Contents
Introduction
Part One - The Destruction of Free Trade
Part Two - A History of Abuse
Part Three - Playing with the Truth
Part Four - Pseudo Debate
Part Five - The Futility of Legal Action
Part Six - Parking Problems Ignored
Part Seven - Council's Propaganda Machine
Part Eight - A Palace for Council, Nothing for Business
Part Nine - Media's Secret Parking Study
Part Ten - Retail Redefined
Part Eleven - Preconceptions vs. the Facts
Part Twelve - The Free Parking Lot Fiasco
Part Thirteen - No Sign Ordinance of the Times
Part Fourteen - The Great Media Borough Hall Boondoggle
Part Fifteen - Seventeen years of Destructive Business Policies
Part Sixteen - Businesses Fight Back with Petition and Protest
Part Seventeen - When Merchants Complain, Raise Taxes
Part Eighteen - Mayor Bob and Freedom of the Press
No Conclusion
Excerpts included from:
I: Media Zoning Ordinance of 1986
II: The Anti-Business Zoning Revision
IIA: Over 250 Banned Businesses
III: Media Borough Residential Parking Ordinance of 1984
IV: Media Parking Survey of 1994
V: Atlantic Report on State Street
VI: The Kotkin Report
VII: Atlantic Report on Baltimore Pike
VIII: Media Borough Comprehensive Plan
IX: Delaware County Planning Department Zoning Amendment Disapproval
X: Comiskey Parking Survey of 1971
XI: Media Borough Budget - 1998
XII: News and Letters
Introduction
Let us begin this document with a statement, "We love Media." Our town is a quaint little village in the heart of Delaware County, Pennsylvania. Covering only 3/4 of one square mile and inhabited by some 6,500 souls, Media has all the charm anyone could ever want in their home town. The town slogan is, "Welcome to Media, Everybody's Home Town" and the people who live and work in the borough have epeatedly shown themselves to be the warm and friendly
neighbors who fit that slogan perfectly.
Media was founded as a temperance village in 1851, but soon grew to be the governmental center of a county that today approaches one million population. Today the courthouse and its associated governmental agencies have become the engine that drives the borough's economy. Growing to over 35,000 daytime population, Media is home to numerous professional offices. More than fifteen banks and financial institutions call Media home.
Following WWII, Media's business district began to develop into a thriving mixed use retail and professional area. There were three super markets in the town until the 60's and over 100 businesses actively supported the Media Business Association. Delaware County grew at a
double digit rate and the surrounding areas of Springfield and Middletown changed from sleepy countryside to busy suburbia in what seemed like overnight.
The opening of both Springfield Mall and Granite Run Mall in the seventies led to dire predictions for Media's State Street business district. Although there were some vacancies that developed, the strength of the businesses and the hard work of the business owners led to a rapid
replacement of those stores that relocated. Business related events such as the Media Town Fair were developed to boost sales during the traditional Media Sidewalk Sale Days and throughout the seventies, business boomed and storefront vacancies disappeared.
Surveys of Media residents taken during the late seventies showed that 88% felt a prosperous central business district was important to the health of the town. The town
government at the time had been particularly hostile to the business district and accordingly the elected officials became vulnerable at election time. The elections of 1979, 1981 and 1983 led to a dramatic takeover by the Media Democrats under the banner of "Leaders for a Change."
The campaign literature of the time stated "The easy approach to solving problems is the overly simplistic, shoot-from-the-hip method - it never works. Our town's leadership must offer more than a vague desire that today's real problems will just go away - leadership must offer more than a yearning to return to a time when things were all very simple." Although most of the same cast of characters are still in office, the past fifteen years have decimated the central business district leaving the political climate similar to the one that originally got them elected.
Media is now run by a group of politicians who behave as though their time in office has somehow given them knowledge of how to revive a business district. While they have spent tens of thousands of dollars on studies and consultants, they have consistently refused to invest in
substantial improvements or even to follow their consultants' advice. There are no business owners on council and no one on council has any investment in commercial development. They are lawyers and bureaucrats who govern the borough as though they were experienced business planners, ignoring the pleas of the business owners, professionals and investment community. They have passed many pieces of legislation that have made Media into a noncompetitive commercial area, all in the name of "doing it for the residents."
This study documents a series of steps taken by the mayor and council that have harmed what once was a vital central business district. It exposes the mayor, council members, borough solicitor and members of various official boards for what can reasonably be considered unethical
behavior. While it is not the subject of this treatise to claim violations f the law, it is maintained that this group has adopted the same "shoot-from-the-hip" attitude they swore to replace almost twenty years ago.
