GSK to Spring-Ford: Talk to our attorneys [updated]

The Spring-Ford Area School District fired the latest salvo in its public relations offensive against GlaxoSmithKline on Monday evening, as several school board members took the meeting floor to angrily denounce the company's recent response to a public letter writing campaign and petition organized by the school district.

The pharmaceutical company is pursuing a property reassessment of its Upper Providence campus that could result in the school district having to refund the company more than $5.5 million in previously collected property taxes dating back to 2008. The school district is in the process of cutting staff, curriculum, and other expenses as it reckons with a projected 2011-12 budget deficit of more than $11 million.

Board member Thomas DiBello read aloud from a letter the company sent to the school district in response to its efforts. The letter acknowledged the district's financial predicament and touted the company's commitment to the region, which it said includes more than 4,000 jobs and numerous educational programs. The company compared its efforts to obtain a "fair tax assessment" to that of a homeowner.

"We have been and will continue to be a major contributor to the local tax base. However, just as an individual has a right to a fair tax assessment of his home, the company is pursuing a fair tax assessment that reflects the market value of its property in Upper Providence Township," DiBello quoted from the letter.

"As this matter is undergoing litigation, we ask that all future communication take place through each party's respective counsel," DiBello read.

Sarah Alspach, director of U.S. corporate media relations for GlaxoSmithKline,

DiBello said that school board president Joseph Ciresi, who was not present at Monday's meeting, had "reached out" to the company and been rebuffed.

"Joe [Ciresi] reached out to them, and to their surprise, they told us they can't talk to us and that we should be talking to their legal folks," DiBello said.

Board member David Shafer was similarly critical.

"What I read was 'blah blah blah, don't talk to us, talk to our lawyers, blah blah blah,'" said Shafer.

"I was shocked to find out that we're not part of the Philadelphia region that they're so interested in protecting for students," board member Bernard Pettit said.

Shafer and Pettit called on residents of the district to continue to contact the company.

"The community should be reaching out to Glaxo, let them know that they should be stepping up to the plate and showing some interest in our kids here, not just the city of Philadelphia, ," Pettit said.

"There's not much to add [to the letter]," Alspach said by telephone Tuesday morning. "We're pursuing a fair tax assessment. We remain willing to discuss the issue with the school district, but because it's in litigation, that communication has to happen through legal channels."

Pettit: "Strongly opposed" to outsourcing custodial work

Pettit expressed his opposition to the district's plans to fire up to 30 custodial workers and replace them with workers from Jani-King, a Philadelphia based custodial services franchise. The Jani-King contract will cost the district a maximum of $795,212 per year for the 2011-12 and 2012-13 school years. The contract includes an optional third year.

"I've been opposed, strongly, to bringing in outside custodial workers for this district and I continue my opposition to it. I see where it's going and where it's been, but I'm continuing my opposition to it and I want to make that known," Pettit said.

The motion passed, 7-1, with Pettit casting the opposing vote.