Tonight, the YSA presented their exciting proposal to the Commission during their Discussion Session. Jordan Halter, representing Lacrosse (MLLA), made the presentation. 2012 YSA Field Project Analysis & Recommendation
Updated: cleaned up version of YSA proposal with bid exclusions stripped
To turf and light Wildcat and Middle Fields without stands, lining of fields, parking improvements and maintenance, is $1,125,000. This is the exciting part. YSA will buy the stands for $10,000 and contribute $190,000 towards the lighting.
Missing from the field analysis is the "Rock Pile," which will be back in two years.
My question is why is Aqua Club in YSA? Nothing was mentioned about the pool and yet they contribute to YSA. Nothing was mentioned about YSA paying their debts to the School District. Nothing was mentioned about the terms of the $200,000 donation.
Update June 28, 2012 4:19 PM Clarification from Susan Morgans, PIO
180 comments:
Is the 1.125 million per field or total cost for turf?
The Rockpile will likely be offline until 2016. And who knows what the district will choose to do with it. It can't be part of the analysis.
The aqua club got a huge new pool as part of the school renovation. I don't think they are complaining about anything. You can confirm this with the aqua club, but they probably have not contributed to the YSA at the same rate as the field sports (if at all in recent years).
A 62% increase in field availability is HUGE! The plan looks great.
Go to page 14 of the presentation. The cost breakdown is there. The answer to your question is $1.125 million to turf both fields.
Elaine
I am tired and cranky, so please forgive me if this comes out wrong. The field sports got new turf at the high school two years ago and they are still complaining. They are getting a new sports facility as part of the school renovation. And it is not enough. I loved how Jordan Halter said that it didn't make sense to turf Mellon. Are you kidding me? That is all we heard for how many years now?
Elaine
Are all of the exclusions shown on the proposal accounted for? If not, there could be additional hidden costs associated with the project.
I guess I should clarify something. The $1.125 million reflects a portion of the cost of lighting. YSA is pledging to cover the balance of the lighting which is $190,000.
Elaine
Page 5 indicates that the YSA Field analysis excludes the Rock Pile and Turf. The Rock Pile will add 21 slots. How many slots does the Turf add at the high school? I don't think these numbers are correct.
Elaine
Well of course they aren't correct ! No numbers are correct when it comes to YSA, Elaine !
Slide 9:number 9 What lines should the School District paint for sports that have the same seasons ?
I'll believe the deadbeats when the money is in the bank. We know the YSA is unreliable when it comes to money through their tax returns and the RTK requests from the District.
If the YSA had put as much time into fundraising as they have sneaking behind our backs the field would be turfed by now.
The field looks like we are turfing 2 fields for the price of 1 field. I know three estimates of turfing and lighting of a football field. Two of the cost estimates were for Mellon and Jefferson and the cost was over $1-Million for each field. Those numbers came from the Municipal budget documents.
The third field with turf and lights was installed at my high school at a cost above $1-Million when a school director donated a $1-Million gift to turf and light the field.
Do we know a Director, a Commissioner, or a Deadbeat that will donate $1-Million?
Show me the money before you raise my taxes or tax my church to pay for your deadbeat buddies dream. We have been lied to too often.
Both the school district and the municipality raised millage rates to balance THIS year's budgets.
The SD is looking for sugar daddies to bail 'em out of their latest shopping spree.
The media is filled with ominous winds that public employee and teacher pension plans are headed for financial collapse.
So does the YSA tell us once this turf, lighting and parking is created who pays to keep it up every year?
Who pays for the electric bill for lights where nonenexisted now?
Who pays for the new turf in 8-10 years. How about paving and painting of the parking lots?
Did the YSA show any numbers for Total Cost of Ownership over 5, 10, 20 years?
Did they present a comparison of what each entity pays annually for upkeep on these fields now vs what the turf/lighting will cost?
We know that the YSA doesn't really concern itself too much with annual maintenance expenses, don't we!
10:52 why isn't the Rock Pile part of the analysis? At some point it will need to be dealt with. Or don't you think more than one year ahead?
Once you turf a field at sone point (8-10 years) that turf has to be replied and the old one disposed of. The stadium turf cost $500,000 to redo. Is that factored into your plan?
How did you arrive at 62% increase in playing time?
Did any of these YSA rocket scientist happen to think beyond their own selfish interest?
If they turf Middle where will the Track team hold shot, discus and javelin competitions and practice for the next four years?
At a separate location from the rest of the track team?
I know on little Horsman Field! Crap... I forgot we lost that when the moved the taj mahal athletic facilities over there. Boy some body didn't plan ahead there!
Screw it shot, discus, javelin can fend for themselves like the tennis and rifle squads... Franklin wants his plastic grass and that's all that matters.
I can't fathom how they get an increase of 62% of increased field time. That number is complete BS. There is no mathematical way to arrive at that number unless they are saying practice is open all night long.
Does everyone realize that they will turf the ENTIRE FIELD. That is, there will be NO DIRT INFIELD for baseball. It will be red fake grass! Plus you have the removable mounds issue.
