February 22, 2006 Issue                                               

©2005 The Chestnut Hill Local

From our readers

Grace Kelly’s dress display

I read with interest the story by Jim Weaver regarding the 50th Anniversary of Grace Kelly and Prince Rainier’s wedding in Monaco in the Feb. 16 edition of the Chestnut Hill Local. Thank you for bringing to light some local history with such an informative article.

There are two comments I will make for the sake of clarity. The article in the Local mentioned that Grace Kelly’s wedding dress will be on exhibit at the Philadelphia Museum of Art throughout the month of April. The dates of the exhibition are April 1 through May 21. Also, to find out more about the exhibit, the better Web site to use is the Museum’s site at www.philamuseum.org. The Web site given at the end of the article is not the PMA site.

Many thanks to Mr. Weaver for his article. Your readers appreciate the good job you do in reporting on our neighborhood and regional news.

Brian Fagan
European Decorative Arts and Sculpture
Philadelphia Museum of Art

Chestnut Hill post-bedlum

News of continued political strife in Haiti reminds me of our own little “Hate-y” in Chestnut Hill. Were the president and vice presidents of the Community Association to continue their involvement, but acknowledge that leadership of a fractious and opinionated community may not be their forte by stepping aside now with dignity, we could sooner enter the post-bedlum era. And for that, I for one, would be most grateful.

Brian Rudnick
Chestnut Hill

Fast and loose

No wonder there was no editorial in the Local of Feb. 16! The editor (or the person who performs the editing) must be exhausted plowing through the tortured syntax, misspellings and grammatical errors, not to mention (sic) truthiness, near truth and total fabrication in opinion pieces and front page “news stories” disguised in sheep’s clothing.

I vow to keep this shorter than the 23 inches of mind-numbing spin leading off the Forum this week.

Instead of casting CHCA board member Jane Becker as selfless heroine, it would have been more honorable for Pamela Waters and the other 14 unidentified directors to have affixed their signatures to the “bill of particulars.” Since, at CHCA members’ expense, an agenda had been hand-delivered to all board members two days before the meeting, wouldn’t it have been more principled to assure delivery of the four-page motion to the director in question — rather than by e-mail (opened after 11 p.m. on the night before the meeting) — particularly since it had been floating, fully formed and formatted, around the community for at least five days?

These issues are especially galling given Ms. Waters’ statement that a social gathering resulted in “a decision made out of concern for the character of the board.” Where was the outrage when a de-facto member of this group regularly, by e-mail, phone and face-to-face contact, verbally abused elderly men and women, board members, Local staff and others? Where was “the protection of board members, other volunteers and employees” cited in the discussion to support for the duration of the current administration of this board? Who protested the rude and uncivil behavior, the “just move on” and “get to the point” or the spinning finger signaling “wrap it up” most often dealt to directors in their 70s and 80s?

Ms. Becker may feel that the future of the CHCA is in the hands of the young, but she’d be well-advised to offer workshops in courtesy, the CHCA Bylaws, lady-like posture and common decency.

As another old timer, I offer the following advice for free. Require more from your mentors, minders and role models. You’d have been better served with a warning regarding “actionable” statements in the Local. You would have been wise to adhere to the confidentiality of matters considered in an executive session of Jan. 29 submitted by Walter Sullivan, self-identified as “parliamentarian.”

In closing, don’t try to perfume a pig by the dissembling of “the slow clap.”

If that happened to our children or grandchildren in school, the kids would know what that means, we’d know, too, and by the end of our conference with the principal, no one would dare call it “tender.” Too bad a director, having spent the afternoon in surgery under general anesthesia, couldn’t quite muster up the required level of positive eye contact and speed-reading to satisfy the refined and exacting tastes of fellow members.

Martha Haley
Chestnut Hill

To the blog

I would like to echo the sentiments expressed by letter writer Eve Horowitz, who suggested that reporting on the “extremely annoying” CHCA in-fighting be relegated to a blog — for people who care enough to want to read the latest antics of our esteemed board members.

