DV Journal

The Pennsbury School Board has agreed to pay $300,000 to settle a lawsuit brought over First Amendment violations. It also agreed to change its policies regarding the treatment of citizens who want to express their views to officials.

“Rules for public comment periods are meant to maintain time limits and protect each speaker’s right to be heard, not police which viewpoints are expressed. Pennsbury’s rules were so vague and subjective that the board could effectively shut down any speech they didn’t like, and that’s exactly what they did,” said Del Kolde, senior attorney at the Institute for Free Speech.

The lawsuit was filed last October by Lower Makefield residents Douglas Marshall, Simon Campbell, Robert Abrams, and Tim Daly. They were represented by attorneys from the Institute for Free Speech and Michael Gottlieb of Vangrossi & Recchuiti. In addition to the $300,000 for the plaintiffs’ attorney fees, the settlement called for nominal damages of $17.91 to each plaintiff, as a symbolic payment acknowledging that the plaintiffs’ rights were violated.

The amount was chosen because 1791 was the year the First Amendment was ratified.

Neither the former solicitors nor the district’s spokeswoman responded to requests for comment on Friday.

Judge Gene E. K. Pratter

The plaintiffs were censored for attempting to criticize district policies, including efforts to promote contested ideas about diversity, equity, and inclusion. Marshall was once interrupted mere seconds into speaking because the solicitor objected to his use of the term “critical race theory” to describe the district’s initiatives. Critics of the board were cut off for addressing their comments to board members, while other speakers were permitted to directly praise board members and school employees.

A solicitor yelled “You’re done” at one man who was trying to speak to the board.

In addition to the money, the district rewrote its public comment policy to align with the First Amendment and a federal judge’s ruling. It also abolished its “civility” policy and found a new law firm to act as its solicitors. Two of the district’s previous lawyers, Michael P. Clarke and Peter Amuso, were named as defendants in the lawsuit.

“School boards across the country should take note. Rules for public comments must respect the First Amendment rights of speakers. If you are limiting which opinions may be shared, you’ll be held liable for violating First Amendment rights,” said Alan Gura, vice president for litigation at the Institute for Free Speech.

The court had ruled in November that several Pennsbury policies governing speech at school board meetings were unconstitutional. Those policies, modeled after a template recommended by the Pennsylvania School Boards Association (PSBA), allowed the meeting’s presiding officer to stop speakers whose comments were deemed “personally directed,” “personal attacks,” “abusive,” “verbally abusive,” “irrelevant,” “disruptive,” “offensive,” “inappropriate,” or “otherwise inappropriate.”

After an evidentiary hearing in Philadelphia, Judge Gene E.K. Pratter found evidence that the board selectively enforced the rules to stifle criticism of its actions and members.

After the injunction was issued, Pennsbury abolished one of the two policies challenged in the lawsuit and rewrote the other to comply with the First Amendment. The court also ruled against a board requirement that speakers publicly announce their home addresses before beginning their remarks. According to a spokesperson for the PSBA, the model policy was reviewed after the court’s ruling.

The abuses in the case, however, went beyond the restrictions on speech recommended by the PSBA, the Institute said in a press release. On one occasion, school board officials edited video of a board meeting to remove a critical comment by one plaintiff. The board president even publicly apologized for not censoring the plaintiffs more aggressively.

Marshall praised the judge and the lawyers who represented the residents.

“I think it was clear that the primary motivation we had in bringing the lawsuit was to protect our constitutional rights as codified in the First Amendment,” said Marshall. “And that’s why the free speech entity agreed to take the case pro bono. They devoted an enormous amount of hours to it.”

The judge’s decision now stands as a precedent that other citizens and school boards can cite, he said.  “I think the judge properly guided us to a settlement (rather than a trial). She did a wonderful job on the case. And most importantly there is precedential value in the opinion she wrote.”

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

Vincent Rongione, whose status as the chief administrative officer of Upper Darby remains in legal limbo, filed a lawsuit earlier this month against the members of the township council who voted in June to fire him. He is seeking damages of no less than $50,000.

The 19-page complaint (99 pages when including exhibits) was filed in the Delaware County Court of Common Pleas on Friday. The filing seeks a jury trial and alleges that the six council members violated the commonwealth’s sunshine laws and conspired against Rongione, the top appointee in Mayor Barbarann Keffer’s (D) administration. Rongione’s lawsuit also names the entire governmental body of the town council as a defendant, in addition to singling out the group of six by name.

“As a direct and proximate result of Defendants [sic] actions, Mr. Rongione suffered and continues to suffer emotional distress, mental anguish, embarrassment, harassment and the denial of his position as Chief Administrative Officer,” the complaint concludes. The filing also asserts that Rongione has “performed brilliantly” as the township’s CAO.