Is that even allowed in WPIAL play?
On to another point, why is it that when I research new installations of artificial turf, that those fields seem to be paid for with private money? Has anyone at the YSA even bothered to check on this or are they just so ingrained in this place that they know they need to get it.
I say, find the money (all of it), and I will come around.
So how did the counter-propoisal go? Who presented the other side?
Anon 2:29, let's stick with facts. The high school field sports currently practice and compete @ Foster. In the past, they have used the Rockpile. Some have suggested that they will return there after the renovation if it is restored to field space.
To my knowledge, Middle has never been used for these sports and probably never will. I must assume that is because some rocket scientist concluded that high school baseball and the javelin don't really mix well together.
Anon 2:08, the Rockpile is not part of the analysis because it does not currently exist. If and when it returns online it will remain under the control of the high school and will likely be subject to the same use restrictions as currently exist for the turf (i.e., high school sports get it first). As a result, it probably won't be too accessible for things like youth field hockey or K-2 Rec league soccer.
OK, why isn't the turf part of the analysis? How many field slots does that represent? I remember someone saying how multiple groups can use it simultaneously because of its size and the turf making it rainproof. The lights add to the playing time too. Wouldn't that make it a large number?
Elaine
More facts for Anon 6:41 - not only is it allowed for WPIAL play, but the WPIAL Championship game was played on all turf field this year.
Elaine,
I believe the vast majority of field usage on the HS turf is prioritized for the HS sports teams. Varsity, JV and 9th grade teams from football, boys and girls soccer , boys and girls lacrosse and field hockey use the turf for both practice and games. The AD schedules and maintains the list of available field space.
During the summer ? ?
Still don't see a ten year cost of the project.
That's over $100,000 a year for turf (not including interest and not including maintenance).
Is there any chance in heck that the municipality spends $100,000 each year on maintenance of the existing grass fields?
If the YSA wants to pay for lights to practice until 10pm, let them pay. But the annual cost of turf is clearly higher than the annual cost of maintaining a grass field.
It's really not that hard to do the math.
Oh, and I love that our kids will get carpet burn sliding into home plate.
That's just stupid.
I can understand that it is prioritized for HS sports, but I remember one of the Dave's saying how the younger groups would play simultaneously at the high school due to the turf and lighting. It was when they were either pitching McNeilly or turfing Mellon. So why not count those as slots? If I am reading the chart correctly, the Soccer Association uses the turf every day. Are we calling it Horsman Field? So how many slots is that?
Elaine
Just got off the phone with a fellow athletic supporter in the audience last night and he said he was surprised. He simply didn't get the math on the usage of the fields. He was lead to believe all the Commissioners were on board and this was the only option. I shared with him some of the other options and clearly some Commissioners are not on board. He found anything but turf was a better option. He also added that most of the problems from fields are the School District’s fields (Foster, Mellon). Anyway he contacted a fellow athletic supporter and association person and they didn’t know about the presentation or the push for turf. What is going on there? Do all these groups want this plan or just a select few?
I am a supporter of the Swim Club and I can’t believe that nothing was said about the outdoor swimming pool. It’s terrible for the club and the community. No less completely under-used. The YSA gives a good amount of money from the Aqua Club, did anyone say or ask anything about them? Will they raise YSA fees, including Aqua Club, to do this?
Do any of the other sports groups pay toward their capital projects and/or maintenace? Anyone know?
9:34 AM, according to 10:52 PM, you get what you pay for. Also, according to 10:52 PM, you aren't complaining because you got a huge new pool in the high school renovation. Read my response at 11:00 PM.
Following 10:52's logic, lacrosse shouldn't be getting anything since they have never contributed to YSA.
Elaine
Hey 7:01, I know you're smarter than everyone else, so tell me why can't the high school track team hold their fiscus, shot and javelin competitions on middle field thereby keeping the teams close together. you telling me the sprints and relays are held at Foster as opposed to the HS track?
You say javelin and baseball don't mix! Oh yeah soccer and baseball do!
Dimwit!
Some one asked where the opposing plan was. Were you asleep for the past month- Fraasch and Kluck offered one up weeks ago.
Keep in mind folks the YSA wants this plan implemented before the 2013 tax bills go out!!!
Right now the sticker shock of the reassessment has hit home.
Ask the commission and school district to project your tax based on next year's projections, then add in ALL THE ADDITIONAL COST for the YSA plan.
They need it approved now before next year, that's the rush.
I uploaded the podcast from last night's meetings. You can hear the YSA presentation here.The YSA presentation begins a little after the 13 minute mark.
Elaine
First, no activities are permitted on Middle Field when there is a game being played at Wildcat. So, you can't have baseball games and field events on the same dates. Since baseball and track/field are both Spring sports (unlike soccer), it would be difficult for two sports to share that space. Baseball and soccer don't compete for space on this field. To put it simply, the track athletes don't want to be dodging line drives any more than the baseball players want to dodge the javelin.
The track events still take place at the high school track. Not at Foster.