Given that most readers of the Local probably don’t know what a blog is, let me propose a slight variation: Why not create a separate section of the paper, along the lines of the Fall Festival and Holiday sections? It could be called the “Special CHCA In-Fighting” section. That way I could identify it easily, and immediately throw it into the recycling bin, as I do with the Inquirer’s Automotive section (among others).

Ok, if that’s too radical, couldn’t we at least make a profit from all of this nonsense? Surely someone in this village has the connections to sell Hollywood on a CHCA-based reality show. We could call it “The Community.” No, wait — that has “unity” in it. We’ll have to think of something else.

Jim Goodman
Chestnut Hill

Lawless — Still!

There seems to be an unseemly rush to fill an alleged vacancy on the CHCA board, which does not, in fact, exist.

The accused person injured no one. His fault was in having the audacity to speak his mind to those with whom he communicated in private conversations and e-mails. That proved to be foolhardy indeed. Given our experience over the last year with members of this administration, he should have known better.

Those individuals, to whom he spoke, chose to make public, among close associates and “very dear friends,” comments meant for their own ears alone. It is they, not he, who are at fault.

They chose to make much of nothing. They chose to mis-characterize his comments and to take them out of context. They chose to organize, behind the scenes, to get him off the board. They chose to hide their purpose and their identities from the electorate by illegally going into executive session. They chose, again, to violate the Bylaws and Robert’s Rules of Order.

In so doing, they violated not only the rights of this individual and the rights of the community to know what they are doing, but the most basic elements of civility, of a fair, open and correct democratic process, guided by rules which have been agreed upon by decades of earlier volunteers and characterized by open, accessible meetings and a process that respects the rights of all, as well as of accepting responsibility for the results of their own actions.

There is more to civility than sugared tones and modulated voices. There is more to community than money. Heart is necessary. Accountability is essential. The willingness to listen to others is crucial. Community, however complex, is more than a business, however well-off, and is impoverished without heart.

What is at issue now is not only the independence of the editor in monitoring the content of the Local and in expressing his or her own opinion in editorials. It has now come to the issue of free speech in private conversations and in the written communications of an individual.

The community deserves better. If board members want civility, they, themselves, must act civilly. They have not done so.

There is no vacancy to be filled. The accused, winner of a three-year term in last May’s election and garnering 172 votes at that time, remains installed as a board member, despite their assertions to the contrary. Unlawful actions do not produce lawful results.

Ann Ward Spaeth
Chestnut Hill

Bylaw inquiries

In an e-mail of Feb. 4, 2006, Walter Sullivan, the Chestnut Hill Community Association board parliamentarian, said, “I am somewhat troubled by the procedural question regarding Trial of Members of Societies (a section of Robert’s Rules of Order) which Mary Anna raised Jan. 26 (at the CHCA board meeting). I was familiar with the provision and it was my opinion then that it did not pertain. I have again reviewed that provision and I remain of the opinion that it does not pertain.”

The provision referred to is that any board member accused of inappropriate actions resulting in a motion to remove him or her from the board should have “due process” and should be notified well in advance of this action so that he or she can prepare their defense.

Our Bylaws simply say that it requires a two-thirds vote of the board to remove a board member. This dichotomy needs to be addressed and, as co-chair of the Bylaws committee, I shall introduce this at our first meeting. But, regardless of any provision in either the Robert’s Rules or the Bylaws, I feel there was a very serious injustice done at the January board meeting and I appreciate Walt’s further consideration of this matter.

First: anyone who is accused of anything should, by all American standards, be given plenty of time to prepare his or her response to such accusation.

Second: the executive session was, in my opinion, illegally held because the full board should have made the decision as to whether or not it should be held and, if held, when it should be held. These continuous infringements of the Bylaws must stop.

The matter should have been at a separate meeting because of the lack of time for a response and for the unforgivable, extreme discourtesy to our host, the Chestnut Hill Hospital, and Rodney Rider, CEO, and vice president Barbara Wilson. Barbara and others were kept waiting until 10 p.m. when the executive session, in which the matter was handled, was ended.

This meeting was not thoughtfully and respectfully planned, and whoever was responsible for setting the procedure this way owes an immediate and serious apology to the hospital officers and to all of us on the board.

