, 2012 at 6:30 PM

      You are ignorant. And pathetic.

      Delete
  23. The blog author has nothing to do with the posts on this site. This is the public speaking their mind. He has published both sides.

    The current council is pushing thier personal choice on the rest of us. Have you seen the propaganda piece they sent out giving people the option? This was very one sided, just like stacking the CAC in their favor as well as the last CAC meeting. Luckily, most of those that spoke up were against the greenway and wanted the road returned to what it was 17 years ago.

    I would love to know where all the borough council lives as well as the CAC members. I am sure all of those fighting for a greenway live within 2 blocks of the 3rd street bridge. If you are a council member or CAC member please speak up and let the citizens know where you live and your stance on this issue.

    Lets remember that this was a dam/bridge with a road on it 17 years ago. The last council did not rush to put this thru. The plans from the engineering firm are those from 17 years ago. If they did rush it thru, good for them. They did what 17 years of council could not do. Resolving an issue and by taking advantage of federal grants and funds. This project is 100% funded and a court order issued. If this administration delrails this we not only have a safety issue on our hands but a funding issue as well. Will the current council accept that responsibility? Will they find the funds necessary to compete the greenway? Will they speak up and take responsibility should a emergency happen and first responders are not be able to get to their location in time to save a life? I think not.

    This is not a political issue. It is not republican vs democrate issue. This is a personal issue of council protecting their interests, not that of the majority. Do you think Kent and his croonies want this traffic on their street?

    As many have mentioned above, it is not just Media Borough residents that decide the outcome. It is also those of upper providence, Delaware County, and Broomall Swim club. The author of the post noted that he will be presenting their interests. We all look forward to hearing that. The only way the minority looking for a greenway is going to get their way is if the stance of both Delaware county and Broomall has changed their minds.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All CAC members provided their names and addresses at the 3/5 community meeting, as well as at the beginning of all public CAC workshops held every Monday at 6:00 at Borough Hall for the last two months. For all the cries of lack of transparency, there are very few people who actually show up to voice their concerns at these workshops. I've been to all but one, I believe Tedman has been to only one workshop in all this time, and he stayed for 10 minutes. Instead of blogging about it, be an actual participant!

      Delete
  24. There is a giant pothole opening up on Baltimore Pike. I think it would be a waste of money to pay to have it repaired and help commerce get back to normal. I think we should make it a second greenway that can then connect into the third street greenway. We are so progressive here! We'll need to grab a north-south road too - maybe Orange street. I can have 500 signatures for that by sundown. We are so progressive! Smarter than everyone else, too. Maybe next year we can ban cars in the boro and force all to use public transportation (except me, of course, but I recycle so that is okay).

    ReplyDelete
  25. Thank goodness, for Tedman's blog, without it we would all be in the dark. Politics,it seems, is tumping common sense in the Bridge/Dam project. Hopefully, the legal agreement reached by the three parties will prevail.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I live on 8th street in Media, I have not received any survey and the date today is 3-12-12

    ReplyDelete
  27. Dammit! The post office is in on the scam too!
    Sorry to disappoint you folks, the surveys were not addressed to individual registered voters or even house numbers... They just say "Media Resident" and were bulk mailed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. were mailing duties subcontracted out to the FROGs?

      Delete
  28. I am officially forming a new group, ROADS - RESIDENTS for OPEN ACCESS of the DAM to STATE. The mission of ROADS will be to represent the interests of those who see the road access as vital. This includes residents of both Media and Delaware county.

    This organizations mission is exactly that. We are not disquised as homeowners who formed an organization to protect the environment when they were only trying to protect their own personal interests. Please see the below link for information on the founder of FROGs.

    http://mediapanews.com/2011/07/29/friends-of-glen-providence-park-group-seeks-to-protect-park/

    Please note that FROGs was started 2 months after the court order was finalized to start construction of the 3rd Street Bridge project. If this was someone intersted in protecting the park why does she live in a house in a neighborhood, Parks Edge Lane, that did more damage to the park than the construction for the repair/replacement of the dam and bridge and why not start this organization when she moved in to her house if the park was so important.

    ROADS can be reached at roadsinmedia@yahoo.com. Our facebook page will be coming soon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I detect a tone from the commenter above. The maturity level in your response to the FROGs group speaks for itself. Its you right to form a group and its everyone elses right to judge your actions accordingly. Please don't think that you are the voice for everyone who wants the bridge/dam. Good luck.

      Ps. I do not live near the park. I support a plan for a new bridge. I do not support rebuilding the dam.

      Delete
  29. I wasn't going to say anything, but now that you mention it....

    I have long been considering starting a group of my own--The Broomall's Lake Club Committee (BLCC). Its mission is to encourage the leadership of Broomall's Lake Club to behave itself in a civil, ethical, and cooperative manner with regard to its relationships with its neighbors, members, community, and the government entities that are trying to help it. The club needs help here...but they don't just get a 'free pass' to pull up at the trough in the way they have tried to (unsuccessfully)in the past--we had an election to resole that. Beyond that, Mr. Hadley is gone--no more kingpin to see to the club's every dream.

    The club wants to keep their lake, but can't afford to maintain it--will they stick us with the bill for that as promised (dredging) too? Or just go broke and sell out to developers with their R-2 zoning? Or...both!!!??

    Times have changed. The club has no endowment and no money They might think to let a kid or two dip a fishing pole in their lake or bring his ice skates down there if we're going to foot the bill for them....

    More to come!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ahh, elitist liberal threats at their finest! Welcome to Media: Everyone's Hometown, my ads!

      Delete
    2. Not liberal, my friend, conservative. A private club can do whatever they want...on their own dime. You take government money, you give people something back. How about taking down that fence and zoning yourselves as a recreational area!? Or were you looking to the government to fund the infrastructure of your newly dammed and dredged lakefront development!?

      Delete
  30. I'm finding the hypocrisy in all of this rather sad/amusing. It seems that most of the people who claim to be republicans (and continue to make ignorant, sweeping judgements about the "hippys" and "liberals") are contradicting their party's supposed anti-socialist stance. Do y'all realize that we are talking about government funding here? Of a public road/bridge, which happens to include public AND private property? I would think anyone who claims to be republican and/or conservative would NOT support the privately-owned club benefiting from a government-funded project. It seems that anyone in support of keeping the dam should expect the club (to which they likely belong anyway) to foot the bill for the dam and the maintenance of the "lake".

    ReplyDelete
  31. Sounds like this is just a gripe board for angry republicans. I came to this blog thinking I would find beneficial information on the 3rd St dam. Instead just opinions and mean ones at that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. HTG, you are correct sir this blog is a right wing playground for the dumb people who listen to Rush.

      Delete
    2. You're just upset because this blog brings to light issues local Dems don't want the public to know of. "Transparency" is great when one party can lull the public into believing their claims!

      Delete