Every statement of fact is documented appendices. The sole purpose of this paper is to show the people of Media who is responsible for the loss of their precious business
district. The authors welcome the opportunity to prove these statements in open debate. By making all documentary evidence available it is hoped the readers will be assured as to the accuracy of the facts contained in this document.
July 15, 2000
Richard Swift Glassman
www.MediaPA.net
The State of Commerce in Media Borough - Part One - Destruction of Free Trade
Media Borough Council enacted an ordinance on December 16, 1999 which re-zoned
State Street properties to prohibit most legal business uses. The members of council, the mayor
and various members of the Media Business Authority and Media Borough Planning Commission
have acted in concert to deprive the owners of these properties of their rights by improper or
unethical means.
Since the ordinance was first advertised and thus put into effect as a Pending Ordinance
in June 1999, many business owners and investors have voiced opposition. Mr. Gross, Mr. Stong, Mr. Brooke, Mr. Strine, Mr. Margis, Mrs. Baker, Mr. Anderson and Mr. Glassman have
appeared before Council or attended meetings with the mayor to oppose this unproven strategy. These men and women represent the most experienced members of the business community. They are the major figures in our community and have invested their lives and fortunes into their
businesses and property in Media. Mayor McMahon and the majority of Borough Council have chosen to pursue these anti-business and anti-property rights measures against the advise of the most experienced business and property owners in town.
The following facts are documented in this report:
The vote was taken without proper "notification by mail to all interested parties" as
required by the Media Borough Zoning Ordinance.
Council misled the public and misrepresented evidence in support of their position. During the December meeting a document was introduced by acting councilman Kennedy claiming that this action was successfully taken in other communities. The document's author Joel Kotkin, confirmed that his paper did not support council's contention, rather, his thesis clearly spoke against such governmental actions.
Council introduced misleading and deceptive testimony to support their action. Councilman Robinson claimed several times to have contacted all property owners to
discuss a compromise when in fact the only property owners contacted were attending the meeting. There were no attempts made by council, the mayor, or the borough solicitor to contact the affected property owners by mail even to the extent as required by the Media Zoning Laws.
Mayor McMahon and members of borough council claimed that studies taken in the borough supported this plan. The authors of the referred to Atlantic Group Plan
confirmed that their study in no way supported council's position. The consultants were not permitted by council to testify at the public hearings on the matter and were awarded
an additional contract by council.
The second Atlantic Group Study of November 1999 did not support the proposed
zoning actions and the mayor and council prevented any contrary evidence from being
revealed prior to passage in December by not releasing the report until March 2000.
The mayor, council, and borough solicitor improperly moved to deny Merrill Lynch from
expanding their operations by initiating this ordinance specifically to deny them from
legally relocating to the Chantigian property (Thriftway).
The borough council, in concert with the Media Business Authority improperly diverted
MBA funds for projects detrimental to business through their financial support of the
Great Media Garage Sale, Plum Street architectural renovations, decorations in residential
areas and other non-business public relations events.
Council claimed to be responding to concerns raised in surveys of borough residents when
in fact there were no impartial or scientific surveys ever taken.
Council passed this ordinance without the required time for review by the Delaware
County Planning Commissions required by law.
Council passed this ordinance without the required final review by the Media Borough
Planning Commission as required by law.
The State of Commerce in Media Borough - Part 2 - A History of Abuse
In 1983 the current administration swept Borough Council. That year there were over 75
retail establishments in the Media Business Association. There was a thriving retail district with
an excellent variety of mercantile establishments including two Supermarkets, a shoe store, three
clothing stores, a shoe repair, two 5 & 10's, two Housewares stores and a pet shop. Businesses
remained open late on Wednesdays and Fridays, office space was at a premium and the
courthouse was expanding operations.
There has been a marked decline in all segments of commerce in Media Borough since then. We
have seen the passage of the Mercantile and Business Privilege Taxes, the establishment of the Business
Authority, passage of zoning, sign and parking ordinances that have proven to be harmful to small
business and a "Bank and Financial Services Moratorium" being forced on State Street.
It was micro-mismanagement by our borough government that has led to the situation that we
see today. Empty buildings now line State Street where once was the most sought after real estate in
the borough. Customers have been driven out by a combination of factors including: Poor parking
availability and accessibility, strict parking and traffic enforcement, other consumer and business
unfriendly regulations.
For example, the borough?ong standing anti-office stance has driven away many law firms,
governmental offices and other office businesses symbiotic to Court House activities. Media Borough's
own studies show the workers and clients of these offices represent over 60% of the retail customer
base in Media. By being anti-office, the Council has become anti-consumer. By driving out the
professional and governmental offices, the borough has driven out the customers who worked in and
visited those offices.
The Media Business Authority has shown itself to be highly influenced by government, its
policies slanted toward the interests of council instead of supporting its broader business constituency.
In Media Borough the workers, businesses and property owners, customers and clients contribute over
50% of the total borough budget. In 1998 this represented about $3 million in property taxes, business
privilege taxes, mercantile taxes, parking fees and fines, permits, and wage taxes from employees who
live outside the borough. Of this amount the borough contributes about $50,000.00 (less than 1% of
the budget) toward the marketing of the business district.
At least some of that contributed money has been improperly allocated to projects that improve
the public image of council at the expense of those who the fund is designed to benefit. Sponsorship of
non-business related events such as the Great Media Garage Sale, Super Sunday and the Media Town
Fair has sapped the strength of the few remaining retailers. Projects of dubious value to the business
district have been financed solely due to their public relations value to the mayor and Council. Banners
in the residential district, fountains, curb peninsulas, chess tables and similar pedestrian amenities are
highly visible, but do little toward increasing business in the Borough. Town events no longer represent
the "Grass Roots" will of the business district, but are significant promotional tools for Mayor
McMahon and Borough Council.
In the past fifteen years borough government has had total control of commerce in the
community. Everything from parking and signage through zoning and planning has been their exclusive
domain. The marketing and promotion of the town have been administered by the borough since 1984.
Council's stated purpose was to preserve, protect and perpetuate our central business district, but it is
obvious to even a casual observer that their actions were both ill conceived and badly executed. During
the biggest economic expansion in the history of our country, our town managers have mismanaged our
business district into a shadow of what it was when they took office.
Burdensome legislation, mismanagement and overzealous regulation hurt both the residential
and business communities of Media. Empty Stores on State Street lead to lower residential property
values. By restricting higher quality tenants from our central business district, council has opened the
door for lower quality businesses to settle here. Council is trying to legislate the commercial makeup of
the borough and that is just bad business. To legislate a preference for hair salons over financial
institutions is a recipe for financial disaster.
It is a well known "secret" that Media Borough Council put the anti-business zoning ordinance
into effect to delay Merrill Lynch from expanding their operations and to give the mayor time to recruit
a large restaurant and bar into town. The Council did no research into the effect this action would have
on the State Street business district. No survey was done as to effects on the traffic, crime and
cleanliness of the town. No plan exists that will show how the hundreds of added cars each day will be
accommodated in the existing parking inventory.
It is in the best interest of all the citizens of Media to have a prosperous commercial district.
Business planning is not a Monopoly game. Somehow Mayor McMahon and Borough Council must be
prevented from meddling in areas in which they have no experience or expertise. The only rational
method for improving the business climate in Media is to allow free trade to return to State Street.
The State of Commerce in Media Borough - Part Three - Playing with the Truth
In July 1999, several property owners asked council for a written plan on how council saw how
a ban on free trade in the central business district would result in increased business. Mayor McMahon
responded by stating that a written plan was not required. Several members of council claimed the
Atlantic Group Study supported council's action. Atlantic Group support was claimed in public by both
the Borough Solicitor Mr. Daly and later by Chris Pavlou, a Media Planning Commission member and
Media Business Authority co-chair. Mr. Lawrence Houston of the Atlantic Group and author of the
study privately said that his study in no way supported council's actions.
The owners then asked for a list of towns that had successfully renewed their central business
district by prohibiting banks, stock brokers and other businesses. Council replied with blank stares and
stated that they knew of no list. Repeated requests for documentation went unanswered through seven
months of hearings and council meetings. Mayor McMahon and Councilman Robinson had frequently
stated this new regulation would eventually increase property values but refused to provide any hard
data on how other towns had successfully revitalized their central business district by banning financial
institutions and other businesses.
Before the December meeting, council declared their intention to put the anti-business zoning
ordinance into effect. Documentation on how this had actually worked in other towns was once again
requested. Each previous request was rebuffed with no information, but at this meeting council
presented a written plan that they claimed supported their action. Many gathered at that meeting were
skeptical because intensive research had produced no known examples. Those assembled were
confident that no town anywhere had ever increased retail business by prohibiting businesses.
After repeatedly saying that they had no knowledge of any place that had successfully tried their
scheme, council presented a document at that meeting, just before their vote. Acting Councilman Tony
Kennedy claimed to have researched the Internet to find examples that supported Council?osition.
No one present from the business community was given the opportunity to examine the document
before Council?ote. With seven Council members and the mayor all speaking favorably about the
ordinance, passage during the regular council session that followed was assumed and predictably, the
vote was unanimous.
A few weeks later a copy was circulated in the business community. The paper was prepared
for the Reason Public Policy Institute by Joel Kotkin. Mr. Kotkin has impressive credentials having
authored five books and is a regular contributor to the Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The
Washington Post and Forbes. It is a thoroughly documented paper dealing with how cities like Miami
and Houston must change their planing policies to embrace what he calls the New Economy. It
documents how cities must open their markets to new ideas and new types of businesses if they want to
survive and thrive in the future.
The study mentioned nothing about prohibiting businesses. Councilman Kennedy
misrepresented this document. Mr. Kotkin concluded, "Most of all, the economy and culture should
be given free rein to express its spontaneity and diversity - without the deadening hand of
government. Let the city renew itself from the marketplace and the ground up." In other words the
document that they presented in support of their scheme actually speaks against their actions.
The State of Commerce in Media Borough - Part Four - Pseudo Debate
Council?thical failure was not limited to misrepresenting the Kotkin paper. Councilman
Robinson stated that he made an effort to speak to all affected property owners to try to come to some
compromise. This was an outright fabrication. There has been virtually no contact from borough
council to the property owners on this matter. Many property owners have contacted council to
complain about the total lack of communications from Borough Council, the Mayor or the Media
Business Authority. Furthermore, council neglected to follow their own zoning plan that clearly says
that all interested parties must be notified by mail before any hearings or zoning changes can legally take
effect.
Many property owners have been unable to attend the many meetings on this matter. Some
have been frustrated with the lack of respect and consideration they have received when they made the
time to attend. A meeting in August 1999 was called by Mr. Robinson and chaired by Mayor
McMahon. It was attended by Mr. Anderson, Mr. Strine, Mr. Gross, Mr. Brooke, and Mr. Glassman.
Mayor McMahon began the proceedings with the statement that the zoning ordinance was not on the
table for discussion and that no transcript of the meeting would be provided.
The meeting soon degenerated into a shouting match between some of the participants. Mr.
Strine, Mr. Glassman and Mr. Anderson eventually walked out of the meeting in frustration with the
lack of knowledge exhibited by both Councilman Robinson and Mayor McMahon. Neither had any
clear picture of what could be included in a commercial lease. They had started the meeting by
suggesting the property owners change the terms of those leases currently in effect. Objections
immediately arose as to the impracticality or illegality of those recommendations. Those actions
triggered personal attacks by Mr. Robinson and lead to the early departure of most of the participants.
While Mr. Robinson's public demeanor is deceptively polite, his attitude in private can only be
described as arrogant. He has been the council's point man on the rezoning even though his only
experience in a retail environment was a stint as a counter man at Media Hardware and as a customer
representative at Taylor Rents. He is currently employed in a tax bureau and no longer in the private
sector. As a public official, he now has the power over the property owners of the town and he has
consistently displayed an unwillingness to consider any viewpoint other than his own.
Robinson was responsible for Banks being put on the banned list as the original legislation was
advertised. This grew out of an incident early in 1999 when First Keystone Federal applied for
permission to expand their operations into the vacant Charlies Shoe Repair building. FKF had a long
standing agreement with the owner to take over the building when he retired. When they went before
Mr. Robinson's Planning Commission, instead of a friendly helping hand, they received a berating from
the councilman as to how they were somehow doing something horrible to the town. This was
especially galling to the FKF executives as the bank had been one of the most active supporters of
business in Media and the only financial institution to house their home office in Media.
The old adage that "Power corrupts" is certainly applicable here. As with the rest of council and
the mayor, lack of expertise has not inhibited him from imposing his "shoot-from-the-hip" schemes on
an unwilling business district.
The State of Commerce in Media Borough - Part Five - The Futility of Legal Action
On the advice of property owner Judge Anthony Truscello, Mr. Joseph Fioravanti, an attorney
here in Media was contacted. Mr. Fioravanti has impressive credentials as a trial lawyer and was kind
enough to take time from his busy schedule to speak about legal alternatives. Fioravanti is also an
experienced Solicitor so he has a good handle on how things actually work in small town politics.
