The Howling

"Shoot me if I ever go to another CHCA meeting!" I told my wife. This was last Thursday, after the opening of the Fall/Winter Board Follies for 2009--10, held, strangely, at St. Paul's instead of in the Library.

I hadn't gone for awhile, but I'd heard Hitchcock and her goons were tightening the noose on the Local further by nominating Mark Keintz and Rob Remus to the Budget and Finance Committee. These guys made up the Ad Hoc Committee (along with Hitchcock) from last year, that pushed for Jimmy Pack's firing; pushed for Pete Mazzaccaro's firing; cut Sonia Leounes's ad sales commissions in half, and after Keintz had abruptly resigned as Treasurer, installed David Mansfield to replace him.

Mansfield, a fiscal conservative who swept in with the Positively Chestnut Hill gang last Spring, is a partner to out-of-his-depth associate publisher Larry Hochberger, in radically altering fiscal mechanics at the CHCA. They've decided to cut $200,000 out of the Local's budget, and to facilitate the bleeding, got Keintzy to shove off. Now they've brought him back by appointing him to Budget and Finance, along with Remus, whom they've similarly rewarded for being a good soldier by paying him $3500 for not suing them last winter -- though his attorney hadn't moved to do so! And, I guess, for hanging in through all the sturm und drang.

Anyway, when I got to the Library, where most meetings happen, it was dark. A bunch of people were milling around, slapping at mosquitos and cursing in the moist weather.

"Didja see [Walter] Sullivan?" demanded one guy I didn't recognize. "He forgot to notify the Library Manager that we were coming, so she locked up and went home!"

"Yeah", said his friend. "So then Foghorn wanted to hold the meeting right there on the steps!"

"Thinking all the time!" said the first guy.

Finally somebody said he had a key to St. Paul's, so we hump over there. And the Board began its usual obfuscations. Hours of sliding around on zoning matters left over from the 8/27 meeting, followed by stalling on former President Ron Recko's questions on why Mansfield, Hochberger and Hitchcock seemed so set on forcing the Local to pay rent for its office space, and repay a loan from the Trustees the Local incurred in 2006, during Recko's presidency, for a three-month printing bill that was in arrears.

"How was it that Jean Hemphill 'forgave' $180,000 for Maxine Dornemann [during her administration, 2005-6] , but nothing can be done for the paper during these tough times?" Recko wondered.

At which point a weird howling began from one side of St. Paul's . It was Christine Sullivan, Walter's wife, who despite the humidity, seemed strangely furry and werewolfian: "OOooohhh!" she howled, dragging it out and pointing a long finger at Recko. "I haven't forgotten yoouuuh! We'll get to youuuh !! But FIRST I wanna know what's going on with Mr. Hochberger, here! It's put-up or shut-up time for yoouuhh, buddy! What happened to all your grand pllaaanns and proomisses?? OoohWOOooh!"

Recko tried to get things back on track, but was overwhelmed by Mrs. Sullivan's Whhoooing! He bolted for the door. Former president Tolis Vardakis, who'd been trying to interrupt Recko's line of questioning on debt relief, yelling "Point of order!", now turned to Mrs. Sullivan, but was howled down, too. "RRrrWhooor!!" she snarled, adding some pointed sharps to her flats, that sounded really dangerous. People started rushing the exits . . . I'd seen the battles over Lombardi, Sturdivant and Mishak, I remember the Walsh surgery unpleasantness, the 2008 election thefts . . . but this lycanthropy seemed beyond the pale . . . I headed for my Chevy, too.

"Never again!" I told my long-suffering wife, after I'd locked the door.

"At least next time, go armed," she said dryly.

-- Charlie Partana

Follow the Money

Walter Sullivan has just told us that he is his own man and denied there was any manipulation in the CHCA election this year to insure an outcome that would clearly benefit the new-found arm of the business community and its founder and financier, Richard Snowden. If you buy any of that, please line up to purchase a bridge at wholesale from Bowman Properties.

Let's assume for the moment that all those purchased memberships just before the election and mass meetings of business types and their acolytes were not strategy sessions and pre-vote counting strategy a la Maxine and Dina, and that you won fair and square on the basis that the very limited number of participants in this last election wanted you at the leadership role because you represented independent integrity, legal expertise, and a willingness to run the organization using the By-Laws -- for a change.