The bipartisan group of six on the township council voted for Rongione to forfeit his office at a council meeting on June 1, the culmination of a months-long battle over the township’s finances, in particular, questions over the roughly $20 million the township received from the federal American Rescue Plan Act, or ARPA.

Rongione and his attorney argue that the vote to fire him violated Pennsylvania’s sunshine laws, “because the stated purpose on the agenda did not provide the Township Council, the Township administration and members of the public with a clear understanding of what purpose and the known action item to be voted on.”

Despite the 6-5 vote by the council to relieve Rongione of his duties, he has continued to work while the members of the council are seeking a court order that would bar Rongione from continuing his duties or from entering township offices because of the forfeiture.

The group of six include Republican council members Lisa Faraglia, Meaghan Wagner, and Brian Andruszko. They are joined by Democrats Matt Silva, Council President Brian Burke, and Council Vice President Laura Wentz.

The other five Democrats on the town council have rallied behind Mayor Barbarann Keffer and Rongione after the conflict erupted in public at a council meeting in early February.

At that February meeting, Township Treasurer David David Haman (D) raised questions about the ARPA funds, saying that the end-of-month balances of some bank accounts had dropped below what would be expected. (By the nature of the township’s governance structure, the treasurer’s role is one more of oversight, and does not have direct access to the bank accounts).

Soon after, the group of six authorized an outside investigation into the ARPA funds and all the township’s finances. Keffer authorized her own third-party audit.

In mid-May, two weeks before the council voted to oust Rongione, Keffer released the results of the audit she commissioned, conducted by national accounting firm Marcum LLP.

“Marcum performed analyses of the actual bank balances of general fund bank accounts comparing them to the ARP funds from December 1, 2021 through February 7, 2022 and determined that the actual bank balances exceeded the ARP funds at all times,” the report said.

The group of six have cast doubt on this conclusion, saying that the investigation was incomplete because Marcum did not have access to all township accounts.

At the June 1 meeting, Councilwoman Wagner led the charge for Rongione’s dismissal, something Rongione highlighted in his complaint, but in doing so apparently incorrectly named Councilwoman Wentz.

Wagner laid out a theory that Rongione had moved monies in a “forfeiture” fund — an account the township shares in conjunction with the district attorney’s office that holds monies temporarily forfeited by persons who have been arrested and are still awaiting adjudication of their guilt or innocence.

“Wentz’s attack on Mr. Rongione was ghastly, ill-tempered and more importantly, according to the Township Solicitor Kilkenny’s office, stunningly wrong on the law.”

Democrat Councilmember Andrew Hayman agrees with Rongione that the vote to fire him violated the commonwealth’s sunshine laws, but also says the follow-up actions by the group of six have likely been illegal as well.

The decision by the group of six to seek a court order to remove Rongione “wasn’t even voted on in a public meeting,” Hayman said.

“Council is required to vote on litigation in a public meeting and that wasn’t done. It’s not on the agenda for tonight’s council meeting [Wednesday, July 6]. So it’s not something council could add on tonight either. I don’t know whose responsibility that is, whether that’s our council president, President Burke’s responsibility. But it is not on the agenda and was not on the agenda. And as such, I do not believe it is or was a legitimate, permissible action.”

Requests for comment emailed to all other members of the township council, Mayor Keffer, and Rongione were not returned.

Throughout most of the controversy, the group of six have maintained the investigation they sponsored will produce evidence that Rongione inappropriately moved township money without the necessary authorization from the council. The results of that investigation are expected this summer.

As for the legal action underway by the group of six, a conference is slated for Thursday before Delaware County Court of Common Pleas Judge Spiros Angelos to initiate a determination whether council had the authority to deem Rongione’s office forfeited without the mayor’s approval.

This article first appeared in Broad + Liberty.

A Common Pleas judge this week kept his injunction in place preventing the Delaware County Health Department from conducting inspections of restaurants and other facilities in the townships and boroughs that are part of a lawsuit.

Those municipalities–Springfield, Ridley, Upper Chichester, Aston, Tinicum, Darby, Marple, and Middletown—object to the newly-minted department performing inspections in their jurisdictions. They prefer to keep that function local, where they can do it at a fraction of the cost levied by the county.

Also on Wednesday, Judge Spiros Angelos heard testimony from Lower Chichester Township Administrator Joseph Possenti Jr.

Although Lower Chichester is not part of the litigation, it sought clarification from the state Department of Health over keeping inspections local since it has its own health board and conducts its own inspections.

Former acting state Health Secretary Keara Klinepeter wrote Possenti back on April 19, telling him the county and township health departments can co-exist under state law.

“While there exist similar and distinguishable duties, each provides benefits that together can be valuable to Lower Chichester Township,” she wrote.

