|
Analysis of Exeter Township Governance Issues based on the video information above:
This report examines serious governance concerns within Exeter Township, focusing on alleged violations of the Pennsylvania Second Class Township Code through unilateral decisions, incomplete documentation, and potential transparency issues. Major Findings 1. Unauthorized Unilateral Decision-Making Chairman John "Jack" Piho admitted during the May 28 meeting to making significant decisions without Board approval, potentially violating Pennsylvania Second Class Township Code requirements for collective action and public deliberation. You will see after watching this Video that the agenda item Chairman Piho calls for motion to approve: to hire Dan Hoch was a coverup. Piho had already unilaterally made the decision to hire him, he knew Hoch started in early May and he hid this information as they discussed approving the “agreement” to hire on MAy 28th. Piho knew, Schnee knew and Piersol knew Hoch and his wife were already working from home almost a month but hid the facts. Legal Context:** Township Code mandates collective board decisions in public meetings, except in genuine emergencies. 2. Questionable Legal Guidance Solicitor Schnee's actions raised significant concerns: - Presented incomplete documentation (missing page 2 of agreement) - Urged approval despite missing documentation - Referenced superseding agreement that wasn't available for review These actions may violate Pennsylvania Supreme Court's Rules of Professional Conduct, specifically Rules 1.1 (Competence) and 1.4 (Communication). 3. Misrepresentation of Hiring Actions Interim Manager Larry Piersol (also Director of Public Works) made potentially misleading statements: - Claimed no new hires had been made - Later evidence showed Dan Hoch and his wife were hired in early May - Receiving $2,000 monthly stipend for interim role This raises concerns about breach of fiduciary duty and potential personal liability. ## Systemic Issues Identified Legal Violations 1. **Sunshine Act Non-Compliance** - Decisions made outside public meetings - Lack of transparent decision-making processes 2. **Hiring Practice Concerns** - Potential favoritism in hiring procedures - Insufficient public discussion of hiring decisions - Possible conflicts of interest 3. **Township Code Violations** - Pattern of non-compliance with statutory requirements - Risk of oversight investigations # Recommended Actions ### Immediate Steps 1. **Independent Investigation** - State oversight body review - External audit of decision-making processes - Review of compliance with Township Code 2. **Professional Conduct Review** - Consider ethics complaints to Pennsylvania Disciplinary Board - Review of legal counsel's actions ### Long-term Reforms 1. **Enhanced Oversight** - Implement stronger decision-making controls - Improve hiring practice transparency - Strengthen public meeting compliance 2. **Policy Updates** - Develop clear guidelines for emergency actions - Establish documentation requirements - Create transparency protocols ## Impact Assessment - Potential significant taxpayer costs - Erosion of public trust - Risk of legal challenges - Need for systemic reform ## Conclusion The identified issues reveal significant governance failures that require immediate attention and reform. The combination of unilateral decision-making, incomplete legal documentation, and misleading statements has created a concerning pattern that undermines public trust and proper township administration.
0 Comments
SCHNEE REWRITES STATE LAW7/16/2024 This video runs slightly over 21 minutes, which is longer than I typically prefer. However, I strongly encourage all of you to watch it in its entirety. It provides significant insights into J. Chadwick Schnee's performance in his role for Exeter Township, which I have observed over the past two and a half years.