Since I know your personal political history of having "found God in the Democratic Party" after being nurtured and maturing as a Republican and realizing that the needs of the people should triumph over the desires of the powerful (I think that is how you put it) let me ask you to transmit those beliefs directly to how you plan to run what remains of a once-legitimate community organization that actually did at one time deal with the needs of the majority over individual power players - - and there were always plenty of them in the Hill.

I see a conflict right off the bat with the Snowden Empire and your deep personal beliefs. This is the man with the deepest financial pockets who jettisoned the needs of the community years ago by keeping as many prime properties empty as a payback to a community who did not accede to his wishes and give carte blanche to his vision. What must have been more revolting to a "man of the people" like yourself than those huge racist bigoted billboards that Richard Snowden placed in the most prominent locations all over Chestnut Hill as a warning of things to come if he was not given his way - - can you even stand to recall the sight of them? This wasn't a page from Birmingham Alabama in the 1930s, this was darling Chestnut Hill just a couple of years ago!

And who is the entire community lining up to worship and follow as if it all never happened because his says his money and connections will make the Hill some combination of what it was and what it should be - - the very same individual who in his own mind must be laughing all the way to the bank he owns now having had the "Chestnut Hill Establishment" say UNCLE.

Your first mission as your own man is to restore confidence in this organization by picking up the pieces, and that means telling the truth to the larger community about what was done to destroy its image, and that goes to that well-worn path of following the money, who misused it and who covered up its misuse - - and why? For it is not whether the state DCED grant and community trust fund dollars went offshore versus being used to pave over reckless and self-serving management right here, but it is that a few clever manipulators took the Association you now preside over and ran it according to what they openly characterized as a "corporate model" but the corporation they must have chosen was Enron.

They moved the money, cooked the books, and now hide behind legal technicalities that even prevent their current auditors from telling the truth about how previous audits were incomplete, inaccurate and misleading. On top of that there is still an open investigation into financial irregularities by the State Attorney General. You must know that old adage about wheels grinding exceedingly small. It would be a shame if they ground to a halt on your watch and you were not prepared.

First order of business is to reinstate the Oversight Committee which was severed just as it was about to fulfill its two-year mandate. The first year it examined and reported on the CHCA. The second was to be the Fund, and that is where the money is, or I should say was. Sadly, the new trustees have done all they can to keep the Fund's history in the dark, even to the point of misleading the board for years now as to what kind of fund it was. The fund is the financial sandbox that has been misused and mismanaged going back many years, and claiming it could not have been stable and yielded reasonable returns while supporting the community with earnings rather than losing millions is nonsense - - but nonsense that much of the membership and most of the board has bought into.

Run the meetings with the community priorities ahead of personal agendas and according to the By-Laws, form committees with new and fresh leadership that don't do back channel work for insiders. Replace all the trustees as they serve at the pleasure of the board and can be removed at any time for any reason. Have the auditors do the right thing and report to the board quarterly while at the same time clean up the bogus and inaccurate reporting that the internal statements provide, and while you are at it, return to providing monthly internals for the Fund, which the current trustee president discontinued a year and a half ago so the board would have trouble monitoring its activities.

Lastly, do not let the CHCA become the zoning tool of the business community, for that is the primary reason they stacked the board in their favor at this election. There are massive plans in the offing and they will require multiple and far-reaching zoning changes and challenges to the Special District Controls that Chestnut Hill enjoys in the Zoning Code. Using you as a tool, along with the LUPZ and DRC is the master plan; make no mistake about it. Be that good committed Democrat you claim and don't let that narrow power base turn Chestnut Hill into Stepford on Fairmount Park.

So you have had power foisted upon you that you might have not imagined and are promising good things. We have seen those occasions before in our political history where unlikely individuals were parachuted into high positions and had the opportunity to do the right things and change course. These are often difficult decisions, and during the time the individuals are in power they have been sometimes vilified for what they do, sometimes worshiped, but only time tells who did the people's business legitimately. The big question for you Walter is - - will you be Harry Truman or Huey Long?

Remember that great film where the people triumph over arrogant power in the Community? Remember George Bailey? You and Kris can be Jimmy Stewart and Donna Reed, and Chestnut Hill can have "A Wonderful Life." I think we all know who represents Mr. Potter.

