The Good Intentions of “Yes”: Women’s group combines comedy with cause.

June 1, 2015 | by Lori M. Myers

Vicki Fox, photo by Meredith Kaminek

When all-around funny person Jennie Adams, a member of the improvisation group No Artificial Sweeteners, was contacted by Vicki Fox, founder of Women of Intention (WOI), the request seemed simple enough—put on a performance for an upcoming WOI event.

When Adams explained that the group only performs at charitable fundraisers and was not for hire, Fox offered more details that changed Adams’ mind. Her event was to help the C.A.R.E. Program at Allison Hill Community Ministry so that the group could receive much-needed funds. That new bit of information and the now resounding “yes” from Adams sealed the deal.

No Artificial Sweeteners is an all-female, all-volunteer improv group that has put on shows in the past to benefit organizations such as the PA Breast Cancer Coalition, Caitlin’s Smiles and The MakeSpace. WOI is a community of women committed to changing the world. When the two merge, you get an evening of hilarity, connection and support for everyone involved, but particularly for a local after-school program that serves about 30 Allison Hill children, providing them with meals, tutoring and field trips.

“When Vicki called, I couldn’t say no,” Adams recalls. “The match-up was just too perfect.”

Fox couldn’t agree more. She’d been looking to create another entertaining evening for her group of women but, at the same time, wanted to extend her reach to help the local community.

“I believe women are the change agents making this world a more humane planet,” Fox says. “We are the ones who tend and befriend and are mindful of the generations that will follow. In order to be able to give, a trait that women excel in, we have to have something to give. In order to nurture, we need to nurture, replenish, rejuvenate and refresh ourselves. What does that better than laughter?”

Improv comedy, as many know, is an unscripted, seat-of-your-pants art form where the actors create characters, dialogue and story as they go. It’s edgy and scary for the people on stage; it’s refreshing and fun and in-the-moment for audiences. The mantra that improv comedians follow is “Yes, and…”, meaning they accept and go with any scenario they are presented with and, in a sense, jump into the comedic fire with everything they’ve got.

While comedy was not Fox’s objective when she organized WOI in 2006, most of the other descriptions of improv probably apply as to why the group exists in the first place. It was at her 55th birthday party attended by 38 female friends where she asked each to share their intentions. They did so with such passion, Fox recalls, that she sought to continue that intention-sharing experience—thus the name Women of Intention, whose tagline is “Ordinary Women Making an Extraordinary Difference.”

In a way, Fox’s journey headed toward that improv rule of “Yes, and….” Saying “yes” to coming up with the idea of WOI, going with her gut, and creating events where like-minded women—teachers, doctors, activists, artists, entrepreneurs—are nurtured, informed and connected and where they give to each other and to others.

So women making other women laugh for a good cause? Yes, and…it all makes sense.

“No Artificial Sweeteners proved my point of how women find it natural to come together to make the world a better place,” Fox says. “While they perform in different troupes, they feel drawn to gather in supporting each other and donating their time and energy to support causes that improve our community. It will benefit the WOI women because not only will we be having an evening filled with laughter, camaraderie and fun, we will have the joy of knowing we are helping people in our local community.”

The Women of Intention benefit for the C.A.R.E. Program at Allison Hill Community Ministry will take place on Thursday, June 18, 6:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m., at Passage to India Restaurant, 520 Race St., Harrisburg. For more information and registration, visit www.womenofintention.com.

Editorial Judgment

May 27, 2015 | by Lawrance Binda

Cornelius Johnson and Westburn Majors, two of the victors in the recent Democratic primary for Harrisburg City Council.

In the Burg Blog, I’ve written previously about my distaste for editorial boards and professional editorial writers.

My dislike has nothing to do with certain individual columnists or newspapers. I just find it confounding and presumptuous that people, sitting in an office building somewhere, can cast judgment on issues that they’ve never covered and really know little about.

They’re not at the meetings; they don’t witness the often-subtle dynamics between the players; they don’t interview anyone; chances are, they rarely even step foot in the places (like Harrisburg city hall) they’re writing about.