After his first year, I assessed Mr. Schnee’s performance and assigned a grade of F, urging him to strive for a C+. Unfortunately, in his second year, he received an F-, and his third year is proving to be equally disappointing. In retrospect, my initial support for his hiring was a mistake, influenced by the recommendations of Michelle Kircher and Mark Scott. Mr. Schnee has consistently demonstrated a lack of the broad experience required to effectively advise any township or borough. His career began at the Office of Open Records after passing the Pennsylvania Bar exam, and he later worked for Berks County before joining Tucker Hull Law Firm, where I first encountered him. Mr. Schnee charged $215 per hour at Tucker Hull and continues to charge this rate to the township. Initially, I believed we could collaborate, but it quickly became evident that he aligned himself with Bell, Vollmer, Gardella, and Kircher, ultimately becoming my adversary. This alignment led to his recommendation, and their agreement, to sue me. In the video, the first four minutes feature Mr. Schnee outlining his duties, a discussion prompted by my questioning of his billings and management involvement. Notably, he references section 1103 of the 2nd class township code, but conveniently omits critical phrases such as “when directed or requested so to do” or “authorized or required to do by the board of supervisors.” These omissions are significant and were also excluded from resolution 2023-39, where he reiterates his duties. The video reviews section 1103 and examines resolution 2023-39, highlighting Mr. Schnee’s unauthorized actions and deals made without board oversight, effectively bypassing the board’s responsibility to direct his work. Mr. Schnee’s performance has been mediocre, demonstrating that he is out of his depth beyond the realm of RTKL. Contracts he has written or reviewed for the township do not appear to favor our interests or result in mutually beneficial arrangements. They are often incomplete and fail to include key points. To further illustrate Mr. Schnee’s unfitness for his role, it is worth noting that after separation (rumor is terminated) from Tucker Hull, he established his own business and solicited reviews, which he subsequently removed, raising questions about his honesty. Additionally, he has redacted his invoices, managed them inappropriately, and, along with his wife, assumed false identities on social media to attack Exeter residents. This behavior, coupled with lawsuits against three township citizens (one of which he lost, with two still ongoing), underscores a pattern of creating billable busy work to support his firm and lifestyle. To my knowledge, we are his only contracted client. I urge you to watch the video and attend the meetings. This is your community, and it deserves competent and ethical representation. In my opinion, Mr. Schnee is both incompetent and corrupt. We urgently need a larger law firm with expertise in the laws governing 2nd class townships. We require a solicitor who refrains from interfering in management. It is time to initiate the departure of Mr. Schnee and secure a fair, honest, and unbiased solicitor immediately. THE SCHNEE ATM: EXETER TWP7/14/2024 At our July 8th board of supervisors meeting, I publicly reviewed Solicitor Schnee's invoices for June. Schnee billed us $14,279.93 in July for his services rendered in June. I focused on what I term "internal billings," which include invoices categorized by Schnee for activities such as internal emails, phone calls, and reviewing our agenda. For the first six months, Schnee billed us “INTERNAL BILLINGS” of $45,047 (unaudited), which is approximately 47% of the year-to-date total of $94,887 paid by Exeter taxpayers. It is clear that most of Schnee’s taxpayer-funded work involves internal communication.
In what universe is this allowed? Here's the issue for Exeter taxpayers: Despite Schnee’s misleading online presence and advertisements suggesting he has a larger team, he is actually a solo attorney contractor. This means that clerical tasks, like redacting and copying, are performed by him at a rate of $215 per hour, with a minimum charge of $21.50 for any action he takes. Consequently, Exeter taxpayers are billed hundreds of thousands of dollars primarily for phone calls, reviewing supervisor meeting agendas and emails, and corresponding with residents. Watch the video and observe Schnee’s behavior. His condescending attitude and disdain for me, his supervisor, are intolerable, unethical, and reprehensible. Combined with offensive billing practices, mediocre work, and significant mistakes over the past two years costing Exeter taxpayers millions, Schnee's performance is unacceptable. Schnee has crossed the line into involvement in management activities, directing employees and writing Resolutions that reduces Board oversight while giving him broad powers. Schnee must be dismissed and disbarred. Fire Schnee! Schnee Illegal Contracting with Hoch7/10/2024 This is sadly, almost a comedic display by John (Jack) Piho of Piho Engineering and the Exeter Township's Board of Supervisors ....