Jim Foster
Still close by

Discuss Among Yourselves

Ed Note: There are two cross-comments today that deserve posting to further the discussion on the Chestnut Hill Community Fund, the Chestnut Hill Community Association and the inter-related cluster-f that it encompasses. As an aside, Keintz has not been replaced as treasurer despite his obvious incompetence (he is a walking joke) and Sullivan (BDD-prez), Piotrowski (VP Operations) and Aiello (VP Physical Division) take us back to the Maxinista years. Incompetency has its reward. But at least the board has fall guys now. As an aside, word has it Pat Moran has resigned. Nancy Hutter moves up to the board. How long will Phil retain the Community Manager slot? And with Richard Snowden on the CHCA board, the tragi-comedy is complete.

Also, a small collection of commenters from familiar IPs keep sending "give it up" and "move forward" messages. It's much like the Coulter-Malkin-Limbaugh refrain we hear about the Cheney-Bush years. Guys, make your own blog to tell people what you think. Because you don't sign your posts or request "no name," you don't get posted. You may as well know that as moderator, I get a lede that gives me the first seven words. I delete it as to not waste time. I never see the rest of your BS. Keep your auto-erotism to yourselves. Please, make your own site.

Scott Alloway, Waylaid Pilgrim

Posted by Jeremiade

Jim: Insider manipulation? The change in the Fund (CHCF) that happened in the 1990's was a decision by the trustees to move from bonds (bond funds) to stocks (funds also). It was an attempt to earn more on the substantial holdings of the Fund. It can not be characterized as manipulation. The trustees are chosen by the CHCA board to make those decisions. Perhaps the trustees decisions were poor (known only in hindsight) but I doubt that the trustees gained personally. Who hasn't lost money in this market? You owe an appology to the trustees for your comparison to Madoff.

As far as financial information withheld from board members, that is the responsibility of the Treasurer. CHCA boards elect the treasurer and he has access to the brokerage statements which are mailed to both the CHCF and the CHCA at Town Hall. It was wrong for any treasurer to withhold such information from board members and, to this day, I have no idea why that was done. You had an incompetent treasurer who was elected by the board, the same board that elected the Fund trustees. As far as the Fund loans to the CHCA, the fake signature was that of the CHCA president who was also elected by the board. (I do not believe this act will be determined to be anything but sloppiness and laziness, not wrongdoing.) The Fund should not have made any loans not directed to do so by the CHCA board. Problematic cash flow must be reported to the board by the treasurer, who should present a resolution to borrow money from the Fund.

I can agree with you that the CHCA boards have acted improperly (not just in financial matters) but your spin of these financial matters is just plain wrong. If Trustee McGuckin and Treasurer Keintz are not doing their jobs properly, then replace them.

The purchase of 8431 Gtn Ave was never intended to make money. CHCA boards never carried through on their original plans for the building and ultimately sold it. Sure the whole thing was a mistake, but again, there was no wrongdoing. And the mistake was one made by the CHCA board in not having a realistic plan.

I think you meant well but you are too off base factually to be effective. Sadly, you are right that there is little left to respect in the CHCA. That's why the CHRA is trying to take root. But there's always hope and another election next year.

Jeremiade


Note: May 31. The Foster repsonse has been corrected for typos.

Response by Jim Foster:

The title of the post I recently made was “Deflection and Self-Protection,” [since corrected - ed.] and not Self-Reflection and it was intended to characterize the words of Messrs. McGuckin and Nottingham that were published in the Local, and many of the actions and manipulations of by-laws and process over the years.

To respond to Jeremaide who does properly outline what the well structured CHCA and CHCF guiding documents require of its officers and directors, I will state the following:

There are no existing minutes from CHCF trustees or CHCA board meetings where the decision to move to high yield investments took place. In fact there are no existing minutes in the Fund minute book going back 23 years as per notation in the current minutes provided by this group of trustees. That declaration is in the handwriting and signed by the Secretary of the current trustees. No minutes for 23 years! Believe me, we searched for the minutes of the trustees for the entire period from the late 1990s up through 2006-07 and found none (also many CHCA board meeting minutes were missing from that same period)

My personal 3 hour interview with Trustee President Butler in 2007 included questions about those minutes and trustee meetings where the loans were authorized using Fund assets as security and his reply was “I have no recollection when we ever met, and those loans should not have been made.” He further commented that while he knew they were moving money from the trust without proper oversight, that he should never have let it happen. “They were robbing the piggy bank and I did not stop it” was the quote I believe. However, he made specific reference to the final use of the Fund-owned building at 8431 to secure a $50,000 loan to an out-of-area bank claiming he had no knowledge it was made. Not only does that loan have a signature of the CHCA President claiming she was the CHCF President, but an accompanying notarized signature on a separate document is where that person swears she holds that title with the Fund. Clearly there is no accident here, and it was done by a knowing individual who was not naïve or uninformed as to process, corporate structure, and responsibility.