How can you have an informed opinion about something in which you have such limited knowledge? Yet, there they are—people whose main job is to have opinions about stuff. How strange.

That thought occurred to me again the other day when PennLive’s editorial board weighed in on Harrisburg’s recently concluded primary election. The rather sloppy editorial seemed to suggest that Harrisburg Mayor Eric Papenfuse, in alliance with businessman Alex Hartzler, unduly influenced the election.

I’m not writing this blog post to defend Papenfuse or Hartzler, who, no wallflowers, are perfectly capable of defending themselves (Hartzler also is publisher of TheBurg). My issue is that the editorial demonstrates scant knowledge of what actually happened in that election and, just as much, with the election process itself.

A mayor, any mayor, has an interest in seeing that his agenda is passed. Mayors do this in numerous ways, including compromise, cajoling, begging, alliance-building, promising, cutting deals, even intimidation. They also often try to get their supporters elected to the legislative body, in this case, City Council.

Over the past year or so, Papenfuse has employed various tactics to pass legislation that he deems important to the future of Harrisburg. At some point, he concluded that several council members, including Wanda Williams and Brad Koplinski, were obstacles to this agenda. Therefore, he went on the offensive, seeking to unseat Koplinski and neutralize the power of Williams, the council president.

When Papenfuse vocally urged Harrisburg residents to reject Koplinski and vote for his preferred candidates (Cornelius Johnson, Jeffrey Baltimore and Westburn Majors), I thought his stance might be too aggressive, that it might turn off voters or even mobilize supporters of the other candidates. But he gambled that, in the end, more residents would be motivated to vote for his slate than vote against it, that he could have out-sized influence in what would be a very low-turnout election. To his credit, he was right.

Papenfuse’s bold support of and campaigning for Johnson and Majors, two men with little name recognition a few months back, almost certainly helped their election. Likewise, his condemnation of the incumbent Koplinski, the candidate with perhaps the greatest name recognition (and recently a candidate for lieutenant governor), almost certainly led to his loss.

As for Hartlzer—I don’t understand why the PennLive editorial mentioned him three times. Yes, he is a member of Harrisburg Capital PAC, but the PAC’s donations were hardly excessive ($5,000 to Johnson and $1,500 to Majors, according to Dauphin County Elections Bureau). The PAC also paid for a poll early in the election cycle (the negative mailings that Koplinski repeatedly warned would result from the poll never materialized).

The sad truth is that, in the United States, elections are financed privately. Any serious Harrisburg council candidate should expect to spend at least $5,000 for campaign signs, literature and mailings. I don’t like it—PennLive evidently doesn’t—but that’s the way it is.

That said: money guarantees nothing. Koplinski received $500 from Vision for PA PAC, $1,000 from IBEW 98 out of Philadelphia and $2,000 from a guy named Alex Shchegol of Staten Island, N.Y., among other contributors. And he still lost, as did other candidates who raised money.

And that brings me to the most important point.

The PennLive editorial, while crediting (or blaming) Papenfuse and Hartzler for the primary results, ignores one of the most important and obvious factors in the election: the candidates themselves. The editorial reads as if a Big Brother-like force selected these candidates to run and then people hypnotically marched to the polls to nominate them.

In fact, Johnson was a superb candidate who ran an energetic, well-organized campaign. He was everywhere: at neighborhood events, at doorsteps, at debates, where he presented himself as caring, hardworking and knowledgeable. He also raised a significant sum of money from sources other than Harrisburg Capital PAC. Voters—particularly “super voters” who vote in every election and were rightly targeted by Johnson—responded to that effort. Did the mayor’s endorsement help? Yes, but Johnson deserves much credit for his own victory.

Destini Hodges, who was not endorsed by Papenfuse, also ran an energetic campaign. Voters similarly responded to her effort, and she won the two-year council seat by a surprisingly large margin.

I was not impressed with the campaigns of the other candidates, even the winners. Incumbent Baltimore, who placed second for three, four-year council seats, did not run a particularly vigorous campaign, but he is well liked and well regarded, and his election was never seriously in doubt. Majors may have benefited most from Papenfuse’s nod, eking out a 19-vote win for the final four-year seat.

