The vice chairman of the Pennsbury Township Planning Commission wants to take a seat with the Board of Supervisors.
Aaron McIntyre, 50, has been a Pennsbury resident for 10 years and has been active in open space issues, the Pennsbury Land Trust and is president of the Hanover Hunt Homeowners’ Association.
Besides serving on the township Planning Commission, he is also a representative to the Kennett Area Regional Planning Commission.
While on the Open Space Committee, he said he was involved with selecting properties for open space preservation consideration. Open space and development issues remain significant in his eyes.
“The biggest issue is how to guide development in such a way to preserve the semi-rural charm, the open space and environmental issues of the township,” McIntyre said.
But, he said that maintaining financial responsibility is just as important because “ the temptation to spend is continuing to come before the township.”
An example of that temptation, he said, is the call for more public roads, with the township responsible for maintenance versus private roads, those that exist only within a given development. Individual homeowners’ associations, not the township, maintain those private roads.
And McIntyre said there is a need to watch out for, what he called “ tax creep.”
He said there’s always a call and trend to look for ways to spend money. “ That must be carefully controlled, or it will balloon out of control,” McIntyre said. “ Money must be spent carefully and judiciously.”
Here he cites money spent on the Mendenhall property as an example, saying the township spent too much.
He said the $700,000 to $900,000 was more than needed, especially considering there were not as many environmental restrictions placed on the property as there could have been.
“There were so little that the county backed out,” McIntyre said.
Had the county been part of the transaction, there would have been more money available so the township would have paid less, he said.
McIntyre also fought against the use of township property being leased for private development of Pennsbury Village project.
Both that project and the way open space taxes were initially presented to public became controversial and divisive within the township, yet McIntyre said it’s not as bad as it seems.
“The split is one which is typical and expected because of policy differences,” he said. “ But the last two elections show the township is more united than people think, though there is vocal disappointment in the changing of the guard.”
He said he has previously supported those involved in both factions, though he is more affiliated with the Wendell Fenton and Charles Scottoline faction. Fenton and Scottoline are currently sitting supervisors, having been elected in 2005 and 2007 respectively, the two elections he referenced.
McIntyre is running in the Republican primary. He did not cross-file, he said.
McIntyre is a senior vice president with Smith Barney, involved with investment management and financial planning.
Also running for supervisor in the May 19 primary is Steve Eichinger.
About Rich Schwartzman
Rich Schwartzman has been reporting on events in the greater Chadds Ford area since September 2001 when he became the founding editor of The Chadds Ford Post. In April 2009 he became managing editor of ChaddsFordLive. He is also an award-winning photographer.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...
Aaron McIntyre, in the words of those who have worked with him most closely, is a loose cannon and should never have been appointed to the Planning Commission. All of his “thoughts” in this article are taken directly from the Liitle Book of Fenton. Does he not have any ideas of his own?
Meanwhile, though Fenton and Scottoline ran, in part, on platforms of fiscal responsibility, Pennsbury’s financial situation is sinking rapidly. Scottoline and Fenton are powerless to know what to do. Persistent violations of the Sunshine Act have kept township residents completely in the dark. If McIntyre is elected, expect more of the same.
A whole article on Fenton’s boy … and, oh by the way, there’s someone else running too.
Same old Schwartzman. Too lazy to write a real researched news article. CFLive is apparently destined to be a public relations suck-up vehicle just like the CFPost was.
(Editor’s note: Mr. Eichinger was mentioned in the story as also running. Perhaps the person making the comment should advise Mr. Eichinger to return phone calls. See editorial on How not to run for office.)
“Fenton’s boy”. “Loose cannon”. It’s kind of sad to see that Aaron’s detractors can’t offer anything other than name calling in the way of
opposition to his candidacy. Sort of the same thing they did to oppose Mr. Fenton and Mr. Scottoline. Well, we saw how that worked out. Maybe that’s because the majority of the residents are more interested
in the issues than hearing sour grapes and personal differences from people whose vision for the township was so obviously out of touch with what the vast majority of residents want. I’ve known and worked with Aaron longer than most and for him it has always been about the issues. I’ve never heard him level a personal attack against someone he differed with, even in private conversation. But instead of arguing their opposition to him based on the issues and bringing some reasonable alternatives to the discussion, his detractors seem to be capable only of personal attacks, name calling, and innuendo. They rail against the rancor and acrimony over various issues in the township, and then just add to it. A more constructive approach to the issues would benefit everyone, including them. Unlike those who so courageously do their sniping from behind the curtain of anonymous web posts and Google group emailings, I’ll sign my name to what I have to say.
Let me tell Will Sappington “how that worked out”. Fenton and Scottoline have wasted $150,000 of Pennsbury taxpayers money. Yes, $150,000. Fenton’s half of that is on defending himself in court. Once Judge Gavin ruled against him, why should he use township money to try to bail him out? Under Fenton and Scottoline, Pennsbury finances have taken a nosedive, due to this wastefulness and other gross fiscal mismanagement.