Delaware County Health Department Director Melissa Lyon testified very briefly that she had seen the letter from the state to Lower Chichester.

Passenti testified there are areas that the township would need help from the county health department, including the COVID pandemic, or a disaster like a tornado or an earthquake.

However, “we’ve been very happy with our own inspection process,” he said. For example, local people know the inspectors.

“We had somebody (from the county) show up at our elementary school and we knew nothing about it,” said Passenti. “A gentleman arrived at Lynwood School unannounced and he wanted to be paid upfront. The school district was concerned. They had no idea who it was.”

Joseph McAlee, a lawyer for the county said, “I think there’s been some confusion. The county health department is not doing anything it is not empowered to do. They have been authorized by law to conduct these inspections.”

James Byrne, attorney for the municipalities, referenced the Lower Chichester letters, and said, “As far as the state authority, the state agrees (with the towns). People are being asked to submit to a double inspection.”

Angelos told the lawyers to file briefs and said he will rule on the case in the future.

In the meantime, Frank Catania, a lawyer for Lower Chichester, told Delaware Valley Journal the town’s Board of Commissioners decided to keep its health department and work with the county to provide various services.

“We’re allowed to co-exist,” said Catania. “So far the county has rebuffed those efforts.”

A letter from county Solicitor William F. Martin to Possenti said the county disagreed with the township’s “interpretation of the law,” that the two health departments can continue to operate.

As to joining the lawsuit, Catania said, “We’re going to wait and see what the judge says.” But if the county continues to balk, “we’ll litigate it.”

But Catania is hopeful an agreement can be worked out. Meanwhile, the judge had not been aware of the letters between Lower Chichester, the state, and the county.

The new county health department, which was given state approval on April 2, is expected to cost some $10 million in its first year, with continuing costs of $8 to $10 million annually. While much of the expense will come from state and federal grants, county taxpayers will pick up about 30 percent of the tab. The county also signed a five-year lease on the 11,235-square-foot Wellness Center in Yeadon, paying more than the originally requested rent. Over the course of the lease, the county will pay some $250,000 more than what the real estate company had sought.

Follow us on social media: Twitter: @DV_Journal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

With fewer than 1,000 votes separating them, the close primary election between Dr. Mehmet Oz and Dave McCormick for the open U.S. Senate seat is going into a recount.

Acting Secretary of State Leigh Chapman announced the recount Wednesday afternoon. It was triggered by the 0.5 percent margin between the two candidates’ vote totals and must be completed by June 7.

Unofficial returns showed Oz with 419,365 votes or 31.21 percent and McCormick at 418,463 or 31.14 percent.

McCormick also filed a lawsuit asking the state Supreme Court to permit mail-in ballots without a date written on them by the voter to be counted. Chapman told county election offices to set those ballots aside to await the court’s decision.

But McCormick’s move garnered swift pushback from state and national Republican Party officials.

Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel, said via Twitter: “Both Republican candidates in Pennsylvania would be fantastic senators. The RNC is committed to election integrity and election laws must be followed. We’re intervening in a Pennsylvania legal battle alongside the @PAGOP to ensure just that.”

RNC Chief Counsel Matt Raymer said, “The RNC is intervening in this lawsuit alongside the Pennsylvania GOP because election laws are meant to be followed, and changing the rules when ballots are already being counted harms the integrity of our elections. Either of Pennsylvania’s leading Republican Senate candidates would represent the Keystone State better than a Democrat, but Pennsylvania law is clear that undated absentee ballots may not be counted. This is another example of the RNC’s ironclad commitment to ensuring that the highest standards of transparency and security are upheld throughout the election process.”

And conservative radio talk host Dom Giordano told the Delaware Valley Journal podcast he thinks McCormick’s decision to go to court is a mistake. He believes McCormick should “take one for the team” and emerge as the GOP’s nominee to take on state Sen. Bob Casey (D) in 2024.

“I like McCormick, and to spend all that money and lose by so few votes — I get it. If your attorney says there’s another avenue, you do it,” Giordano said. “Once it becomes apparent where we are, he [McCormick] should be aware that Casey is viewed as very vulnerable, and he’d have the entire GOP behind him.”

As of Wednesday night, however, the McCormick campaign was pressing ahead. Spokesperson Jess Szymanski said the litigation the campaign filed was to require counties to adhere to a recent ruling by the “Republican-leaning Third Circuit Court to count Republican ballots signed by a voter, received and timestamped by 8 p.m. on Election Day. These ‘undated’ ballots are in fact dated because they’re timestamped and proven to have arrived on time,” she said.

“Once we have counted all Republican votes received on time, we will unite behind a strong GOP nominee to defeat socialist John Fetterman in the fall. All Republicans should be focused on that goal.”