As per Koplinski—he depended too much on the perceived power of incumbency and not enough on selling himself again to the voters of Harrisburg. If he had, he might have been able to overcome Papenfuse’s anti-endorsement—or even used it to his advantage. If anyone could fend off, or even turn the tables on Papenfuse, it should have been Koplinski, a two-term councilman whose day job is professional political consultant.

In the end, PennLive seems baffled by Papenfuse, whom the editorial condescendingly describes as a “two-time failed candidate for elected office with no political experience” until two years ago. How could he now have so much power and influence?

I can tell you how: Papenfuse has learned. Over the years, he’s learned how to be successful in politics, how to go from sideline firebrand to skilled tactician who got himself elected and now is helping to elect others. He has a clear idea of what he wants to do and plots a path to achieve it. He also is focused and works harder than other politicians in the city.

You may disagree with Papenfuse’s agenda; I don’t agree with all of it. However, even in disagreement, I can see that he has grown immeasurably as a political practitioner. In that sense, he deserves respect—enthusiastic or grudging, depending on your viewpoint—not sour grapes or condescension.

Harrisburg deserves a fuller accounting and more sophisticated analysis of an important election from its “paper of record.” The vote totals resulted from some combination of the candidates themselves, their campaign strategies, the voters, the low turnout and, yes, the influence of Papenfuse (both pro- and anti-). The backers of the candidates, whether Hartzler, Shchegol, Jimmy Pianka or Dan Miller, also played small roles.

The election, like most elections, was a complex beast, dependent upon many factors that mixed, mingled and overlapped. The superficial, rather lazy, analysis by PennLive shows little understanding of that complexity.

Turned Out

May 20, 2015 | by Lawrance Binda

Turnout was sparse yesterday at polling stations throughout Harrisburg, including at the Neighborhood Center in Midtown.

As you may know, there’s an old adage in real estate about what’s most important: location, location, location.

In politics, the corollary might be: turnout, turnout, turnout.

Ideally, elections are supposed to measure the mood of the electorate, but most don’t. In off-year elections, particularly off-year, primary elections, only a small slice of the body politic is measured–the people who bother showing up to vote. As a candidate or a candidate-backer, you need to get your people to the polls. Otherwise, believe me, you will lose.

That point was proven yesterday in the Democratic primary for Harrisburg City Council. Hours before the polls closed, I told my wife that I believed the three council candidates endorsed by Mayor Eric Papenfuse (Cornelius Johnson, Jeffrey Baltimore and Westburn Majors) were likely to win and that incumbent Councilman Brad Koplinski–vocally denounced by Papenfuse–would probably lose his seat.

I’m no political genius, but I saw two trends emerge in the final week or so that convinced me that the mayor would have his way.

First, I assessed which candidates were running the best campaigns. In low-turnout elections, campaigns matter a lot, and no one ran a more organized, professional and energetic campaign than Johnson. For the past two months, Johnson systematically knocked on doors throughout the city, met with residents, and asked for their votes. At debates, he was personable, thoughtful and respectful. He raised money and smartly deployed it building up his name recognition through direct mail. As a result, the 26-year-old Johnson, virtually unknown to swaths of the city before the campaign, was the top vote-getter in the election.

Majors also ran a good campaign, though perhaps without the youthful vigor of Johnson, as did Destini Hodges, the winner of the two-year seat. The rest of the field ran campaigns that ranged from mediocre to practically invisible. Koplinski seemed to make a classic politician’s mistake, depending too much on the power of incumbency. As a result, he placed fourth in a field of eight (nine if you count Koscina Lowe), which is pretty awful for a sitting office-holder, especially one as widely known as Koplinski.

Secondly, I believed that a low turnout election would benefit Papenfuse’s slate. People need a reason to vote for a candidate–and some need a reason to show up to vote at all, particularly in a mid-May primary. Papenfuse provided that motivation and guidance for voters who like him or agree with his pro-business/balanced budget/Reed rollback approach to the office. Meanwhile, anti-Papenfuse sentiment in the city, while it exists, seems rather feeble and unorganized.