And we are well aware that Sappington is one of the litigants who started all this mess, along with McIntyre and Fenton. Yes, McIntyre is one of the litigators, with outstanding suits. If he is elected, will he expect taxpayers to help pay his legal fees like Fenton has done
Perhaps the poster below (hmmm, still no name, huh?) needs to be reminded that all parties involved in legal proceedings are “litigants” and that includes the township and the developer, not just we residents. And of the lot, the developer has been the most prolific, handing out lawsuits like lollipops at a bank window. After coming into town claiming to be all benevolent and cooperative with the township, their first response to something they didn’t like, the conditions imposed on the conditional approval, was to appeal the conditions, effectively suing the supervisors for doing their job to protect the township. It’s what developers do. The residents have simply met them on their own terms. As to Mr. Fenton’s bias case, the action was taken against him as a Supervisor of the township, he is legally entitled to the resources of the township to defend himself. Judge Gavin has shown considerable sympathy toward the developers in these matters and has issued some very questionable rulings, one of which was overturned 6 to 1 by the Commonwealth Court, and his ruling in the bias case is equally questionable. Mr. Fenton is due his day in court, especially to appeal a ruling from a judge who has been so resoundingly overturned on other rulings. One could make a reasonable case that if he loses he should pay for his appeal, but if he wins and is found to have done nothing wrong in the eyes of the law, he is absolutely entitled to having his expenses paid. As to Aaron expecting his expenses to be paid too, well, that’s just being silly. His case is a private matter between him and PVA and is being paid privately. But then I guess silly little arguments like that are all the anonymous poster below has left.
Will Sappington has a problem with the Google group E-Mails. Since Mr. Fenton and Mr. Scottoline have effectively shut off all communication on important township matters, whoever it is that is putting out those group E-Mails is the only source for knowing what’s going on. I hope they continue. As for Mr. Sappington, we have never seen him at any township meetings, at least for the last few years, so he must be getting all his information from Aaron McIntyre. How can you speak so authoritatively when you never come to any meetings to see for yourself what’s really going on?
Actually I do not have a problem with the Google emails, if they would stick to the original, as-advertised purpose of being a fact-based, informative news letter. But they have often been just a vehicle for shouting down Mr.’s Fenton and Scottoline – the bias and political bent was obvious. Whenever there was mud to be slung at them, you could read it first in the group emails. Otherwise, I think they’re a fine idea.
As to the meetings, yep, y’ got me there, I’ve been to very few in the last few years. Several reasons, but the main one is, honestly, I’ve gotten damned sick of hearing otherwise good, respectable people take jabs and potshots at each other and generally think the worst of each other because they happen to be on opposite sides of a difficult issue. Some of the meetings have resembled a WWF Smackdown and I just don’t want to be a part of that. I got into this because I, like the others, felt we the residents deserved better representation than we were getting from the previous supervisors on an issue that would profoundly affect all of us for for the foreseeable future, that someone needed to stand up for our public lands and our local environment and give the residents a real voice in the issues, not just lip service at the hearings, and if the supervisors weren’t going to do that then we would. I personally, perhaps naively, thought that reasonable people could resolve even difficult issues reasonably. But then the emotions came into play, the insults started flying, like some of the comments here, MaryAnna in particular was the target of some unconscionable attacks, and people on one side or the other were being tarred with the same brush regardless of their past friendships. At one of the recent meetings that dealt with the bias ruling, a woman I greatly respect said to me in conversation afterward “We always liked you, Will.” Hmmm, past tense. Well, if I have to lose a friend because of my beliefs on a certain matter, so be it, maybe the friendship wasn’t that strong to begin with. The whole scene has become very distasteful so I decided to get away from all that and just go about my business quietly.
But you needn’t worry, I do manage to stay well-informed, thanks more so to a lot of other people than to Aaron. I actually do have more than one friend in this township. And as you freely admit below, I can speak very authoritatively on this issue in particular. Thank you for that.
Later this month, Pennsbury Township will hold primary elections to select a candidate for Supervisor on its three-person Board of Supervisors. This e-mail is to call attention to its recipients of two facts and to study implications of them.
Fact One: One of the candidates, at a recent public meeting, denied that he is involved in any litigation in which the Township is involved with Pennsbury Village Associates (PVA) [the group developing the area around the Township office building]. In actual fact, he is apparently involved in TWO of the many lawsuits among PVA, the Township, and others. Since one of the current Board is already involved in these litigations (already on appeal — at Township expense), one might question the implications to our governance if two of the three supervisors become involved. Perhaps this is the reason behind the candidate’s denial! (There is also, though somewhat irrelevant, some question about one candidate’s purported educational credentials.)
Fact Two: A prominent local family, with some legal credentials, was recently interrupted while disturbing roadside campaign signs. This is against the law! After a painful confrontation, the signs were ultimately restored to their original location. (There is an UNCONFIRMED RUMOR that there is an informal group involved in organized activity to remove/disturb campaign signs of one candidate.) What motivates such actions?
Thought problem: Should two of three supervisors sit on a board when their actions on a major township issue could be ruled invalid? Or should ONE supervisor have to carry the load on his slender shoulders if the other two had to recuse themselves? Is this legal? Background: One supervisor was enjoined from participating in Board actions involving PVA. This injunction is currently under appeal, with legal costs being borne by the Township. Current annual legal costs are running more than twice as high as formerly. If a SECOND candidate were also enjoined, and an appeal undertaken, what would our legal costs look like then? What if such appeals were unsuccessful — what would it cost the township residents to UNDO any actions taken and certified by the majority of a board ultimately enjoined? What would be the cost of damage suits undertaken against the Township as a result of the many current litigatory actions?
This author merely raises issues for consideration by his fellow residents. The speculations may not be very popular, but they should be considered.
So Mr. Sappington,
Is it your opinion that there was mud out there but it should be left alone and not brought to the public?
The article today states that you stand by your web site information about your education. If so why did you change it today? What is the real story about you. Are you a facade. A pretty face in a nice suit but have dirty secrets hidden behind all the niceties? And what would Smith Barney think about you comments that it really dosen’t matter what you did 30 years ago.