The McCormick campaign believes the state Supreme Court will decide whether to hear its appeal by the close of business Thursday, Szymanski said.

Dave McCormick said via Twitter, “We are proud our campaign received nearly 418,000 votes, won 37 of 67 counties, and contributed to a historic turnout with a razor-thin difference between myself and Mehmet Oz. This narrow difference triggers an automatic recount and we look forward to a swift resolution so our party can unite to defeat socialist John Fetterman in the fall.”

Lawrence Tabas, chair of the Pennsylvania Republican Party says he believes either Republican will defeat Fetterman in the general election.

“We look forward to working with whoever is the nominee, once the primary results are certified,” Tabas said.

Follow us on social media: Twitter: @DV_Journal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

Republican Senate candidate David McCormick has filed a petition in Commonwealth Court to make sure that all undated ballots received were on time are counted in counties that are, so far, refusing to count them. It’s just the latest drama in a primary season featuring nonstop negative RINO ads and one of the Democratic candidates hospitalized shortly before Election Day.

A May 20 ruling by a federal appeals court that permitted mail-in ballots in Lehigh County to be counted despite not having the required date on the exterior of the ballot opened the door for McCormick’s petition.

McCormick, a hedge fund CEO, and celebrity Dr. Mehmet Oz are in a statistical tie in the Republican primary to be the party’s nominee to run against Lt. Gov. John Fetterman in the fall, and their contest is headed toward a recount.

“Both the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit have held that mail-in ballots should not be disqualified simply because the voters failed to handwrite a date on the exterior mailing envelope of their ballots,” said McCormick’s chief legal counsel Chuck Cooper. “Because all ballots are time-stamped by the County Boards of Elections on receipt, a voter’s handwritten date is meaningless. All timely ballots of qualified Republican voters should be counted.”

Jess Szymanski, a spokeswoman for the McCormick campaign, added, “Every Republican primary vote should be counted, including the votes of Pennsylvania’s active-duty military members who risk their lives to defend our constitutional right to vote. When every Republican vote is counted, Dave looks forward to uniting the party and defeating socialist John Fetterman in the fall.”

Previously, Oz filed a challenge to Philadelphia Republican voters’ provisional ballots being counted.

“The Board’s only basis for disenfranchising these voters is a technical error that is immaterial under both state and federal law. A plurality of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has already held that the Commonwealth’s Election Code—which “must be liberally construed so as not to deprive . . . the voters of their right to elect a candidate of their choice”—”does not require boards of elections to disqualify mail-in or absentee ballots submitted by qualified electors who signed the declaration on their ballot’s outer envelope but did not handwrite . . . [the] date, where no fraud or irregularity has been alleged,” the suit said.

“By refusing to count absentee and mail-in ballots based solely on the lack of a handwritten date in the declaration section of the exterior mailing envelope, the Boards are depriving likely thousands of voters of the right to vote that (the law) explicitly preserved,” the suit stated. “These ballots were indisputably returned on time. Whether or not a voter remembered to write a date on the mailing envelope is entirely immaterial to whether that voter’ “is qualified under State law to vote’… Just as there is no basis on this record [for the Boards] to refuse to count undated ballots.”

Meanwhile, Casey Contres, Oz’s campaign manager, responded with a tweet, saying that while McCormick had a been a “formidable opponent,” he was going to come up short and was “following the Democrats’ playbook” by filing the suit, which “could have long-term harmful consequences” to elections in Pennsylvania.

But if Oz is the nominee, he would “appreciate” McCormick’s support in defeating “extreme liberal socialist” Fetterman.

In addition to the counties, Pennsylvania Secretary of State Leigh Chapman, who oversees elections, was also named a defendant in the suit.

Follow us on social media:Twitter: @DV_Journal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

Pennsylvania’s state treasurer is throwing her two cents into a lawsuit opposing the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).

“RGGI is a massive, illegal tax disguised as a regulation,” Treasurer Stacy Garrity said in a press release.

The lawsuit was filed in the Commonwealth Court on April 25 by a coalition of energy companies and unions. They argue Pennsylvania’s entrance into RGGI will drive up prices and harm jobs.

Garrity agreed.

“If it’s allowed to be implemented, energy prices for every Pennsylvanian will skyrocket–and thousands of our good, family-sustaining jobs will be lost,” said Garrity.

Pennsylvania’s entrance into RGGI has been a hotly-contested issue for years. Gov. Tom Wolf (D) took executive action in 2019 instructing the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to put Pennsylvania in the multi-state compact. Politicians, think tanks, and special interest groups say Wolf should have gone through the legislative process.

“The governor unilaterally entering RGGI without any legislative approval is a direct insult to democracy,” state Rep. Ryan Warner (R-Fayette) told DVJournal last year.

