On December 12 the Abington Township board of commissioners passed a budget that literally a handful of people, if 
				that, understood.
In the 
				next two years, Abington residents were  likely to receive the 
				largest increase that any have ever seen in their
				 entire history
				 in Abington….. and I 
				personally, have lived here 44 years. 
				And I fear it is on the cusp of getting far worse under 
				this current leadership. (As things turned out - the Covid 19 
				Pandemic hit us in early 2020 and the increases  decribed 
				below never came to pass)
Manager Richard Manfredi, the 
				least transparent manager we have ever had
				 is consolidating power at 
				the top - and you should be concerned.  
				
				
				
 Here are some 2020 
				realities
				
				9.9% INCREASE TO EVERY HOME 
				DOUBLE THAT AS A 
				POSSIBILITY NEXT YEAR 
OUR TOWNSHIP AND YOUR WALLETS 
				“OPEN FOR BUSINESS” 
A MANAGER CONCENTRATING 
				POWER 
				AT THE TOP 
A MANAGER FULLFILLING HIS 
				WISH LIST  NO 
				MATTER THE  COST TO YOU 
				 
FALSE REASONS GIVEN FOR THE TAX INCREASE(S)
				 the reason given  
				in a direct phone call with the Manager was for 
				the OPEB and Debt Service. 
				Nonsense. Those are obligations.
				 Pensions are obligations.   
				You take care of your obligations before you take your cart to 
				the toy store. They have plenty of money for all their 
				obligations but they don't have 
				money for their obligations and also dozens of wish list items.  
				In his presentations he also cited the actuarial report 
				requiring an extra amount in the pension fun etc. 
				Again....hogwas. A pension fund is an obligation. It is the wish 
				list items that are causing them to increase taxes while the 
				have $11-12million in the unrestricted fund balance .
				
				Wish list items like: 
 -- a new Township building and 
				Firehouse
 -- an Economic 
				Development Corporation 
                
				
				
                
				(not vetted with the public)
--- personnel devoted to the 
				Economic Development Committee ( free or for $1 per year) 
 
				
                 -- converting  Manor Woods 
				(to we don't know what - it's not been vetted)
 -- new IT toys 
				of every kind including
				
				
                
				a GIS system ( not vetted with the public)
				-- IT personnel (while dropping needed department personnel)
				--  7% increases 
				to some personnel ( not to all, just to some)
---a 
				professional advisor to figure out how to make revenue 
           
				( 
				something I don’t want them doing because they’re doing it in 
				their interests not in mine)
-- Park studies (while we have 
				no Parks Director  who knows our Parks and how they are 
				used)
--  a brand-new “Inclusive Park “ 
				(again- not vetted  with the public)  
-- Open Gov 
				Software that produces charts and graphs of financial 
				information etc  
           ( not vetted with the public)
-- 
				Contigency Expense -  was previously $150,000 - gifted self $485,000 in 
				2020  (we were told this was for contract negotiations  
				or similar - but we understnd an outsized part of it went to the 
				solicitor - that information is STILL being made hard to get  
				in 2021) 
				
				
These - and many, many more like these - 
				are the reasons for your tax increase - not the reasons cited.
				
These are 
				all  things that they are not obligated 
				
				to provide. 
Mr. Manfredi confirmed ( by phone 
				12-12-19 ) that the things that are approved in the budget no 
				longer need vetting for him to begin spending those funds per 
				that plan .  He said we had an opportunity at the Budget 
				meeting  to comment -  but, of course, there were 
				dozens and dozens of  things at the Budget meeting and only 
				a few precious minutes is given to comment on all of them 
				
 
				
THE SOLICITOR - A DILEMMA  In addition to the wish list items 
				being a huge burden , the 
				solicitor’s budget, in my 
				opinion, warrants no increase but, I think , but an investigationnot . He  
				explained his increase saying it is expensive to take code 
				violators to court. Hogwash. First of all , I don't think he 
				does many of those.  If those properties are properly 
				cited, the fines will pay for the attorney fees. He would have 
				to make the case for us to the judge  that the violator, not the 
				taxpayer, should bear the cost.  Apparently that is not his 
				strong suit - getting money BACK for the taxpayers. 
        