Watch as they discover that they do not have a contract for hiring Hoch (per Schnee) and that the current draft is incomplete. This is a great opportunity to see the complete incompetence of Solicitor Chadwick Schnee of Schnee Legal Services. Witness the clear disengagement of Supervisors Bell, Hamm and Kircher -- and note that Bell and Kircher seats are up for Election next year. WE MUST SEND THEM HOME FOR GOOD! In My Opinion: “Whereas, the township has a need for services to be performed of a nature requiring executive leadership, decision-making authority, and project management, “ (…) … In other words, Schnee has finalized his months-long subtle manipulation, effectively stripping control from Exeter’s Board of Supervisors. This action represents the final nail in the coffin …. In a contract arranged and negotiated by Schnee behind the scenes, Piho and Schnee are facilitating the planned obsolescence of Exeter Township’s board of supervisors. They are appointing Kafferlin Strategies LLC, a full-service management firm known for “transforming local governments” (https://kafferlinstrategies.com). This move suggests that many departments and employees of Exeter Township could be replaced by Kafferlin employees or consultants. Essentially, the implementation of the Kafferlin program is likely to lead to a significant reduction in the workforce and headcount as Kafferlin becomes more entrenched and permanent in Exeter Township’s government. Exeter Taxpayers, soon Kafferlin and Schnee will be our government. What could possibly go wrong? Piho and Bell must resign! Smoke and Mirrors7/1/2024  Chairman of the Exeter Township Board of Supervisors John Piho of Piho Engineering recently read a prepared statement during his Supervisors Report: Supervisor Hughes has continually asked for a forensic Audit. Our last 2 audits showed no deficiencies. Current Audit also is not showing any deficiencies. The County audit of our District Magistrate shows no deficiencies. Supervisor Hughes has repeatedly been asked to show 1) specifically what type of Forensic Audit he wants to have done 2) what accounts or specific corruption he alleges the township has done. So far the Chair has not received this information. This Chair will not ask for such an open ended request be placed on the agenda for a vote. Supervisor Hughes commented in his June 10 Supervisor Report that our Interim Manager Larry Piersol should be fired as interim manager. For the life of me I have no idea why. Mr. Piersol has been very gracious with his busy schedule to answer Supervisor Hughes questions and pulling together documents. This Chair will not ask for Larry Piersol’s resignation. Further I urge my fellow Supervisors to give Larry Piersol a unanimous vote of confidence in his service to our Township!! Also, this Chair will not ask for Chief Harley’s resignation. He has also been very gracious in his time answering Supervisor Hughes Questions. Further I urge my fellow Supervisor’s to give Chief Harley a unanimous vote of confidence in his service to our Township!!! I, Jack Piho, as Chairman and Supervisor for Exeter Township have no intention of resigning. We are moving Exeter forward and we are not looking back. Myself with my fellow supervisors have a vision we want to see and hopefully with support of this Board we will achieve those Goals. John Piho of Piho Engineering has been caught in a blatant lie to Exeter's taxpayers. He hired Schnee's friend and wife at the Reading Country Club without proper contracts or insurance. This deceit alone warrants his resignation. His prepared statement is nothing but smoke and mirrors, much like the online smear campaign his supporters have been running recently, in the same fashion they’ve ran slanderous character assassination campaigns for the past two years. So much for Piho's promise of "professionalism and civility" - the man is a professional liar, plain and simple. Let's cut through Piho's lies: I have called for a forensic audit because we've uncovered a clear pattern of financial irregularities in the township’s finances much of it surrounding the Reading Country Club. Concerns range from crucial errors in financial records to major reporting inaccuracies, along with suspicious expenditures and widespread confusion. In the real world, this might smell like large-scale embezzlement considering the amounts involved. Piho's claim about clean audits is misleading at best. He's referencing standard financial statement audits, which aren't designed to catch fraud or evaluate internal controls. Even El Chapo had GAAP-compliant financial statements. A forensic audit is necessary and Piho's resistance to it is deeply suspicious. The intense opposition to even discussing a forensic audit from Piho and his cronies should raise red flags for everyone. This isn't about justification - it's about basic transparency and honesty to the public. Piho's statement is a pathetic attempt to divert attention from his recent actions, lies, and cover-up attempts, along with those of Schnee and interim township manager Larry Piersol. I'll soon release a video fully documenting their illegal employment and botched hiring of Dan Hoch and his wife at the Reading Country Club. The truth will come out, Piho. Remember: the more lies you tell about me, the more truth I'll tell about you. Here is what John Piho of Piho Engineering is attempting to cover-up:
This all explains why John Piho of Piho Engineering is desperately trying to deflect attention from his illegal actions. He's resorting to malicious slander tactics against me, both publicly and online, aided by the usual small clique feverishly spreading defamatory lies. Let me be clear: these tactics won't work. They never have. We can't allow them to get away with this. That's why I've proposed the following actions:
It should be clear:
The Dan Hoch Contract6/10/2024 The Dan Hoch contract scandal: a web of lies, misleading information, information withheld by the Interim Township Manager, The Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the Solicitor.