Wolf ignored the complaints. The Environmental Quality Board (EQB) went on to vote 15-4 to adopt the final regulation that would bring the state into a regional agreement among Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia. It sets a cap on total carbon dioxide emissions from electric power generation in those states. Generators will purchase credits–effectively a carbon tax–per ton of emissions through auctions.

“The Wolf administration is trying to use the regulatory process to avoid seeking legislative approval for its scheme to impose limits on the operation of electric generators, but our state constitution is clear,” Garrity said this week. “The power of taxation belongs to the General Assembly, not to the unelected and unaccountable members of the EQB.”

As a result, Garrity says she is “proud” to stand with Pennsylvania’s energy companies and the unions who “represent many thousands of hardworking Pennsylvanians.”

Unions and energy companies are not the only ones concerned about RGGI. Organizations including the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) Pennsylvania have been speaking out against RGGI. Several appeared before the Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee in April to testify on the concerns about RGGI’s economic harm, particularly among small and independent businesses already facing higher prices and supply chain issues.

Greg Moreland of NFIB PA said the concerns remain. NFIB told DVJournal Wednesday he believes the EQB did not conduct a complete analysis of the regulation on small businesses as required by the Regulatory Review Act (RRA).

“Every other state that has entered RGGI has obtained legislative approval,” Moreland said. “The governor and the EQB do not have the authority to enact a carbon tax, and this is a tax. NFIB is fully supportive of efforts that acknowledge the constitutional powers to tax only come from the General Assembly.”

Time is of the essence. Wolf, who is a lame duck, has stated on several occasions that Pennsylvania’s participation in RGGI is needed to combat man-made climate change.

“Climate is the most critical environmental threat confronting the world, and power generation is one of the biggest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions,” said the governor.

Delaware Valley Democrats agree that is the case. State Sen. Katie Muth (D-44) has also argued reducing emissions will improve public health.

“Efforts to block Pennsylvania from joining RGGI only put our environment, health, and economic security at risk,” she wrote in an op-ed.

Still, Garrity and others argue that economic security is at risk of jobs being killed as a result of RGGI.

“The taxes imposed by these unlawful regulations will directly harm miners, electrical workers, welders, and fabricators,” said Garrity. “Once lost, these jobs may never return, (so) the Court should act quickly to prevent irreparable harm done to Pennsylvania’s electric generation industry and its thousands of workers.”

Pointing to a report last fall by Independent Fiscal Office, Garrity said Pennsylvania’s carbon dioxide emissions have fallen by 37 percent over the last decade without the regulatory burden of RGGI.

Companies and unions involved in the lawsuit include those with coal interests, natural gas, and oil-burning power plants in Pennsylvania, United Mine Workers of America, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), and the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers.

Follow us on social media:Twitter: @DV_Journal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

A parent filed a federal lawsuit against the Tredyffrin/Easttown School District Tuesday claiming the district violated his First Amendment rights.

Ben Auslander says the school district and its business manager, Arthur McDonnell, violated his constitutional rights by ushering him out from a room where he was perusing documents that outline the Critical Race Theory (CRT) curriculum the district is using.

Using a Right-to-Know request, Auslander asked for all materials pertaining to Pacific Education Group (PEG), the district’s CRT consultant, the suit said. The district had paid PEG $400,000.

CRT is a controversial and divisive theory being used in the curriculum of many school districts and has brought parents out to school board meetings to object. Parents found out about it when their children had in-home schooling due to the pandemic.

Stemming from Marxist philosophy, CRT teaches children they are oppressors if they are White and victims if they are Black. While many districts have denied they teach CRT when confronted by parents, one former T/E board member, Kyle Boyer, openly admitted it at a board meeting last July.

The district denied Auslander’s request “to provide the records, lessons, and materials, but granted an in-camera (in person) review of the material created by PEG,” the suit said. Auslander began to take verbal notes in a smartphone voice recorder about the voluminous material. When he refused to stop,  McDonnell escorted him out.

“McDonnell threatened to hold (Auslander) liable under the Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act for recording his own voice,” the suit said. “He also threatened to hold (him) liable under ‘copyright laws.’

“McDonnell also called the school district’s attorney and threatened to call PEG’s attorney,” the suit said. “After Mr. Auslander refused to stop recording his voice, defendant Mr. McDonnell terminated the meeting and ordered (him) to vacate the premises,” the suit said.

Auslander “seeks a preliminary injunction against defendants prohibiting them from interfering with his constitutional right to speak and record his voice while conducting a public records inspection. He also seeks nominal damages.”