It must be noted here that the transfers of funds from CHCF accounts to CHCA were frequent and were done through the simple signatures of bookkeepers and clerks on checks. Not one officer ever signed those transfers and check writing authority in any amount on any account was held by three employees who could sign individually, and did so. It was not until after we implemented the first group of recommendations of the Oversight Committee in 2007 that two signatures were required and officers were to be the signers.

Bottom line, a part-time bookkeeper and a part-time administrator had full check signing authority in any amount at any time on any account. Not only was that a fact, but the tax returns (1120s) and non-profit annual returns (990s) were never signed by an officer during that period despite the fact that the federal forms used state “Signature of Officer” directly under that line.

Tell me how a 45 year old organization and 25 year old trust fund in a community where most folks are college graduates and above, that runs a million dollar newspaper and a two million dollar trust fund, and makes all those mistakes accidentally. Compounding the problem is that denial that these things ever happened is alive and well to this day. Some have even charged that members of the reform board of 2006 forged those documents. No proper audit was ever done for 2005 and 2006 for either entity and it was during those fiscal years that most of the money was moved from trust to CHCA without controls. It is not just the treasurer alone who failed here. As the Oversight Committee stated in its summary report, we felt that the trustees were the final security, protector of assets and firewall for the money in the tax exempt trust, and had they followed only the minimum standards by holding meetings and keeping records, none of the rest could have happened. Even if the board was easily manipulated (and they obviously were) if they could not get to the trust fund money, the whole process would have ground to a halt in 2005 at the latest.

As to the purchase of 8431 and the claim that it was never intended to make money for the Fund, I was not there, nor did we find minutes that support that claim. What we did learn was that it was supposed to “break even” after expenses and debt service through rentals, but then provide space for community events in one portion. What financial records do show is that it lost money virtually every month it was owned and was rarely fully occupied for years. Now, if the Fund chooses to be in the real estate business, it is to monitor its assets, and clearly it did not. I would call that another trustee failure, but again no minutes or records they ever took it up exist, and they owned the building. Now, the board did discuss this from time to time, but no remedial action that moved the building into at least break-even was ever accomplished, and furthermore the use of it for public purposes never happened either. For that reason when they sold the building the IRS penalized the fund $70,000 or so as it violated the rules for a non-profit owning real estate. When will these administrative accidents stop happening?

Sure a better treasurer would have helped, but so would a board that was interested in performance more than resume enhancement, so would trustees whose names we never really knew for sure, as there were no documents or complete board minutes which stated for certain who was a trustee and for what period. Mr. Butler claimed he knew at the 11th hour when he sold the building to Bowman properties and dragged two individuals to a meeting who “supported” his actions, but it was never verified that they were serving according to the Trust Indenture, and when questioned about that Mr. Butler stated that an emergency provision in that document let him make that decision on his own.

All the reform group ever requested was a true outside audit by a professional independent auditor who was familiar with non-profits and the laws that accompanied them when there were affiliated for profit relationships. After that was done, we suggested filing amended tax and non-profit returns, tightening up the inside financial rules, and moving ahead on sold footing - - something that definitely did not exist in my view for at least the previous 7-8 years. No one wanted anyone prosecuted, nor did we want to continue the debate, just make the corrections and admit they needed to be made. It was that “admitting” part that sent shock waves through Chestnut Hill.

Instead a massive push back against any action but the minor office procedures began and in the process it has destroyed the CHCA and CHCF credibility to the point that it is now the tool of another group who want to use if for their own narrow agendas, not the “quality of life of Chestnut Hill and the surrounding areas” as the documents so well drawn years ago state.

The problem in nutshell is that some very educated folks think those documents are a joke and the fund, with its tax free shelter, is their financial sandbox

Just a few accidental administrative errors - - not a chance.

Jim Foster.