Multiple people who I admire and in some cases consider friends have spoken out in opposition to term limits for Lehigh County. I respectfully, disagree.

Here is an article on the recent conversation.

A term limit proposal for 3 terms totalling 12 years has been made and presented to the County board. It received support from executive Armstrong at the recent state of County speech.

I am a supporter of term limits. Pretty much across the board. It’s one of the things in government I feel most strongly about. It’s an essential reform.

I have struggled at times with the question whether we need term limits for positions with part time stipends or no pay at all. This was brought up by numerous Commissioners in arguments against County term limits.
The problem is to assume that financial security is the only motivating factor that can lead one to cut corners over time. Certainly, full time pay and benefits supercharges an environment ripe for corruption. The Pennsylvania State House is the ultimate example. Full of warm bodies happily taking a taxpayer salary, benefits and pensions serving for a lifetime without accomplishing much of anything.

With or without a career dynamic when put in a position of power, there is potential to eventually be corrupted by it. Local government does not come with great esteem, perks or broad sweeping power. Nonetheless, important decisions are made and therefore opens the door to bad behavior. (realized or not) Humans accustomed to power do not want to give that power up.

While I wholeheartedly agree with Commissioner Grammes that those who serve on the local level are for the most part the truest public servants, I am still convinced and concerned that the longer one serves, the more likely decisions are impacted by self interest one way or another. The founders realized this. Which is why our system was concieved with a citizen legislator in mind.

The problem is not just pursuing self interest. There are also cases where genuine desire to accomplish something, even if well intentioned opens the door to a sort of tunnel vision. In other words, end justifies the means traps. In protecting institutions process is everything. We have a very high profile conversation right now at the federal level about this.

A desire to take a machete to bureaucratic red tape is a good thing. But that can’t conflict with checks and balances meant to ensure good, transperent and ethical government. Even the best and most well intentioned of us are susceptible.

By remaining in government perpetually at one position, you acquire the habits of a place, which might differ from those of their constituents. I’m paraphrasing this from one of founders in something I read at some point that stuck with me. Think of it as almost a political stockholme syndrome.

We also have the flip side of this human nature problem dealing with the assertion that “politicians are term limited, by voters”. Another point referenced by one opposing Commissioner.

Ask yourself question: Are 90% of incumbents better than any other challenger who could materialize? Since that’s roughly how many incumbents keep positions.

No. Definitely not. This drives the fact 84% of Americans support limits.

This is the other side of the equation. There are reasons for retention rate of incumbents across the board, despite an overwhelmingly opinion that term limits are needed. It has to do with incumbency protections baked into a rigged game. It’s reality whether someone actively takes advantage or not. The protections are still there and the results the same. It truly is much less about merit than it is a natural tendency and nature to maintain status quo.

Would we lose some good public servants with limits? Sure. There are of course exceptions to the rule. My friend Percy Dougherty is an example. The County is better off because of his long tenured service.  But the flip side of allowing bad folks, placeholders or compromised to languish is more concerning. New blood is an antiseptic. Turnover brings fresh viewpoints. Too many people have a pre-disposition to “this is the way it’s always been done” thinking. 

Another thought, whether consciously or not it’s narcissistic to think that out of a county with a talent pool of almost 400,000 people (or in my case a township of 32,000) that there aren’t others capable of doing a job. Perhaps even at a higher level. 

One last note, for term limited public servants opportunity still exists (and they ought to be encouraged) for higher officer. The cream rises to the top. Where opportunities don’t exist, there are lots of ways to stay involved as a citizen activist or as a formal volunteer on boards, commissions etc. This addresses the question of “losing institutional knowledge”. Someone who genuinely cares, even if term limited still has ample opportunity to participate. To say otherwise implies that there is a different dynamic between being on the “outside” vs. the “inside. I think most will agree in good government that gap should be very narrow if at all. 

The only exception I would say are truly small Boroughs where the talent pool is numerically small. I support a 12 year 3 term limit for all paid positions, for County Government and for large municipalities. 

Most have heard about the dilemma with the Allentown State Hospital. It was built in 1912 and closed in 2010. A cornerstone of the community, it housed treatment for 2,012 patients at its peak. Since it’s closure, the buildings have sat empty, yet upkept. Photos of the inside show remarkably little damage or decay for a building that’s been vacant for almost a decade.

Many years ago, before I knew what the buildings even were I remember driving past doing a double take, pulling into the campus and taking a walk. The stately grounds and handsome buildings were truly stunning up close. It’s of a character and quality that simply do not get built anymore.