T/E student assignment

“School systems across America desperately try to hide from parents the instructional materials developed by highly paid consultants to indoctrinate our children with critical race theory and other biased, partisan materials. In this case, the Tredyffrin/Easttown School District was so desperate to keep information from the public that it blatantly violated Mr. Auslander’s First Amendment right to document the instructional materials used to develop curriculum in his child’s school,” said Gene Hamilton, vice president and general counsel with America First Legal, which filed the lawsuit, along with Villanova lawyer Wally Zimolong.

“We look forward to continuing to stand up for parents like Mr. Auslander and hold school districts accountable that believe that parents surrender their constitutional rights when their children walk through the school doors.”

Kenneth Roos, the T/E solicitor, said Auslander’s First Amendment rights were not violated and that the district was complying with copyright law when officials refused to allow Auslander to make recorded notes about PEG materials.

“The fact is, it was copyrighted and Mr. Auslander was told what the restrictions would be and we followed the restrictions that were laid out by the Office of Open Records,” said Roos. “He was given certain ground rules to follow and he wouldn’t follow those ground rules.”

The district is required to protect the copyright held by PEG, he said.

“Whatever the district did was to protect the copyright. It had nothing to do with the content of materials,” said Roos. “It could have been anything.”

Delaware Valley Journal asked Roos whether Auslander’s First Amendment rights trump copyright law.

“The First Amendment is his right to speech,” said Roos. “It’s not his right to look at a document and make a verbatim oral transcript of it. He had a right to review documents under certain conditions. There’s nothing in the First Amendment that gave him the right to review those documents. The right to review the documents came under the Open Records Act.”

Parent Andrew McClellan, whose son is a student at Conestoga High School, said T/E officials are also paying PEG to train teachers and other staff in CRT. Numerous parents have spoken out at school board meetings against the CRT curriculum, yet the district continues to use it, he said.

“We literally had to get a lawyer to look at the curriculum,” said McClellan, regarding Auslander’s ordeal.

“All of these people from the White House to the school board work for us,” said McClellan. “They have forgotten that. I’m doing my best to remind them.”

Follow us on social media: Twitter: @DV_Journal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

CBD Kratom may have the last laugh.

After weeks of residents’ outrage, Radnor officials passed an ordinance that prevents the controversial store from opening at the site of a former Starbucks on Lancaster Avenue in Wayne. The company immediately filed a lawsuit against the Main Line township.

“Since the township ordinance was unanimously approved by the board, CBD Kratom filed a lawsuit to enjoin its application,” said Bill White, township manager. “The township intends to vigorously defend the lawsuit in that the ordinance is solely designed to protect children from exposure to unregulated substances in close proximity to schools, daycare facilities, and playgrounds. The township looks forward to defending against the claim in Delaware County Court of Common Pleas.”

For their part, CBD Kratom officials said they signed a 10-year agreement to rent at the Radnor location last August.

Spencer Owens, government affairs specialist for CBD Kratom, explained Radnor was chosen simply because of the demand for its product. CBD Kratom, which has over 50 venues nationwide and several within the Philadelphia area, determined many of its customers were traveling long distances to their stores and that a Radnor location would negate the need for that. That is where things began to grow complicated.

However, township officials said CBD Kratom had not obtained the proper permits to do business there. But Owens claims that the inability to get the proper permits was due in large part to township officials and their lack of responsiveness on the matter. CBD Kratom filed its lawsuit against both the township and the township’s director of community development accusing them of spot-zoning, a type of legislation targeted at one specific business.

The suit aims to allow Kratom to open for business and to sell kratom/delta-8. The  THC measure was passed April 4. It prevents the sale and distribution of any kratom or delta-8 THC product from within 1000 feet of schools, playgrounds, and daycares. That makes the Lancaster Avenue CBD Kratom location unusable because it is near Radnor Middle School and St. Katharine of Siena School.

Fear of their children being exposed to the drug motivated many parents to pack township meetings in opposition to the kratom store.

Delta-8-THC is a less common, less potent relative of Delta-9 THC, the primary psychoactive ingredient found in marijuana. It is currently under preliminary research. Kratom, derived from an evergreen tree native to Southeast Asia, currently stands in a unique spot in the world of psychoactive substances.

Like marijuana, it has been used for thousands of years and is said to offer a wide variety of benefits, from pain relief to energy gains. Unlike marijuana, however, it is underregulated. For a product to make it to shelves that, in many cases, provides no dosage information whatsoever, is quite unusual in the world of pharmaceuticals and supplements.

The lack of regulation surrounding it sabotages the effort to prove its benefits. People are often left with the impression that any substance so completely unregulated must thereby be dangerous. The truth is more complicated.

While deaths have been attributed to kratom, they have rarely occurred without additional factors or substances at play. There is understandable concern that kratom, which does interact with the brain’s opiate receptors, could serve as a gateway drug in the communities that it enters. The inverse, however, is also true. There is no shortage of kratom users who espouse its benefits, Many claim kratom saved them from crippling opiate addiction. Others go even further and credit kratom for saving their lives entirely.