I’ll be honest–when Papenfuse announced on TheBurg Podcast a few weeks back that he was publicly supporting Johnson, Baltimore and Majors, I thought that a mayoral endorsement was a risky (if bold) move. I thought the same when he vocally urged residents to vote against Koplinski and when he became ever-more critical of council President Wanda Williams.

Papenfuse, though, has proven himself a savvy tactician. He gambled that, in a low turnout election, he could have outsized influence, perhaps even enough to sway the election–and that the louder and clearer he announced his choices, the better.

He was right, which I realized in something of an epiphany when I sauntered to the polls at around 2 p.m. yesterday and was just the 72nd person in my ward to vote. The turnout was so sparse that the punchy poll-workers actually applauded my arrival.

Assuming the election’s unofficial results hold (Koplinski is down just 18 votes from the final four-year slot), Papenfuse now must ensure that he retains the allegiance of his slate. Former Mayor Steve Reed was famous (perhaps infamous) for running a “Reed team,” only to lose their support as his erstwhile allies, once in office, increasingly recoiled at his dismissive, bullying attitude towards council.

Papenfuse is an ambitious man with a broad agenda. When the new council takes office next year, he will have an opportunity to push through a number of items that, so far, he’s been denied (sustainability officer, anyone?). However, to do so, he needs to keep his support on council in tact.

Johnson and Majors owe Papenfuse some measure of thanks for their wins. However, after an initial period of adjustment, nearly all new council members find their voices, priorities and preferred constituencies. Expect the same here. Come January, the mayor may have more allies on City Council, but he still will have to work hard–and wisely–to retain their support, to line up the votes he needs to pass his legislative agenda.

In the meantime, Papenfuse can take pleasure in knowing that he, again, has out-maneuvered his political foes. Perhaps he and his team understand something that oddly seems to be lost on other local politicians and their backers. Half-measures and wishful thinking don’t win elections. Effort does. Strategy does. Organization does. To win, you must do what needs to be done to turn out your voters.

Mayor’s Slate Victorious in City Council Primary

May 20, 2015 | by Lawrance Binda

Campaign signs from earlier today outside a polling station.

Mayor Eric Papenfuse wasn’t on the ballot, but he may have emerged the greatest victor in today’s Democratic primary for Harrisburg City Council.

The three candidates endorsed by Papenfuse–incumbent Jeffrey Baltimore and challengers Cornelius Johnson and Westburn Majors–won nominations for four-year terms on council. Challenger Destini Hodges tallied the most votes for the lone two-year seat.

No Republicans ran in the primary, meaning the winners of the Democratic primary will be strongly favored in November’s general election.

Moreover, Papenfuse vocally denounced incumbent Brad Koplinski, pleading with residents to vote against him. Koplinski placed fourth, losing to Majors by just 18 votes for the nomination for the final four-year seat.

“This is a big night for Harrisburg, absolutely phenomenal,” said Papenfuse after the final votes were reported. “I’m elated that we’re finally going to get new leadership to move the city forward.”

He added that he believed the public, with its vote, sent a message that it was “tired of the dysfunction on City Council.” Papenfuse advocated for new blood on council to help move his agenda forward and to replace Councilwoman Wanda Williams as council president.

Primary results were as follows: Johnson, 1,474; Baltimore, 1,429; Majors, 1,257; Koplinski, 1239; Ellis “Rick” Roy, 1,048; Rhonda Mays, 760; Jeremiah Chamberlin, 719; Ron Chapel, 332; Koscina Lowe, 226.

In the race for city treasurer, Tyrell Spradley defeated challenger Brian Ostella by a count of 1,279 to 1,221. Council appointed Spradley last year to fill the unexpired term of former city Treasurer John Campbell, who was arrested on theft charges.