What we know:
Where this gets scandalous:
In light of this scandal, I call for Schnee and Piersol to be fired and for Piho to resign immediately. For Discussion: In Mr. Hoch’s first invoice, submitted while he was not yet an official employee, he billed the township for activities that do not align with his contract. Additionally, he failed to provide any documentation, reports, analyses, or recommendations to justify the 113 hours he billed at a rate of $50 per hour. This lack of a paper trail is unacceptable for a contractor at that rate, indicating that the $7,000 we paid him essentially amounts to a sign-on bonus for work that cannot be substantiated.
Mulligans
Facility Rental and Catering
George Bell was improperly, illegally appointed to the board for a second two year term.Was it a wise decision? What could be behind this political move? Never elected, always appointed and his actions and behavior contradict his promises during the election. Lets take a closer look: WATCH VIDEO, THEN READ BELOW: George Bell’s leadership qualities have been a topic of discussion, and it’s interesting to explore the traits that define effective leadership. Let’s delve into some insights related to leadership and consider how George Bell’s behavior aligns with these traits. 1 Integrity: Unfortunately, Bell’s behavior seems to lack integrity, as evidenced by his actions and decisions. 2 Innovation: While he may exhibit some innovation in a negative political context, true visionary innovation appears to be missing. 3 Vision: The absence of a clear vision is concerning for any leader. 4 Passion: Passion should drive positive actions, but it’s unclear whether Bell’s passion is directed toward constructive goals. 5 Communication: Transparency in government is crucial, and Bell’s lack of it raises concerns. 6 Self-awareness: Leaders should be aware of how they come across, especially during meetings. 7 Empathy: Empathy is essential for understanding and connecting with others, but it appears to be lacking. 8 Courage: While Bell may not shy away from confrontation, courage should be channeled toward positive impact. 9 Delegation: Effective leaders delegate tasks appropriately, but we don’t see evidence of this. 10 Learning Agility: Adaptability and learning from experiences are vital for leadership, yet they seem absent. 11 Adaptability: A leader should adjust to changing conditions, but Bell’s rigidity is evident. 12 Decision Making: Unilateral decisions without considering others’ input can hinder effective leadership. 13 Accountability: Public sector leaders must be accountable, but Bell’s track record suggests otherwise. 14 Gratitude: Appreciation and kindness matter, but Bell’s behavior doesn’t reflect this. 15 Influence: Much of what transpired in the past two years falls on his shoulders, indicating significant influence. 16 Respect: Respect for others’ feelings, wishes, and traditions is crucial, and Bell’s failure in this area is concerning. As you watch the video clips, consider how Bell’s actions align with these leadership traits. It’s essential for leaders to embody these qualities to effectively serve their communities. Is this one reason the Government of Exeter is in Chaos? On another note:
Mr. Bell's actions have significantly impacted me, primarily through his involvement in investigations, censures, wrongful exclusions from meetings, baseless resolutions, and unfounded personal attacks based solely on his assertions. What I find most troubling, however, is his role as an advisor for Fidelity Investments. I am deeply troubled that Mr. Bell, despite his position, chooses to publicly demean and attack community members, including myself. I have not yet reported his behavior to Fidelity Investments, and it seems Mr. Bell is unconcerned about his employer discovering his unprofessional conduct. Integrity matters greatly to me, and I expect that any Fidelity Investments representative should prioritize my interests above their own. I want to make it clear that George Bell is not my advisor, nor would I ever choose to work with someone who behaves as he does in a public setting. My primary concern lies in the standards Fidelity Investments upholds when hiring advisors, especially since I am an investor with them. A revealing and insightful look as Solicitor J. Chadwick Schnee pontificates to justify his unilateral actions redacting his own invoices. Chadwick Schnee of Schnee Legal Services is claiming, he decided that I would violate attorney client privilege regarding a review of his invoices for $14,192 and this permits him to unilaterally redact his invoices from my review.
No other supervisor reviewed these invoices, that is clearly stated at approximately 1:17 of this video the township manager clearly states no other supervisors asked to review these fees. As a elected township supervisor one of my duties is to review the bi-weekly payables distribution and vote to pay the vendors bills listed. The amount of Schneelegal.com invoices represented a significant percent of the total payables for this period at 6% of the total payables of $233,842. Chadwick Schnee of Schneelegal.com unilaterally decided I did not have the right to review his invoices ( no other invoices were withheld or redacted of my other requests). As you listen to this short 5 minute clip you will hear the manager admit he did not redact them, he did not instruct Chad Schnee of Schneelegal.com to redact them, and the board of supervisors had never passed a resolution that he redact his invoices. Subsequent to this meeting J. Chadwick Schnee sent me correspondence claiming I misunderstand the role of the solicitor. He goes on to pontificate that he is only empowered to take such actions as directed by the BOS or the township manager. As this video will support, the manager nor the BOS directed him to redact his invoices. He acted unilaterally !! In this brief video clip, Chadwick Schnee pontificates excessively during the meeting. He references a case: Levy v. Senate of Pennsylvania to support unilaterally redacting his own invoices around 2:48. Where did this come from? Was he preparing to defend his actions? The case doesn't seem to have any relevance concerning my review of payables as is my responsibility. Marc Levy was a member of the Associated Press and he sent two written "Right to Know" requests to the Pennsylvania State Senate Right to Know officer. Right here huge difference, I am not with the Associated Press and this is not a Right to Know Issue. Mr. Levy wanted to see "all bills, contracts and payment records related to the hiring of any outside lawyer or law firm to represent Senator Robert J. Mellow. What does this have to do with my duties as an elected official? What is Chadwick Schnee trying to hide? The Board as Chairman Piho states (interesting that he made a unilateral decision, anyone catch that?) at about 4:33 of this video that I am allowed to review Chadwick Schnee of Schneelegal.com invoices unredacted. A little follow up to the Levy case Chadwick Schnee referenced during his pontificating during this meeting. In this case the Commonwealth court concluded that descriptions of legal services generally were not protected. Only if the invoice contains legal advice or confidential information would it require redaction. What competent attorney would put legal advice or confidential information in an invoice? The court went on to conclude that general descriptions are not protected by attorney-client privilege because they do not reveal confidential communications. Also, it appears that this case suggests that in general client identities are not protected by attorney-client privilege. Additionally the case documents state that legal services such as "memo", "telephone call", or "research" were not protected by attorney-client privilege. Yet, every single word was redacted on his invoices and he in fact charged us for these redaction which were not directed by the manager or the board of supervisors. Thus, creating billable hours and false billings, in essence once again OVER BILLING! This document is 18 pages long.....was Chadwick Schnee preparing to defend his position? Did he charge the township somewhere in his invoices to research this bombastic claim that this case law allows him to unilaterally redact his own invoices? You decide. SUPERVISORS REPORT
As you're aware, my concerns about the township's management are fairly clear and well documented, however, my current focus is on the confusing and illogical manner surrounding the so-called “sale” of the Promenade to the Berks County Redevelopment Agency (BCRDA) introduced in the March 11th BoS meeting by Mr. Schnee. I was just as shocked as everyone else when the township solicitor suddenly announced this sale to BCRDA. Not only was I kept in the dark, not being informed or involved in any discussions about this matter, but you, the public, were also completely unaware. This sale involves a property that has already cost taxpayers a staggering $3 plus million, and yet, it was never brought up in any public meeting for discussion to option it BCRDA. Currently, the only detail we have is that the BCRDA approached us with a proposal. The Board as I understood it directed Schnee to gather more information. However, it seems that no one explicitly asked Schnee to obtain an offer or propose an offer, yet here it is. This raises the question: why do we have an offer on the table? Whose idea was this in the first place? Let's delve into this matter. There are so many discrepancies and falsehoods present that it's crucial to illuminate each one. Following this examination, we'll propose a theory regarding Schnee's motivations. The way this solicitor has acted, including how this matter was introduced to both the board and the public, is alarmingly & troubling.
ii.More than a dozen malls across Pennsylvania fit the description of a dead mall. iii.Another house bill introduced would create a two-year grant program administered by the DCED to assist with renovation and redevelopment of historic buildings that do not conform to modern building codes. This program will provide up to $500,000 to bring mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and fire protection systems up to code. The grants can also be used to make buildings more accessible to people with disabilities.
Considering all of these points should lead everyone to question the wisdom of selling any properties at this time. I propose that we halt Mr. Schnee's forceful attempts to sell off our assets, which serve as an effective defense against the current wave of inflation. With potentially new funding sources now accessible to enhance these properties, we have the opportunity to significantly increase their value for our community. Most critically, we must ask why Schnee is behaving as if he were a commercial real estate broker. Could this be the reason for the absence of a contract or any documentation? Our goal is maximum return for our residents and a use consistent with what our resident wish to see on this land. 
Categories
All
Archives
July 2024
|