While benign in comparison to more accepted drugs like tobacco and alcohol, its sheer lack of regulation is concerning to many. Based on imports and sales, there are between 10 and 15 million kratom users in the U.S. alone. For a drug to amass such a large base of users while so little is actually known about it is highly unusual. In December, the WHO said there simply was not evidence to recommend a critical review of the substance, and that it should be kept at a minimum level of regulatory surveillance.

An article from Scientific American explained how damaging the effect of FDA regulation could be. “In the context of an America with the highest number of overdose deaths ever—driven largely by street fentanyl—removing a safer substitute almost certainly will increase mortality.”

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story mis-identified the Radnor Township Manager. It has been corrected. DVJournal regrets the error.

Follow us on social media: Twitter: @DV_Journal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

Timing is everything. And Bucks County officials said the time is now to sue a long list of companies that manufactured firefighting foam that contained PFAS.

Bucks County District Attorney Matt Weintraub, Commissioners Chairman Bob Harvie, and county Solicitor Joe Khan recently announced the county filed a lawsuit against various companies that manufactured the firefighting chemicals. The suit, filed in  Bucks County Common Pleas Court, seeks civil fines, penalties, and restoration under the state’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law.

Those chemicals have polluted water and soil in Bucks County, the officials said.

“We’re bringing this action on a unified, bipartisan basis because as your elected officials, we have a duty to protect the people of Bucks County and to conserve and maintain the county’s natural resources,” said Harvie.

“Regardless of our differences, we all inhabit one planet, and that one planet has one environment and that environment is what sustains all of us,” said Harvie. “The desire to protect our environment is what unites us as Bucks County public servants.”

“These companies knew or should have known their products were toxic,” said Khan.

The suit alleges that PFAS were released into soil and water when firefighting foam products and chemicals contained therein, manufactured and sold by the suit’s defendants, were used in Bucks County. Because those substances do not biodegrade, PFAS are sometimes called “forever chemicals.”

Although the companies named as defendants largely stopped producing the PFAS-containing aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) products, recent testing at the county’s Public Safety Training Center in Doylestown Township confirmed the presence of PFAS in water and soil samples. It has been at least 10 years since those chemicals were used at the training center.

PFAS, an abbreviation for perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are known as forever chemicals because they do not break down in the environment. They appeared commonly in many nonstick, stain-resistant, and waterproof products, including the AFFF products used to fight fuel fires. PFAS are highly water-soluble, which causes the chemicals to spread easily and contaminate soil, groundwater, and surface water.

Testing of fish tissue samples last year also showed the continued presence of PFAS in Neshaminy Creek, causing the state Departments of Health, Agriculture, and Environmental Protection to issue a “Do Not Eat” advisory for all species of fish caught in the Neshaminy Creek basin.

“You literally cannot eat the fish you catch,” said Weintraub.

Certain PFAS can cause adverse health effects including, but not limited to, decreased fertility and increased high blood pressure in pregnant women, developmental effects or delays in children, increased risk of certain cancers, and increased risk of high cholesterol and obesity, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Health advisory levels of PFAS in water have long remained at 70 parts per trillion, but the state Department of Environmental Protection seeks to significantly reduce those levels. The public has until April 27 to comment on the state’s most recent proposal.

“While we will continue to investigate and study the health effects of these harmful chemicals, the time to hold these companies accountable is now. They knew that their firefighting foam products contained these toxic substances when they peddled them and that they were dangerous even when used properly,” Harvie said.

“These companies interfered with our rights to public health, safety and peace, and the right to pure water and to the preservation of the natural environment,” said Weintraub. “As district attorney, I am dedicated to protecting the county and its residents from the deceptive and unfair acts and practices of the manufacturers of PFAS in connection with their marketing and sale of products containing these undisclosed ‘forever chemicals’ to entities throughout the county.”

“The health and safety of the citizens of Bucks County is our top concern,” he said.

Asked about why the suit was being filed now, Weintraub said officials had been investigating the matter and reviewing the law for the last two years.

“There is an old Israeli proverb. The best time to plant a tree was 30 years ago, but the second-best time to plant a tree is today,” said Weintraub.

Khan said, “This lawsuit is about more than the county’s substantial rights as a property owner. This is about enforcing the people’s constitutional right to pure water. These corporations need to pay for their outrageous misconduct and this lawsuit will help make sure that they do.”

“Pennsylvania is the only state in the country that guarantees a right to pure water,” said Khan.

Bucks County and the Bucks County District Attorney’s office are represented by attorneys from Baron & Budd, P.C., Cossich Sumich Parsiola & Taylor, LLC, and Dilworth Paxson LLP.