For Harrisburg school board, Jennifer Smallwood, Monica Blackston-Bailey, Matthew Krupp and Melvin Wilson Jr. won nominations for four-year seats. Daunessy Penn and Lionel Gonzalez were tied for the final four-year slot, each with 1,159 votes. Judd Pittman defeated LaTasha Frye for the nomination for the sole two-year seat.

Harrisburg Zoning Board Approves Moose Lodge Conversion

May 19, 2015 | by Lawrance Binda

WCI Partners may be interested in converting the historic Moose Lodge into a mixed use project.

The historic Moose Lodge in Midtown Harrisburg

The landmark Moose Lodge Temple in Midtown Harrisburg took a step closer to revival and reoccupation tonight, as the city’s Zoning Hearing Board approved a plan to renovate it as mixed-use space.

The board unanimously granted a variance to WCI Partners LP for 33 apartments on three upper floors with commercial space on the ground floor. WCI needed the variance because the size of the apartment units, about 500 square feet apiece, is less than the 1,200-square-foot size permitted under the zoning code for the 900-block of N. 3^rd Street.

WCI President David Butcher told the board that the apartment sizes needed to be small due to beams that run vertically through the building, limiting design options. He also said the project would not be economically feasible without the apartment density.

Board members seemed skeptical that WCI could not create a floor plan to accommodate larger units. However, they voted in favor of the variance largely because they want to see the building redeveloped, as it has sat empty and increasingly blighted for a decade.

“This case is a case that must recognize the reality of the facts in this neighborhood,” said board member Thomas Leonard. “The reality is that this property has been vacant for 10 years.”

Leonard also cited a lack of community opposition. Several community organizations in Midtown submitted letters supporting the project, and David Morrison, the interim executive director of Historic Harrisburg Association, spoke in favor of it before the board.

Butcher assured the board that the apartments, while small, would have high-end finishes that would appeal to young professionals. He estimated that the units would rent for around $1,000 per month.

WCI is purchasing the four-story building at the corner of N. 3^rd and Boas streets for $900,000 from Atlanta-based Mosaica Education, a for-profit charter school company that is in receivership.

The purchase includes several adjacent parcels of land—three dilapidated townhouses and a 40-vehicle parking lot. Butcher said that WCI also plans to renovate the townhouses into apartments and retail space and would landscape the area around the parking lot to make it more attractive.

Harrisburg City Council now must approve WCI’s land use plan. If all goes smoothly, the project should start by the end of summer with completion expected in 12 to 18 months, said Butcher.

For five years, the former Moose Lodge housed the Ronald Brown Charter School. However, the building has been empty since 2005, when the school district’s board of control refused to reauthorize the school’s charter.

The Harrisburg Moose Lodge Temple was built in 1924, designed in the Beaux Arts style by renowned Harrisburg architect Clayton J. Lappley.

Disclosure: Alex Hartzler, publisher of TheBurg, is a principal with WCI Partners.

TheBurg Podcast, May 15, 2015

May 15, 2015 | by Admin

Welcome to TheBurg Podcast, a weekly roundup of news in and around Harrisburg.

May 15, 2015: This week, Larry and Paul talk about some surprise reversals over a tax-break policy at City Council, the departure of the school district’s chief recovery officer and the upcoming municipal primary.

Special thanks to Paul Cooley, who wrote our theme music. Check out his podcast, the PRC Show, available on SoundCloud and in the iTunes store.

TheBurg Podcast can be downloaded by clicking on the date above or by visiting the iTunes store. You can also access the podcast via its host page.

Two City District Justice Seats Up For Grabs in May Primary

May 14, 2015 | by Paul Barker

A challenge against a sitting judge accused of ethics violations and a five-way race for an open judicial seat are among the races in which Harrisburg residents will cast their votes next Tuesday, May 19, in the municipal primary.

The seats up for election oversee two districts, one encompassing parts of Uptown and North Allison Hill and the other Shipoke, South Allison Hill and Hall Manor.

In the Uptown district, Sonya Baltimore McKnight, a parent engagement specialist at Ben Franklin School, is running against Robert Jennings III, an incumbent who was charged last November by the state Judicial Conduct Board of ethics violations.