				His high fees can be attributed not to work that brings good 
				results for the taxpayers - but often for work that lets the 
				guilty parties off the hook at the expense of the taxpayers. Many actions on his 
				part  are extremely problematic. Ie:
				I made a simple request for documents in November 2018.  
				They exist. They are not exempt.  But I still don't have 
				many of them. The solicitor decided to withhold a vast number of them,  and 
				that act alone, that sheer beligerance,  has cost the 
				Township untold thousands ... whilke thwarting transparency .  
				The Commissioners continue to 
				allow it.  You might want to ask them why ------  and  I would love 
				to hear their answer.  I guess because it's not their money....it's
				yours and he profits nicely 
				and then raises his retainer....  That is just ONE of the 
				things that make him unwarranted hundreds of thousdands. 
 
				
                
				
				
                
				INCOMPREHENSIBLE  COMMENTS ABOUT HOW RAISING THE 
				RETAINER WOULD FIX THE OVER-CHARGING   Because he had gone over his previous  retainer so often, 
				the manager was 
				somehow going to solve the  problem by raising the retainer 
				fee. Really?  So he doesn'thave to bring excesses  
				before the Board to approve.?  The only thing that 
				will do, is to set a higher amount that he will be paid this 
				coming year and will base his raise on the next year...... and 
				it will produce a higher amount for RFP's (Requests for 
				Proposals)Those firms likely would be 
				chosen by our Manager  anyway - so  when viewing all 
				the extra work our Solicitor made for himself, why wouldn't they 
				be high, too?   And when we raise the retainer he will most certainly go over it again. 
				
        A proper investigation 
				into the reasons so many legal actions are initiated here needs 
				to be investigated. The taxpayers are being fleeced. In some 
				cases, taxpayers are paying for both sides of the case...and the 
				solicitor seems to have no incentive to hold guilty parties 
				accountable so taxpayers  get paid back.  Employees 
				have been moved or fired, documents have been withheld on purpose or through 
				negligence, and there was the   MOU (memorandum of 
				Understanding ) on the Colonade where the solicitors rendition 
				could not be honored while abiding by laws and codes. That was 
				the MOU that launched a thousand legal 
				"ships".....  
				some still "sailing"  ..... many that have gone on for years, 
				fattening the  solicitor's wallet and driving up his "need" 
				for a bigger retainer.  
        I think a new solicitor would solve 
				a WHOLE lot of problems.   Time for some proper open 
				bidding - not a closed RFP where a few select high priced 
				alternatives are chosen. And time for some oversight. 
				
                
				
A BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS HELPING THE MANAGER 
				HIDE THE TRUTH  
Knowing otherwise if they had read 
				any parts of the budget, your Commissioners  allowed the manager to suggest they 
				needed to raise taxes for the OPEB 
				and Debt Service and didn’t correct that with the 
				residents.  They didn’t 
				discuss at budget time the real cost of the manager's wish list  and the many, many,many, things on 
				it.  They also refuse to 
				acknowledge what the solicitor is doing, 
				as noted above ----all of which has been brought to their 
				attention--- and ignored by them. They are the enablers. Mr 
				Bowman recently a valient cheerleader while he has no time to 
				hear residents concerns. Is this the kind of Township you want?  
				It is costing the taxpayers dearly for behavior 
				that I believe should be under investigation for improprieties, not rewarded with 
				increases.   
				