“It is has been said that, at its best, preservation engages the past in a conversation with the present over a mutual concern for the future.” William J. Murtagh, Keeping Time: The History and Theory of Preservation in America

A petition has been established to express a desire to save the Hospital in some form. It’s now surpassed 3000 signatures. Petition here.

An impressive number for the short time it’s been active. While the campus is in the City of Allentown since it’s owned by the state it’s fate is a concern for all residents.

As our communities age, more and more buildings of character with rich histories are finding themselves in need of rejuvenation; adaptive reuse is the conscious decision to preserve the past while planning for the future. It’s reuse of pre-existing buildings for new purposes.

The PA state legislature has, unfortunately, moved forward plans to demolish the campus at a cost to taxpayers of $15 million. This is shortsighted. Of course, the campus has costs associated with allowing it to languish as well. Though, I question the numbers being thrown around (2.2 million a year) as I question a lot of price tags associated with government decision making.

Preservation of this type is not impossible. In fact, around the Country, conscientious communities are putting old institutional sites to new and profitable uses, preserving their local history and boosting their economic base. Is it challenging? You bet. Expensive? Yes. On the backend, however, the economic benefits of historic preservation are enormous. Sometimes to be forward thinking we need to not forget the past. This is called adaptive reuse. We’ve seen it happen on a smaller scale in Lower Macungie with a number of great projects recently. Here is one example. It’s a policy goal to make it even more attractive and feasible. The concept in Lower Mac can be applied to bank barns, farmhouses and other buildings we’re interested in seeing rejuvenated as opposed to bulldozed in favor of a new cookie cutter development.

With the right private partnerships, adaptive reuse is an option for the State Hospital as well. Here is a wonderful resource to explore other similar projects. (many also former state hospitals). Opportunities just as complicated have been resolved with creativity and dedication. It starts with a mindset.

I also wanted to point out. When an article was posted a few days ago about a potential private investor it was immediately shared all over. Petition signatures spiked. Clearly, the community sees value here. Throughout the day the relatively short article became longer as politicians no doubt scrambled to add quotes to build a narrative for demolition. Some concern is valid. But again, other initiatives just as constrained, complicated and costly have moved forward. I’m disappointed that some of the critique of the potential investor, Nat Hyman of Allentown seems to be politically motivated since he was at one time a Mayoral candidate in Allentown. The biggest naysayer has been a member of the other party. This is an issue that ought to transcend party politics. I hate seeing partisanship creep into an otherwise healthy discussion. I don’t want to focus on that here. But it’s important to consider. Lehigh Valley blogger Bernie O’Hare has some thoughts.

What our local state politicians should be focusing on is reducing the regulatory burden for private investors who want to save these types of structures. Code requirements are incredibly cumbersome. Of course, some are absolutely necessary. It’s been well documented the asbestos issues with this type of old building. (Again, something that’s been addressed in other similar examples)

Locally, next store in the Borough of Macungie there was a wonderful project by a community conscientious business to build a retail cupcake/coffee shop in an old building of character on Main Street. The couple who own a successful business put a ton of money creating a beautiful space. Unfortunately, the project had to be abandoned because of state requirements to retrofit the building which were in some ways just not feasible because of a zero setback off the sidewalk, but also astronomically expensive. This was such a shame.

State Legislators in our area have supported tax subsidies for strip malls and major grants for warehouses. Projects that without question would have moved forward without government bailouts. Historic rehabilitation and adaptive reuse projects continue to be a struggle. In part because of the regulatory environment. This is a case of misplaced priorities.

The recent Southwest Lehigh Comprehensive Plan scientific survey told us a few things clearly. One question asked if the community values historic architecture as community identity. 85% indicated it’s extremely, very or moderately important. It would benefit our state elected officials to pay closer attention to public sentiment here.

Residents: Make sure you are enrolled in the township property tax reduction program!

As a reminder, in 2014 the Board of Commissioners adopted a Homestead Property Tax Exclusion Ordinance. As a result, the homestead program benefits Lower Macungie homeowners by offering a reduction or in some cases complete elimination of the township property tax. For example, for homes at the median assessed value, the program reduces the property tax bill by half.

Here is a post where I overview the savings. 

Township homeowners are eligible if their home is not used for commercial purposes and if it is their primary residence. Here is the application. Not sure if your already enrolled? Call the Lehigh County assessment office at: 610-782-3038

*This post is about township property taxes, not school or county which are separate issues.

The majority of the board sought to reduce residential property taxes even further this year by increasing the Homestead reduction, unfortunately an anticipated state law change did not occur yet. Learn more here.