The charges, which resulted in Jennings’ suspension with pay while he awaits prosecution, including demanding kickbacks from constables, sitting on citations against him and friends and making sexual remarks to women.

Downtown, a five-way race pits Paul Zozos, the son of a sitting judge in another district, against Bill Cluck, an environmental lawyer, Marva Brown, a social worker, Angel Fox, a casework manager for a state representative and Ausha Green, an employee at the state Department of Education.

The sitting judge in the district, Lavon Postelle, is not running for reelection.

The two Uptown candidates are running on the Democratic ticket, as are all five downtown candidates. Zozos has also cross-filed as a Republican candidate.

Magisterial district judges serve in the minor court system created under the 1968 Pennsylvania Constitution. They hear lower-level cases including traffic violations, landlord-tenant disputes, and civil claims for damages below $12,000.

Their courts also hold original jurisdiction over criminal cases. District judges issue warrants and determine whether to send misdemeanor and felony charges to the county Court of Common Pleas.

Harrisburg currently has five magisterial districts, with judges each serving six-year terms. There are no term limits.

The position comes with an annual salary of $88,000. The city’s district judge offices, funded by the county, have annual budgets this year ranging between $388,000 to $610,000.

A district judgeship has often been a plum prize—and more than once in this city, something of a family business—with candidates occasionally going to great lengths to make a bid for the seat.

In 2002, for example, the state Supreme Court established two new magisterial districts in the city. The next year, one of the freshly created seats attracted a three-way race between Joseph Lahr, Virginia Weaver Zozos and Lavon Postelle.

All three filed as both Democrats and Republicans, and all three mutually attempted to strike each other’s nominations from the ballot. Only Postelle, who currently holds the seat, survived the challenges.

Lahr was at the time the committeeman for the Dauphin County Republicans. He resigned that post the day he filed his nominating papers, but Dauphin County Judge Joseph Kleinfelter ruled that was too late to avoid a conflict.

Zozos, meanwhile, listed a home address in the 1200-block of Hudson Street—even though her family home was in the 600-block of S. 25^th St., in a separate district, where her husband, George Zozos, was already a magisterial judge.

Her challengers claimed she didn’t actually live in the district, a requirement for candidacy, offering among other evidence the Hudson Street property’s suspiciously low water bills.

Zozos admitted in court that the sole purpose of buying the other property was to support her judicial campaign. In striking her from the ballot, Judge Kleinfelter called her residency there a “thinly veiled sham.”

TheBurg Podcast, May 8, 2015

May 8, 2015 | by Admin

Welcome to TheBurg Podcast, a weekly roundup of news in and around Harrisburg.

May 8, 2015: This week, Larry and Paul talk about potential lawsuits against lawyers involved in the city’s borrowings and the team of architects and designers that will be leading an update to the city’s comprehensive plan. Also, a brief update on those Midtown and Uptown bars whose licenses the city is trying to revoke, and some news about a restaurant opening in Midtown.

Special thanks to Paul Cooley, who wrote our theme music. Check out his podcast, the PRC Show, on SoundCloud or on iTunes. Especially his latest episode about his new roommate!

TheBurg Podcast can be downloaded by clicking on the date above or by visiting the iTunes store. You can also access the podcast via its host page, here.

Harrisburg Architect To Steer City’s Comprehensive Plan

May 7, 2015 | by Paul Barker

A screenshot of the new interactive zoning map on Harrisburg’s planning page.

Harrisburg has awarded a contract to a consulting team for the first update in more than 40 years to its comprehensive plan, a document that will guide development across the city for the next two decades.

The $200,000 contract went to a team led by Bret Peters, of the Harrisburg firm Office for Planning and Architecture, that includes designers, planners and engineers from both local and global firms.

Mayor Eric Papenfuse and city planner Geoffrey Knight, sporting ties with street-grid designs from Philadelphia and New York City, respectively, said the update was long overdue and would help speed the city’s recovery.