Grant Thompson, a spokesman for 3M, one of the defendant companies, said, “3M acted responsibly in connection with products containing PFAS, including AFFF (aqueous film-forming foam), and will vigorously defend its record of environmental stewardship.”

Follow us on social media: Twitter: @DV_Journal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

Anthony “Chachi” Paparo, who was fired from his job as police chief in Yeadon Borough, contends the town council terminated him because of his race. He is White, and the borough residents are 90 percent, Black.

The council members wanted a “Black chief for a Black town,” Paparo told the Delaware Valley Journal during a podcast recorded the day after he was fired.

Paparo’s lawyer filed a federal civil rights lawsuit on Monday against the borough and the council members who voted to terminate him: Council President Sharon Council-Harris, Vice President Learin Johnson, Council President Pro Tempore Tomeka Jones-Waters, and Council Member Carlette Brooks

Paparo is seeking monetary damages, lost wages, and his old job back according to his lawyer, Harold Goodman.

“Here, each of the individual defendants agreed and conspired with one another to terminate plaintiff Paparo’s employment as chief of police of Yeadon Borough on account of his race, White, and in order to hire a Black chief to replace him,” the suit said.

Paparo’s race never mattered, the suit said, until the new group of council members was voted into office last year.

“To them, Yeadon was a Black town, and they wanted a Black chief of police to replace plaintiff Paparo. And they plotted and conspired to achieve that result even before they took office on January 3, 2022,” the suit said. The council voted 4-3 to fire Paparo at a Feb. 17 hearing after a “due process” proceeding. The lawsuit claims the due process hearing was not fair.

“It was a sham proceeding, the votes to fire him already cast and known beforehand,” the suit said. “Moreover, it occurred among false and defamatory charges that Chief Paparo was guilty of money mismanagement and wage theft in connection with the borough’s collective bargaining agreement with the Fraternal Order of Police.”

More than 1,000 people signed a petition supporting Paparo, and many came to that meeting with signs expressing their support of “Chief Chachi.”

Paparo was part of the Love is the Answer movement, which seeks to build better relationships between the police and communities of color. Paparo told DVJournal he worked hard to help the community, for example, by providing animal control services with his traps and putting up deer fences for elderly residents himself.

“It’s another way to meet people other than just through a 911 call for an emergency or an accident, or you’re a crime victim, or you’re having a problem with your neighbor,” he said. “I’m coming there. We’re just talking, one on one human to human, and then interacting.”

Meanwhile, “before they were sworn in, the four individual defendants had already decided that because Yeadon was ‘a Black town,’ they would terminate the employment of Chief Paparo and replace him with a Black chief of police,” the suit said.

The council members who had decided to fire Paparo offered him three months’ salary if he would resign. Paparo declined that offer, the suit said. As a “pretext” to get rid of him, council members blamed Paparo for a $387,000 settlement with the FOP over overtime paid to part-time officers during the pandemic, the suit said.

The suit points out town officials agreed to that amount as part of an arbitration settlement, and Paparo had never seen the consent decree until the day he was fired.

Supporters of Paparo’s firing had an oversized copy of the check on display at a Feb. 10 council meeting.

“Not a single witness testified against Chief Paparo. Not a single document was introduced to support the majority’s decision. Indeed, not a single question was put to Chief Paparo in response to his lengthy, detailed account of his accomplishments, his dedication to the town of Yeadon, and the reasons why he, with the mayor’s approval, hired part-time officers to help keep Yeadon safe during periods of significant staff shortages and during the civil unrest that followed George Floyd’s murder and the COVID-19 epidemic that roiled Yeadon and its adjacent communities,” the suit said.

“Paparo has suffered irreparable harm to his unblemished reputation for honesty and integrity, a reputation built over the 37 years he has served as a law enforcement officer. That reputation, so consistently built and reinforced, was taken away in the flash of a 4-3 vote based on the false premise, lacking in any due process, that he was guilty of money mismanagement and wage theft, a scar from which he cannot recover,” the suit said.

Retired Upper Darby Police Chief Mike Chitwood had promoted Paparo to captain when he worked in Upper Darby before coming to Yeadon.

“He was a very, very good cop, excellent,” said Chitwood. “He was in charge of SWAT.”

“If you fire somebody because of the color of their skin, that’s not appropriate,” said Chitwood. “That’s not fair, and it’s absolutely insane.”

But if there was a budgetary reason, that would be a different story, he said.

“Obviously, they’re denying they fired him because of racism,” said Chitwood.

The borough’s public information officer referred the Delaware Valley Journal to a “fact sheet” that was sent to every household, saying that Paparo had violated the FOP agreement, among other issues that led to his dismissal.

Follow us on social media: Twitter: @DV_Journal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal.