UPDATES: Dauphin County Commissioner George Hartwick robocalls 8,223 Republican and Independent voters in zips 17033 and 17036 to tell them Derry Twp Chair John Foley’s letter was “inappropriate and troubling,” imploring them to go to Sandy Ballard’s website for “factual responses.”
I have the m4a file (whatever that is, iTunes can play it), and if anyone can tell me how to share it, I will. Or reply me your email and I will send it.
Kathy Sweney Responds:
Kathy Sweney Letter to Foley (“…a great example of cowardice”)
### (Original Text)
A letter of slanderous lies, dated Oct. 28, made its way to many Derry voters. Letter is on letterhead, and with a signature, both identifying the Chair of our Derry Township Board of Supervisors John Foley as the author, and footer stating that it was paid for by Chairman Foley’s Political Action Committee (PAC).
It was spinelessly released too late for major media or traditional mail response, in time for We The People of Derry to make an informed decision, prior to heading to the polls. The discerning voter must ask themselves why. In the meantime, we are using the power of social media – the great equalizer – to set the record straight.
349 unique views during first 24 hours.
Imagine how many might get “the rest of the story” prior to heading to the polls.
THIS is what democracy looks like. Please share with all in Derry Twp. Thank you.
Sandy Ballard Responds:
Sandy Ballard Responds, point by point:
Rich Suminski Responds:
Letter states: ‘Her [Ballard’s] second largest donor has led frivolous Right-to-Know lawsuits against the Twp, wasting thousands of hours of staff time and costing the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars…’
Forgetting for this moment that I have long broadcast my firm belief that constituent individuals who contribute to local elections should be applauded and not attacked, as they weaken the influence of PACs. Ballard’s campaign finance report appear to show Richard Suminski as one of Sandy Ballard’s larger donors:
Suminski has such a lawsuit pending. Sumniski’s release follows unedited:
“As to my Right to Know Request (RKR) concerning the bike trail and Foley’s inaccurate remarks on same in his letter below are the facts:
Fact: The Open Records Agency ordered the Township to produce various records. A single 2 page invoice was only produced.
Fact: In the Court of Common Pleas an Enforcement Action was filed and the Judge ordered the Township to produce all records in 2 days time. Appropriately 300 pages of documents were produced 2 days later.
Fact; The Judge stated if an application was filed with the Court that he would sanction the Township for their behavior. When a Court orders the other party to produce all records, in 2 days, that they are withholding and offers to impose sanctions the “lawsuit” is not frivolous.
Fact: After providing the 300 pages it was proven that the Township did not provide all documents and then they produced about another 1400 pages.
Fact: Almost 11 months from the initial request there is evidence that the Township has yet provided all documents.
Fact; I offered several times to meet with the supervisors to resolve several issues and they never responded back.
Fact: I twice offered to withdraw my Right to Know Request if the Township allowed an independent IT expert search their server for records. The township refused that request.
Fact: Months ago I requested the Township produce the Township Solicitor’s invoices to determine if “tens of thousands of dollars” was being spent to review Right to Know Requests. The one invoice released for the first half of the year stated that less than $3000 was billed. The remaining invoices are outstanding.
While still litigating to obtain all records which legally entitled, the records received thus far indicate a supervisor Abusing his Power by unilaterally making decisions and ordering Township officials to take actions without involving the full board and making nasty, unprofessional and defamatory remarks in emails.
In my opinion, Foley should reimburse the taxpayers for all legal costs incurred by the Township for violating the Right to Know and Sunshine Acts. He is not trying to defend the Township, but himself.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Candidate for Derry Supervisor Steve Todd Responds:
I have blogged what is by far the most detailed account of the hearing on Suminski vs Derry in Dauphin County Court, which I attended, and in which Derry was basically spanked by the Court:
If you feel this letter was immature, reckless and dishonest, remember: the only surefire way to immediately remove Foley from power is to also elect me, Steve Todd. Candidates Marc Moyer or Susan Cort, who the letter recommends we vote for, will likely allow business as usual to continue. Otherwise, why would the author endorse them?
What Sandy needs is a Board majority, so that she is selected by that Board as its leader. Returning Sandy to the minority of two members will not accomplish that. Only voting for both of us will.
If the rules were changed tomorrow, and I could only vote for one (instead of the two we can), this candidate – Sandy’s competitor – would vote for Sandy Ballard. But, since we have two votes, vote for the only candidate who has pledged, in The Sun four times and via mailing to almost 5,500 households recently or very soon, that:
“I will nominate re-elected Sandy Ballard to Chair our Derry Township Board of Supervisors.”
Because most citizens of all politics and demographics support her, as I have and do.
I have pledged to nominate Sandy as Chair on day one. Presuming we can get Supervisor Matt Weir’s vote, Foley can do or not do whatever he wants. He will be made as irrelevant as his show of inept leadership has proven him, and Sandy leads OUR Derry Supervisors in a constructive fashion.
~ Steve Todd