Exhausted by an extremely intense session, many of us board members were not able to stay until the conclusion of the meeting at midnight. We have set 10 p.m. as the time to close our meetings unless we vote to the contrary. It almost seems trivial to mention it considering all that went on that night, but no such motion was ever made.

Add that to the fact that a number of neighbors had come to the meeting to express their thoughts about the Winston Road matter, and another inexcusable discourtesy was inflicted on more Chestnut Hill people because they could not remain for the two or more hours that the executive session consumed.

There is more – the Bylaws clearly state that the nominating committee is to be elected at the January meeting of the CHCA board of directors. Apparently in planning the executive session that night, no thought was given to the likelihood that there would not be time for that, and another infringement of the Bylaws occurred. Add to that the fact that the location was changed two days before the meeting and the general public was therefore kept from coming if they had wanted to. Walt spoke of the illegality of that in another e-mail.

The word that keeps coming to my mind about that whole meeting is fiasco! As Ann McNally said at the end of the executive session, it is time for this kind of interaction at the board meeting to end once and for all, and I will add that we must return to sessions which are dignified, professional and which stick to the subject matter.

We have conducted meetings in the way I have described above for the most of the time in our 50 years of existence and we can do it again. I urge the president, Maxine Dornemann, to see to it that the meetings are conducted in this fashion and that all of us live up to a reasonable standard of decency and courtesy. The time to start is at our meetings.

I hope very much that all of the board members agree and will join with all of us who feel so strongly about this.

I look forward to seeing all of the board members in February – hopefully with smiles on all of our faces and with resolution to conduct the community association’s agenda with dignity and respect for the association and for each other.

Mary Anna Ross Cowper
Member of the CHCA Board of Directors

Traffic nightmare

As a business person on the lower Hill for the past five years, I have seen the traffic situation on Germantown Avenue daily. In the past couple of months, there have been five accidents in front of my shop, the Night Kitchen, one of them injuring a pedestrian! People drive too fast on Germantown Avenue because there is no stop sign or light between Cresheim Valley Drive and Willow Grove Avenue. That is an awfully long stretch of road without any form of speeding restraint.

There are a few inexpensive solutions that would help make the lower hill safer and more pedestrian friendly. Crosswalks with flashing lights, stop signs or digital speed monitors would help, not to mention a traffic light or two. I fully support attempts to modify the section of Winston Road that is also a speeding and driving hazard. Pedestrian issues and general safety should be addressed with timely action, especially with all of the new shops and customers in our community.

Amy Edelman
Night Kitchen Bakery
Chestnut Hill

A new gem

We have in our midst a new gem. It is the Hill House on West Evergreen Avenue, just a step or two from the R8 SEPTA train to Philadelphia, within striding distance of some handy, often attractive shops on or near Germantown Avenue. For our community, the Hill House forms an important residential junction and for the first time since my return to Chestnut Hill eight years ago (when in my widowhood I looked for an appropriate dwelling near family and friends), I am finding that my choice really fills the bill.

When eight years ago friends living in the building grumbled, I wondered, but what other choice in familiar territory? So in I came, soon to discover how much was amiss. My feathers were repeatedly ruffled, the residents’ frequent appeals had no positive effect on the owner. Though to be fair, it must be said that a valiant exterior repainting and window installation job did take place which we residents were certainly grateful for, even if it was done with minimal regard for tenants.

Now, however, after years of disconcertingly frequent management and staff changes, a transformation has taken place. The wonderful new manager, Lisa Seonia and Tony Andrews, head of maintenance, have given the whole place a reassuring feeling of security in a friendly, thoughtful, respectful, courteous, competent, efficient, comfortable setting.

Within limits, the entrance is decent and kept tidy. Encouraging attempts have been made to make all comers welcome in the lobby, while on each floor the improved lighting does its best to lift our spirits. Now everyone can go about his/her business, secure in the fact that we are hospitably getting what we pay for and Chestnut Hill’s self-respecting image is being maintained.

Marjorie A. vonMoschzisker
Chestnut Hill