				
				
A BUDGET LAID OUT TO CONFUSE IN A DOZEN WAYS 
				– more than 100 
				extra pages of repetitive nonsense
has been added to this 
				budget.  Manager Manfredi was asked 
				previously to keep narratives brief and  to keep them right 
				next to the financial page where the explanation and the actual 
				numbers could be compared. He  refused. He is
				choosing the more confusing 
				way. When you have a 
				question about a financial in one of the charts, you have to 
				scroll up 3-500 pages to try 
				to find the explanation for it . The organizational chart for 
				that department is also not nearby as it always was in the past. 
				An absurd and confusing way to keep a budget. Manager Manfredi 
				has been asked to change that. The Commissioners allow him to 
				continue to confuse.
A PROCESS DESIGNED 
				
				TO CUT THE PUBLIC OUT- delayed budget presentation,
				 canceled meetings,
				 meetings moved up with no 
				overt notice (even on the opening webpage)
				  
				A BUDGET 
				WITHHELD FROM THE PUBLIC  
				 UNTIL 
				THE LAST MINUTE -on purpose - and transcripts withheld  and 
				slides withheld - all till the last minute. Meeting cancelled. 
				Speaking opportunities removed. Dates changed but moved up, not 
				back with no notice.  Requests for information ignored 
				entirely - or not honored until the last minute.  Does that 
				all sound like your version of transparency. 
				 5 DAYS AFTER THE FIRST 
				PRESENTATION , IT WAS APPROVED FOR THE HEARING  
				 absurd – but if your 
				Commissioner didn’t even tell you that happened, how would 
				even know they did that- oh -- and your Commissioner didn't 
				tell you, did they?  
				
				533 PAGES- MUCH OF IT SERIOUSLY EXTRANEOUS INFORMATION - The 
				amount of useless information in this budget is simply 
				overwhelming. It is unthinkable that  a police department should put the 
				minutia of their arrests in a budget document, where important 
				information is intertwined with the voluminous narrative.  A link 
				could be included that would lead to the full Police Department 
				description, if desired, on the police site where it belongs  
				(is it even there? ) or it could be included at the 
				end of the budget. 
				But to mingle the minutia with the important information swhen a 
				reader needs to understand the line items  is  quite 
				clearly designed to confuse- or perhaps just a sign of 
				inexperienced management.  The budget  USED to be done quite clearly.   
				But it seems apparent there is another agenda  in this administration.  Now here's 
				a question for you to consider.  Will you work to change this – or let 
				it be the norm ?
NOMENCLATURE DESIGNED TO CONFUSE - 
				MULTIPLE NAMES FOR THE SAME THING-in one case, five or six 
				different names were for the same thing. Time worn nomenclature 
				has been  changed just to break the continuum so year to year 
				comparisons are more difficult. The "fund balance"  became 
				"fund 
				equity" . Capital and Permanent Improvement continue to be used 
				sometimes separately sometimes together. But the number of 
				different descriptions used for OPEB simply tops the charts. No 
				one would know WHAT you are talking about when you keep 
				referring to it differently.
				
MONEY SHUFFLED FROM THIS ACCOUNT TO THAT ACCOUNT FOR NO 
				REASON other than  to 
				confuse multiple issues.  On the one hand Mr. Manfredi said 
				he couldn't move money because there was a specific fund 
				balance policy. But. of course. a couple of sentences later he 
				was talking about something else he was doing that was a 
				violation of that policy. And he simply explained "well they 
				have a right to grant exceptions" .   Yes they do - 
				and in the blink of an eye they can change the fund balance 
				policy, too,  So we have to look for another reason that 
				all this shuffling is taking place -----  and to recognize 
				that it is not the only element of this budget that seems 
				purposely designed to confuse.  This many elements of 
				confusion are not something that the 
				residents of this Township should  tolerate. 
 