Papenfuse described the plan as “the vision of the residents, and the business owners, and the stakeholders, and everyone who has a stake in Harrisburg and its future development.”

The mayor added that he expects the plan to be ready for formal approval in April 2016 and that it will probably result in a revision of the city’s zoning code.

Knight said the plan, when finished, would overhaul an existing comprehensive plan dating back to 1974. “So we’re in arrears by about 20 years with updating and adopting a new one,” he said.

Peters is a longtime Harrisburg architect who worked on a redesign of the Broad Street Market in the 1990s and has drafted plans for converting uptown portions of 2^nd Street back from a one-way, three-lane street to a two-way road with a median.

His consulting team will include representatives of Arup, a global engineering firm; K&W Engineers and Consultants, a Harrisburg civil engineering firm; Stacy Spann of AB3 Development Advisory, a Washington, D.C.-based expert in housing policy; and Cooltown Studios, which will design a website to solicit public input on the plan.

Peters described his team as “international-caliber consultants” who could inform Harrisburg of “some of the best practices that are happening all over the world.”

Both Peters and the administration said the planning process would be driven by public input, both through the website designed by his team and through public meetings, beginning with a steering committee meeting at HACC’s Midtown campus tonight at 6 p.m.

“People who live in places see them differently than people coming in from far away for a short period of time,” Peters said. “So interviewing folks is one of the best ways to understand the actual fabric of the environment and understand what’s valued in that fabric.”

Harrisburg’s state-sponsored financial recovery plan, adopted in late 2013, had urged the city to adopt a new plan as one of myriad recommendations for improving governance and policy and spurring new development.

But an effort to hire consultants for the plan under Mayor Linda Thompson was scuttled when City Council and residents complained the contract, which had been quietly awarded to the Camp Hill firm Mullin & Lonergan, was not properly vetted.

The Papenfuse administration sidestepped such a controversy this time by sending two resolutions initiating the comprehensive planning process in February and June of last year.

Council passed the first resolution, which authorized the city planning commission and administration to begin the process of soliciting a new comprehensive plan, at a Feb. 25 legislative session.

The second resolution, which council passed on June 24, was primarily for the purpose of appropriating grant funds to repair two city pools, but also authorized the administration to spend up to $245,000 for consultants on the comprehensive plan.

Meanwhile, a 23-member steering committee, which the administration says it selected with input from council, has been meeting over the past year to draft a request for proposals, interview candidates and ultimately award a contract.

Among the committee members are Councilwoman Susan Brown-Wilson, Harrisburg Redevelopment Authority Director Bryan Davis, Capital Region Water CEO Shannon Williams and Dave Botero, the city’s community policing coordinator, all of whom attended a Thursday press conference announcing the contract award.

Papenfuse mentioned the 2^nd Street conversion, which his administration petitioned the state to approve earlier this year, as an example of an existing part of the cityscape he would like to see re-envisioned in the comprehensive plan.

Papenfuse and Knight also used the press conference to demonstrate changes to the planning department’s page on the city website, which now includes an interactive, color-coded zoning map showing characteristics of land parcels across the city.

The city website also includes a dedicated link to information on the comprehensive plan.

This story has been updated with information about a City Council resolution in February 2014 that initiated the comprehensive planning process.

State Takes First Civil Action Over Harrisburg Debt Crisis

May 6, 2015 | by Paul Barker

The seven-story garage in Harrisburg University’s downtown building, at the corner of 4th and Market streets, was the basis of a $3.6 million payment to a Kansas City bank in 2013.

The state coordinator overseeing Harrisburg’s recovery served a summons last month on the downtown offices of a national law firm, marking the first effort to seek damages from professionals who worked on the capital city’s borrowings.

The summons names Fred Reddig, the state-appointed coordinator of the city’s financial recovery plan, as a plaintiff acting “on behalf of the city of Harrisburg” in a claim against the law firm Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney.

The summons was filed in late March in Dauphin County court and served on the law firm on April 16, according to court records.

The one-page summons reveals little about the scope and basis of the claim against the firm, aside from the parties involved, the attorney for Reddig and the fact that the state will seek money damages in excess of $50,000.