He determined that there was a good chance of having this law overturned due to council's
failure to abide by their own notification rules, however, he also thought that council would turn right
around and put the entire thing up again with proper notice. He estimated that the cost of this legal
action may run $10,000.00 or more. There was not enough evidence for him to be able advise on the
feasibility of a class action suit based on civil rights violations or unfair condemnation of properties. His
feeling was that these types of suits are extremely difficult to prove and could get very expensive with
no sure promise of success.
It is difficult to understand why council would push through such legislation against the advice
of every major business and property owner in town, without the support of their own consultants, and
in opposition to the Delaware County Planning Commission. Neither the mayor nor anyone on council
has any retail business experience. No one on council has any commercial investment in our town. Yet,
they have not hesitated to impose controversial legislation on unwilling subjects with no written plan, no
supporting research, and no impartial documentation.
As sometimes occurs in small towns, government officials who are in office for long periods of
time believe they have somehow acquired knowledge in areas in which they have no expertise. Because
the power to govern has been granted to them by the residents, they truly believe they have the right to
legislate anything they may come up with, no matter how foolish. As long as the residential community
(voters) are not adversely affected, they can put into effect anything that comes to mind. It is incumbent
on those who are not voters to organize and finance opposition. In the case of Media Borough, the
opposing forces are disorganized and so small as to make an adequate defense difficult.
This "take us to court if you don't like it" attitude her pervaded council's actions since 1986.
Frank Daly designed the system now in effect that puts the added burden on business to get a variance
for even the most reasonable request. The rules have been written so strictly and so narrowly enforced
that virtually every new business must go to the planning commission and borough council for even the
simplest request.
The sign ordinance is one such example. This restriction on common sense has caught almost
every new business in it's convoluted web. The most recent addition to the town is Primos Hoagies.
The owners came to town and were immediately confronted with the borough's restriction on the
number of logos that can be placed on an awning. The borough denied permission to put the Primos
logo on the awning along with a small Thumann Meats logo. Since the Thumann company had agreed
to pay for the awning Primos couldn't afford to place the awning up without them. When the owners
pointed out that Roger Russell had a KODAK logo on the awning along with the company name, he
was told that business had been "grandfathered" and that he should pay $250.00 to apply for a sign
variance.
The State of Commerce in Media Borough - Part Six - Parking Problems Ignored
Council has predictably put a public relations spin on the parking situation by repeatedly
declaring "There is no parking problem in Media." They lay claim to be able to find a space at any time
during the day in defiance of the following facts:
Over one year after council spent $35,000.00 on studies that recommended
additional signage and parking access, nothing has been done to make parking more visible for
those who don't know the town as well as they.
Their comparison to mall parking ignores the fact that Media has created enormous bad will by
collecting over $4 million dollars since 1994 in parking fees and fines from our customers.
Council has actually reduced the availability of parking over the last fifteen years due to
restrictive zoning and unwanted beautification projects.
Fifteen years after the Media Comprehensive Plan recommended new parking signs, temporary
canvas access signs have been installed.
Media needs a professionally prepared plan that will show us how the addition of so many
vehicles can be adequately assimilated in our small community. Media is less than 10% the size of
West Chester and 2% the size of Newark. How many cars are expected and where will they park? Will
this adversely affect the businesses already here? Will the evening traffic generated by the Media
Theater, New Orleans Cafe and the Iron Hill Brewery result in a Friday night meltdown on State Street?
editors note: Iron Hill Brewery opened in June 2000. There is now total gridlock on the unit block of
State Street with local businesses such as Apollo Pizza, County Beverage, Cavanagh Funeral Home,
the Media Theater and John's Grille adversely impacted by the hugh influx of traffic in the evening
hours. Council is expected to reveal their "secret parking lot plans" in the near future (07/15/00)
The new Atlantic Group study calls for the addition of two new four-story lots on Baltimore
Pike to accommodate the over 700 cars that will be drawn to the borough. The availability of parking
should be a priority before new businesses are recruited. The town governors are risking the future
economic welfare of the borough by not planning ahead. It is not to anyone's benefit if the new
businesses coming to Media suffer because council refuses to deal with a parking situation they deny
exists. It is not an unreasonable request that the mayor and council actually plan for the future rather
than "Shoot-from-the-hip" with our town's economy.
|