				
				$11  MILLION IN THE UNRESTRICTED  FUND BALANCE   
				SHOULD PROHIBIT A TAX INCREASE  Steve Kline pushed 
				before for a tax increase in years prior while we 
				had so many unspoken for millions in our Fund Balance ... and 
				they did not allow him to prevail. This Manager however is on a 
				spending spree ---and  has many plans both for the dollars 
				they have hoarded and for the ones that he just taxed you for. I 
				never ceased to be amazed at how far residents  will let 
				them go without "looking in to it" --- but they  a) make it 
				as confusing as possible b) keep the information from the 
				residents in as many ways as they can. So the whole charade 
				continues on. 
				OTHER POST 
				EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS  
				 
				(OPEB) AND DEBT SERVICE PULLED OUT of THE NORMAL BUDGET and 
				given separate millage ......  that can be raised separately. 
				Heads up - a little raise her and a little raise there  
				looks so harmless....
				EMPLOYEES WITH RAISES EQUIVALENT TO 7% OVER THE PRIOR YEAR . Not 
				all employees just some employees. Who doesn't know that this is 
				not right?
 
				
				TOO MANY
				PROJECTS NEVER VETTED 
				
				ARE INCLUDED IN THIS BUDGET - where the approval of the 
				budget will be considered approval of the project without proper 
				public vetting ever . The Inclusive Park, Manor Woods , the EdCorp, 
				the new Township Building and Firehouse , the GIS system,  
				and on and on 
				
				
The record that Richard 
				Manfredi has in the 2 ½ 
				 short years he has been here 
				is one that has brought a huge increase in expenses and monies 
				used - not in ways desired by residents,  low morale 
				among many watching the firings and the transfers and the 
				locking off of the upstairs “power center” from both residents 
				and employees.  Gone 
				is any feeling of an open door policy. Instead, Abington is "open 
				for business".  And you should be concerned. 
				Very concerned. 
Richard Manfredi has been the 
				most unavailable manager (to residents)  that we have ever had. He has another agenda. How to make 
				business with what we own.
                
				
				
                
				  
                
				Using our personnel, our land &  properties, our resources, 
				I have watched how again and again how the taxpayers are the 
				payees  rather than those beeing served. 
				The
				
				Economic Development Corporation, 
				for example, he tried to ram  through before it was even 
				written --- because he knew if you found out what it was,  you 
				would be upset. Now  he is refusing to post the questions 
				for it .....  promised since September . More than 3 months 
				later, they are still unavailable because he knows they would 
				raise eserious budget concerns. They want to slide the budget 
				through before anyone has time to share out the sordid details.
				
         That is just one small example of many 
				disrespects the residents must endure.
				 For the EDCorp alone you 
				can expect lots of outgo… but there is absolutely not a single 
				line for any income.  
				And only a fraction of the outgo will ever be listed. Why is he 
				not required to show us exactly how this will benefit us, what 
				it will cost, including the  cost of the "free" manpower 
				they want?  Why? Because the Commissioners that represent you 
				are not demanding that he do that. 
				That's why. 
				They are giving him carte blanche and that’s why your 
				costs have so dramatically risen that you now will have a 
				
 9.9% increase this year alone……………. 
				with a possible increase that is
				double 
				that depending on what happens in the economy year. 
				Did your commissioners even tell you 
				about that? 
I don’t think they did.
				
				
				 
				
				Permit fees are taxes too - when they don't represent the cost 
				of the work. 
				Have you paid a permit fee lately?  I just paid $255 of 
				extra tax.
				 Yes - it is exactly like 
				increasing my taxes that amount . They are making revenue on 
				permits. I don’t know if you find that as disgusting as I do, 
				but just consider for a moment the families whose roof fell prey 
				to a storm, or those who  had 
				a fire, or a flood or who have an elderly relative that needs to move in
				 ……. They will need to get 
				permits ----  but 
				their permit won’t just fund the work that needs to be done 
				.... it 
				will fund the Manager's wish list a for code personnel. 
				My
				roofing permit was $355 .  The going 
				rate for roofing permit in many, many other townships is around 
				$100 …. and that’s if  they 
				come out to do an inspection. They didn’t do one on my project. 
				So I paid  a $255 extra 
				tax . Makes the $60 they're  planning to charge in 2020
				 look like chicken 
				feed.  It even dwarfs the more than $100  of a 2nd tax 
				hike that they probably will have to 
				charge you  in 2021 in order to keep their wish list going . 
				
