A newcomer to Pennsbury Township politics is the second candidate seeking the Republican Party nomination for supervisor.
Steve Eichinger, a 32-year-old self employed consultant in communications and high technology will be running against Aaron McIntyre in the May 19 primary.
Eichinger said he has no prior township involvement, adding, “I want to fix things. There’s too much anger. I want to help the township.”
A staunch advocate for open space preservation, Eichinger said he has no allegiance to any political faction and only started going to meetings because of his work and family ties with the Mendenhall family.
He said he’s frustrated and upset over the way things have been going in the township, over the bitterness and lack of effective communication.
Township leaders need to open up to build more trust, he said. He stressed that he wasn’t implying that sitting supervisors Wendell Fenton and Charles “Scotty” Scottoline aren’t being honest, but that things such as litigation in the township aren’t really being discussed “and that leads to mistrust,” he said. “The solicitor doesn’t really answer any questions, maybe he can’t.”
Eichinger, a 14-year resident of Pennsbury, added that he’d like to see less anger from the public who ask questions at supervisors’ meetings.
“People are afraid to go to township meetings,” he said, explaining that they’re afraid of not getting real answers and are “uncomfortable in not knowing who to believe.”
He also said people think both factions within the township are unwilling to discuss issues beyond their differences.
Eichinger said he thinks he can help heal the rift in the township by bringing energy and attention to communication with residents.
On issues, Eichinger said he’s a firm believer in open space preservation.
“It’s great to preserve the rich farmland we have… I want to help prevent development, but I respect and understand a landowner’s need to sell.”
He said townships should look for grants and corporate sponsorships to help preserve those lands and understands the township can’t stop development, and that they shouldn’t be stopped.
He wants to work with landowners, to learn what they need to keep their lands.
In turn, he said, townships should also work with developers.
“We can say, ‘This is what we’d like to see,’” he said. “’We can fight or work together.’ It shouldn’t end in litigation, wars and anger.”
When offered the opportunity for a formal statement, Eichinger said: “It’s about finding a way to make things better, to work with residents. The factions are driving out everyone else.”
There have been a series of lawsuits involving the township, various residents, Supervisors’ Chairman Fenton and Pennsbury Village Associates, the developer of the multi-use Pennsbury Village project.
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...
It is not the role of elected government officials to use their public positions to project their personally held beliefs about things like the proper level of development. We have laws that regulate such things, such as zoning. Mr. Eichenger needs to reassure township residents that he will protect the property rights of all the residents, including those who may desire to sell their land for development within the legal parameters to do so. Those who wish to prevent development may buy land with their own personal resources and leave it undeveloped.
The only true thing Eichinger stated in this article is that he has no township experience. The anger he refers to is only exhibited by his supporters and those who were former elected officials of the township who no longer hold office.
If Eichinger is such a believer in open space why are there several real estate signs to sell building lots where he lives?
Mr. Barron, look at paragraph 12. Mr. Eichinger states that “…I respect and understand a landowner’s need to sell.” He notes that he wants to work with land owners but you should also note that he says that the “…townships should also work with developers. Both points that you address as being important. Are you appauding or critizing his position?
Only in Pennsbury could someone write an angry letter criticizing someone else for saying there’s too much anger … and not see how ridiculous that is. It’s amazing that a township with so much affluence and without any real problems … compared to say Coatesville … can generate so much rancor.
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.
On the one hand, he seeks to preserve open spacce, on the other hand there are FOR SALE signs on Hickory Hill Road !
As one who was, at one time, very involved in the Township, I have placed hope in Aaron McIntyre.
To be honest and up front, Aaron and I are friends. However, this friendship does not imply blind loyalty. As some of you know, Aaron and I do not always agree on the best way forward. Nevertheless, I am supporting Aaron because of his ability to engage, listen and entertain different thoughts without becoming angry or vindictive.
I admit that I do not know Mr. Eichinger. However, due to his close association with a former supervisor with whom I have had very bad relations, I cannot support him. This may be unfair, but nonetheless I subscribe to the old saying that the ‘apple does not fall far from the tree.’
With all of Mr. Eichinger’s words of hope, it is one thing to say, in the words of Rodney King, ‘Why can’t we all just get along.’; it is however quite another to actually follow through.
As one who was, at one time, very involved in the Township, I have placed hope in Aaron McIntyre.
To be honest and up front, Aaron and I are friends. However, this friendship does not imply blind loyalty. As some of you know, Aaron and I do not always agree on the best way forward. Nevertheless, I am supporting Aaron because of his ability to engage, listen and entertain different thoughts without becoming angry or vindictive.
I admit that I do not know Mr. Eichinger. However, due to his close association with a former supervisor with whom I have had very bad relations, I cannot support him. This may be unfair, but nonetheless I subscribe to the old saying that the ‘apple does not fall far from the tree.’
With all of Mr. Eichinger’s words of hope, it is one thing to say, in the words of Rodney King, ‘Why can’t we all just get along.’; it is however quite another to actually follow through.