Ronnie Polaneczky: Spat splits old Whitemarsh pals

I'M GLAD I'M NOT RICH.

I might get sucked into a battle like the one pitting two millionaire Whitemarsh Township couples against each other.

Their dazzling feud glistens with multiple lawsuits and a fun cameo appearance by Phillies outfielder Shane Victorino. But what is making my jaw drop is the $17,000 "voluntary contribution" that the township accepted apparently in lieu of enforcing an ordinance that was violated.

At least, in this tale, the financial offer was put in writing.

Ah, the suburbs. So proper.

Meet the combatants: Gary and Nancy Veloric and Brad and Andrea Heffler. They're stinkin' rich neighbors who own adjacent 10-acre lots on Harts Lane, in Whitemarsh's lovely Miquon area. Each couple lives on three acres. Their remaining, heavily wooded acreage is in a conservation easement held by the Montgomery County Lands Trust. The couples are prohibited from mucking with the land in ways the trust forbids.

The Hefflers, who own a horse, mucked with it anyway.

In violation of easement rules, and without permits from the township, they created a riding ring and pasture for their horse.

They cleared trees, vines and brush from an area the size of a football field. Graded a hill that partially belongs to the Velorics. Removed trees from the Velorics' land. Dumped tons of pebbly material in the ring. And enclosed the area with split-rail fencing.

Brad Heffler says he didn't think he'd done anything wrong, since the property boundaries were unclear and the stuff he removed was mostly dead, diseased or non-native to the forest.

"What a coincidence that it died in the exact size and shape of the corral and pasture," says Nancy Veloric sarcastically.

The Velorics demanded that the township and trust order the fences torn down, the cleared areas replanted, and their damaged property restored.

"We were told that this land would forever be untouched," says Gary Veloric.

After much negotiating, the trust allowed the fencing to stay, but the Hefflers - who contend that they removed just 28 trees - were ordered to plant 40 trees and 99 shrubs elsewhere in the easement, which they did.

But this was 121 trees shy of the number the township calculated was needed to remediate an area prone to erosion and flooding.

Heffler says that he was willing to plant the extra trees on his land but that they probably would have died, as he'd have to cram them close together, which would kill them.

So he made an offer to the township's engineer and arborist: He would make a "voluntary contribution" of $17,000 to the township - the amount his own arborist said the 121 trees would cost - to be used in plantings elsewhere in Whitemarsh.

He told me that he heard of the practice of making payments in lieu of planting requirements, though he can't remember exactly who told him.

"What's the point of planting trees that are going to die?" he said when I asked about the contribution, whose existence was discovered only when the Velorics sued the township, claiming nonenforcement of the law.

"I was trying to be a good guy and do a good thing that would benefit the whole township," Hefler said.

I believe Heffler, who seems like a good guy and who, until this dispute with the Velorics, was their friend.

What I can't believe is that the township accepted the $17,000 without so much as a mention at any of the township's many public meetings.

Neil Stein, the Velorics' attorney and the township's former solicitor, is floored by it.

"In all my years as solicitor, I never heard of anyone paying cash 'in lieu of' following an ordinance," says Stein. "I know a lot of developers who would be glad to write a check so they don't have to deal with an ordinance."

Township attorney Barbara Merlie says that such contributions have been accepted in the past, though she couldn't tell me how often.

The $17,000, she says, was not "in lieu of" anything, and will go into the township's general fund, to be used at the township's discretion.

So it might pay for plants and trees. But it might not. Which sounds pretty "in lieu of" to me.

It's a shock to a former member of the township's Shade Tree Commission.

"If that money isn't even going to be used for trees, that's horrible," said the former member, who didn't want to give her name. "It makes me shudder."

Lest you think the Velorics are blame-free in this feud, they, too, appear to have violated laws of the trust and the township.

The trust cited them for dumping yard waste in the easement. And the Hefflers say that the Velorics also have planted non-native trees there, a no-no.

The Hefflers also note that the Velorics' good friend, Shane Victorino, frequently stays in the Velorics' two-story poolhouse.

(The Velorics admit that this is true. Victorino, my phave Phil, wouldn't comment, darn it.)

But the Whitemarsh zoning code forbids overnig
 
ht guests in any residential property's "accessory structure" if it has kitchen facilities, which the poolhouse has. So the Velorics violate the code each time they wish Victorino sweet dreams.

Mark Clemm, the Hefflers' lawyer, concedes that it is "technical and petty" to point out these violations, "but no more so than the [Velorics'] hyper-technical enforcement of certain restrictions in a conservation easement."

My opinion?

I think Brad Heffler and Gary Veloric are the kind of businessmen who prosper by going for what they want first, and deal with obstacles later. They probably act with a dynamism shared by many successful people.

In this case, though, I think they've each met their match. The Hefflers are rich enough to own their own riding ring.

And the Velorics are rich enough to sue them over it for years to come.

E-mail polaner@phillynews.com or call 215-854-2217. For recent columns:

www.philly.com/Ronnie. Read Ronnie's blog at www.philly.com/RonnieBlog.