     
				How many families have paid such a  tax?  I think all 
				of us are due a refund. 
				I intend to ask for mine. 
				 The code department is now collecting monies 
				that equal 130% of the costs of running the code 
				department ….. And I know many of the ways in which they choose 
				to spend that money are things you would not approve of. For instance, while they didn’t come out 
				to inspect my roof, sometimes as many as three or four paid 
				Township people sit in a  vacant 
				property meeting, where the intent is
				 to do what a real estate 
				agent should be doing - matching vacant properties with 
				speculators or purchasers.  Money 
				out of your pocket and mine that will provide a bigger & better 
				sale for others.  
				Many of the properties out of code were not even cited  
				when they have violations. And they are charging them just for 
				being vacant.  I'm not sure how that is not a violation of 
				their property rights. They call 
				them under-utilized - and have decided that they should be 
				bringing in money ( even though they pay their taxes  - and 
				even the ones that have no code violations )  
				They intend to build a “real estate site” for vacant 
				properties at your expense, too. 
				 That should probably also go on the wish list. 
       So why is it that people 
				 needing a permit are paying the freight for every wish 
				list thing that they would like to do. The members of vacant 
				property were planning the staff time for their wish lists like 
				it didn't cost anything . Of course, because your permits are 
				making it "free".   The code 
				people are failing to properly inspect our properties at times, 
				or to follow up with citations -------in my case , negligence in 
				that department led an entire addition project to go awry. No 
				one has even so much as said "I'm sorry".
				 
				So there is a LOT here that needs to change.  
				  
				
				     
				Mr. Manfredi’s previous administration budget of
				 $1.8 
				million  is 
				listed in 2020 to be $3.5 million 
				 ……
				 while the change in the figure 
				represents amounts not charged back to other 
				departments, which I agree with  ( though  a reference 
				to the department it would be  charged back to is important 
				- so as to note  all legal exppenses, all vehicle expenses 
				etc ) but there are huge concerns in the Manager's budget that 
				he refuses to clarify - such as the  "contingency expense " 
				which used to be $150K  but in 2020 balloons up to $485 K .  
				This would seem to be funds used at the Manager's discretion - 
				so there is no reason that residents should have a problem 
				getting information on that . But the Manager himself refuses to 
				clarify as of this writing.  The GIS 
				system should be  an IT expense - not an Admin expense.   With  his wish list items (a 
				few - very few - of which are in red above)   taking a 
				huge chunk of funds to administer, we need to be able to define 
				the details of this budget. And that has not been possible.    
				
       Were you 
				(falsely ) told the giant tax hike was to prevent cutting 
				services  ? 
        
				You were told that by Commissioners even though they knew, or 
				should have known  that  3 monster departments were to 
				be  consolidated into one (Code, Engineering and Public 
				Works)  without any visible increase in personnel and with 
				an overt statement by Manager Manfredi  that when someone 
				is fired they won't be replaced. 
        
           John Spiegelman said in 
				his email that if you lose personnel you lose services. Then 
				tried to convince you that's what the tax hike was for - to 
				preserve personnel and services.  Well 
				folks, we are losing personnel ----  There 
				is only ONE fewer on the chart - but let me give you an example 
				- if all things had remained the same  and Mr Manfredi was 
				the only person that was gone - and all the other employees 
				remained..... would you get the same result.   That's 
				the bill of goods you're being sold here.  Unless the Manager's 
				secretary  or everyone in Engineering  can answer Engineering 
				Dept Head style questions and everyone in Public Works can 
				answer Public Works Dept Head  questions .... and the Finance Office doesn't need an assistant 
				and you're OK with a Public Works guy running Parks ( 
				he just
				bulldozed down an entire Nature Preserve with no regard to 
				the animals and wildlife there click here to see ) then you 
				are NOT getting the same services. Since Manager  Manfredi  
				joined together the Code and Engineering departments last year ---  it's 
				been clear  the department head is 
				already on overload  and 
				has zero time (except on an infrequent occasion ) to answer 
				questions for residents. I waited forever one day for a very 
				simple question to be answered and was told to put in a Right to 
				Know ( ultimately it was answered without one) That department 
				is also not doing an adequate job by any measure of  
				tending to the code violations that 
				abound in Abington.  
				Mr. Manfredi’s decision, 
				in the face of all that, has been to add Public Works to that 
				workload, to fail to hire  a trained Parks professional  
				and apparently to  reduce the Finance leadership. Those are 
				big salaries. For a reason.
				