Reddig’s office, at the state Department of Community Economic Development, did not respond to several requests over the past week for a comment on the claim. Peter Kreher, listed on the summons as Reddig’s attorney, said he currently had no comment on it.

But sources familiar with the action say it likely stems from legal work attorneys at Buchanan performed on a bond deal in 2006 and early 2007, when the city sought to build a new facility for the year-old Harrisburg University at 4th and Market streets downtown.

That deal planted the seeds of a $3.6 million payment to holders of university-related debt in 2013, as state-appointed officials worked to pull the capital city back from the brink of bankruptcy.

The payment, which came out of the $267 million paid for a 40-year lease of the city’s parking system, was effectively the price for freeing up a garage on university premises so that it could be included in the lease.

“We needed to get the garage in the lease deal,” said Richard Kotz, executive director of the Harrisburg Parking Authority. “We actually had to pay Harrisburg University some money to get the title released.”

In fact, the payment ultimately went not to the university but to UMB Bank of Kansas City, Mo., the trustee for holders of the university bonds. In 2012 and 2013, the university missed two interest payments totaling a little more than $3.6 million—the amount UMB recouped in the garage payment.

“That’s the math I’m sure the bondholders used,” said Harrisburg University President Eric Darr, adding that the price “wasn’t the university’s call.”

Harrisburg doesn’t stand to receive money from any successful suit over the payment, if one is pursued. A 2013 settlement between the city and its creditors stipulates that any awards stemming from the UMB payment will go to bond insurer Assured Guaranty Municipal and Dauphin County.

But it provides a glimpse, however brief, into the state’s strategy for pursuing claims against professionals involved in Harrisburg’s borrowings.

It comes a year and a half after William Lynch, the state-appointed receiver for Harrisburg whom Reddig succeeded, cautiously acknowledged that lawsuits could be a “means to obtain redress” for the decisions that led to the city’s debt crisis.

A small but critical role

It’s not clear how the UMB payment might form the basis of a civil claim. The summons is a minimal, preliminary action and may serve no greater purpose than to extend the state’s timeline for deciding whether to file a complaint in the future.

Nonetheless, the December 2013 settlement agreement between Dauphin County, the city, the Harrisburg Authority and Assured Guaranty Municipal explicitly mentions potential civil claims over the payment to UMB.

Additionally, other publicly available documents, including bond statements, property records and closing documents from the parking lease, chart the story of the small but critical role the Kansas City bank came to play in the city’s debt deal.

The story begins in 2006, when the city sought to build a new downtown home for Harrisburg University, a non-profit school with a focus on science, mathematics and technology that had opened its doors to students in August 2005.

A key piece of the project was the construction of a seven-story, 390-space garage in the 16-story university tower. The Harrisburg Parking Authority agreed to pay $14 million for the garage, providing essential funds for the project, and the university in turn pledged to lease garage spaces back from the authority.

The university never formally transferred the garage, however. In 2010, the parking authority sued the university, claiming it had paid fully for the property. But the university contested the authority had not paid for construction cost overruns and held onto the title.

“The lawsuit just lingered for years,” Darr said.

As a result, university bondholders retained a claim on the garage in 2013, when the city sought to lease its parking system to help pay off its staggering debt load.

UMB Bank, as trustee for the bondholders, didn’t relinquish that claim until December 2013, after negotiating the $3.6 million payment from the parking proceeds.

The bank, through a spokesperson, declined to comment, but did refer to publicly available bond disclosures. Those disclosures say the bank “agreed to release its lien on the Parking Unit upon payment” of the $3.6 million.

Buchanan is linked to the garage because the firm served as bond counsel on the 2007 borrowings for the university project. The firm’s general counsel said Wednesday he had no comment.

Darr, for his part, wonders why the parking authority and the university couldn’t come to an earlier settlement, before the payout from parking lease proceeds was even part of the equation.

“I always labeled it under ‘attorneys,’” Darr said. “Attorneys do things for reasons you’re not always clear about.”

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like

You May Also Like