				          And 
				please don't get me started on the Drop Program which has 
				also been abused to our financial detriment  
				by hiring BACK people after they 
				finished their drop program - so they are collecting retirement 
				AND salary. This just causes people who are not ready to retire 
				, to retire early and to double dip - at our expense.  He 
				hired back ( surprise) 2 Public Works guys  ( our manager 
				himself who brags of his Public Works background )
				      
				
				       
				There is clearly a method to this madness 
				- as he ……and  solicitor Michael Clarke .... appear to be  running the show in this 
				Township without a lot of other "interfering voices".  
				
      The 
				services that you used to have were personal services by people 
				who knew your name and knew your house and knew the history of 
				the various systems in the Township, and knew the Parks , and 
				most of them lived here.  
				That is about to be the way of the past. And I fear it  is about to 
				be  replaced
				 by “professional 
				services“ farmed out by  --- 
				guess who ?  Yes, sir 
				--- the management……  the 
				tip top  where the reins are controlled pretty tightly and 
				no one else can interfere.   
       
				If you think this course of action is into your 
				interests, then hold on to your wallet. Tight.
				   Remember the appraisals 
				where people felt confident bidding nearly $3000 for something 
				that should cost more like $500. Guess who's gonna be in charge 
				of RFP's and bids.....When more and more decisions are made at 
				the top  ….  I mean can 
				one gal really make all the same decisions three Directors did 
				before? .... then there  is simply no good path 
				to oversight ...... in fact,  the question of oversight 
				is an interesting one because at the Dec 4th  meeting...
               
				
             
				In November 2019 , Manager Manfredi declared that the Commissioners job is not 
				oversight (of him and the management), their job is policy and 
				managing the Township is his job alone. 
				
          
       
				I beg your pardon, sir. That is completely not the 
				case. The Commissioners are supposed to be overseeing the 
				Manager's work such that it is in the interest of the residents. 
				If it’s not, they are supposed
				to remove him. Or get him 
				to make a correction. They are the only 
				ones that can do it - so they are the only ones that 
				DO have oversight.
This 
				kind of false declaration leads citizens away from understanding 
				how their government is supposed to work . It dupes them, one 
				could say .... and encourages them away from petitiong the body 
				that does have oversight. 
Would that they would exercise it once in a 
				while.  It is sad they all sat silent while Mr Manfredi 
				said that. 
				
				Your commissioners are complicit in allowing the largest 
				tax increase based on a giant wish list 
				 
by a manager who 
				has decreased speaking rights, decreased transparency,
				 refused to set up a 
				system where residents questions are answered promptly and 
				politely and substantively. He has allowed our website to take 
				giant leaps backward - and it is now as difficult to navigate as his 533 page budget --- 
				and he doesn't care .  
                
				
				
                This manager has 
				overseen the firing or departure of multiple department heads in 
				a bizarre way that seemed almost designed to enable lawsuits 
				against the Township … 
				(more than one of which has already been filed and that’s 
				on the heels of, as you know the giant slew of lawsuits
				 that was caused by the 
				solicitor's MOU . ) Who moves a finance Director to head up 
				Public Works - and who Puts  a Code Director there too. And 
				puts a Public Works guy with no Parks and Rec training in the 
				Parks Director's job ? 
				
				
                
				
				
				Richard Manfredi 
				 dreamed up everything he wanted and in 
				the next two years you will pay for it.