I think I am being ignored about counting the high school turf slots. The Soccer Association uses it every day. Who's your treasurer? I don't think he can count.
The numbers never add up with anything that has to do with YSA.
Elaine
PS I know who your treasurer is. He should know better.
Interesting article from the Post Gazette on Consol Energy Field.
South Xtra: Synthetic turf a real game-saver at Consol
By Joe Koch / Tri-State Sports & News Service
There are a lot of positive statements about the in the article, should be required reading for everyone. But since I oppose the YSA plan I admit I'm not using my character limit here to add them. Here's the one that concerns me.
" said the field's warranty is for eight years, but it should last for as many as 15.
"There might be some minor repairs in some of the high-traffic areas," he said. "But there should be a life cycle of between 12 to 18 years. To put a new surface down in about 15 years would cost about $500,000."
$500,000 divided by 15 years = $34,000/year in JUST TURF REPLACEMENT COST!
That number doesn't include the initial $1.125 million installation.
So yeah, for a few (62% really ?) playing time can we afford (by my total vist of ownership calculations. Installation+replacement) a $100,000+ field?
Commissioners speak up please, just what do we spend now on Middle and Wildcat. What is today's TCO compared to the YSA plans TCO?
Elaine:
If you are referring to the list of Fall 2011 permits, Horsman Field refers to the old, tiny Horsman Field that is well underground as part of the high school renovations. It was used for youth soccer programs. You will note that this same schedule refers to the Upper Practice Field (or Rockpile) which is no longer there. If you look at bthe Spring 2012 permit schedule, you will see that these two slots have been removed to account for their absence.
So to set the record straight, the Soccer Association DOES NOT get the turf every day. The high school controls the turf. The Horsman Field that you are referring to is long gone.
the initial installation of $1.125,000 divided by 15 years (not including bond interest if any, maintenance and minor repairs, electricity) is $75,000/year. At the end of those 15 years (the HS turf was replaced at <10 years, a Texas school is suing FieldTurf to replace their turf after 3) we start all over again with $500,000 returfing.
Again commissioners, what do we spend now on Wildcat and Middle?
I asked earlier who delivered the rebuttal and got no repsonse. So I assume nobody did. Instead, everyone posts on the blog to moan and whine about the YSA, costs, etc. How about this--put together a presentation outlining the reasons against the dumb turf idea and then, and ONLY THEN, can you claim the commissioners are ignoring your concerns. But they can't ignore what they don't hear.
I've read a ton of reasons why turfing is a bad idea. Those supporting arguments, though, dont mean much if they're confined to this blog. AS the one post said, some of the athletic folks in town weren't even aware of the Franklin Plan even though he implies he's speaking on their behalf. So if you have a compelling argument, make it in front of your peers and the commissioners. Is tha sking too much?
The current average annual cost to maintain an existing athletic field in Lebo, excluding the high school stadium artificial turf, is something a bit over $10,000 per field.
If in doubt, study the entire current JMA, including Exhibits A and B and do your own math estimates. Yeah, the $10,000 is an average. So ?
You really are kidding aren't you 11:48... "so"!?
So the municipality just raised taxes, they had to implement a storm water fee to maintain infrastructure that supposedily our muni tax is supposed to cover. They borrowed $2 million to pave streets that they are suppose to Regularly maintain out if our taxes.
Now you want to take one field from $10,000/year maintenance to a $75,000 to $100,000/ year maintenance facility. And you say "SO!"
Hey money bags, you want it so much you pay for it! Lock stock and barrel! I happy with a little more upkeep maybe. Turf no.
Here's a counter offer to the commissioners (they can read can't they) give the YSA a 99 year lease on Wildcat and Middle scott free. They can then turf, paint it, fill it with water for all I care. But whatever THEY want they pay for.
Continue to maintain the lot and use the old wildcat & Middle maintenance expenditures to improve the rest of the communities recreation assets.
How's that for a plan Mr. I'm free with other peoples money So? You get your precious play space to do with what you want- but YOU PAY FOR IT. We'll give you the existing space for free.
Seeing as how your little cabal couldn't live up to their obligation on the JMA agreement I expect a lot of whining and smartass comments post haste!
Commissoners, neighbors, taxpayers, the YSA proponents keep asking for a counter plan. Here's my suggestion and I'd like to hear what everyone thinks before proposing it to the commissioners, though I'd love to hear what they think here.
Here's the plan.
Dissolve the Joint Maintenance Agreement. It's not working and the muni and SD have been overing the YSA or years. Let 'em off the hook for the $30,000.
Give 'em Wildcat and Middle on a 99 year renewable lease. Everything at those fields, the backstops, the fences everything tht is in place now. Give 'em the new field sign right too.
Then they can turf, paint, light to their hearts content. Carpet the field in Burberry if thats what they want.
They want $1.125M in turf, they buy $1.125M, but the muni doesn't co-sign for it.
Now what does the muni get out of the deal. It takes the maintenance money from Wildcat and Middle and distributes it around to the rest of the rec. facilities and fields. Which will still be available for use by the YSA groups.
Everybody wins. The muni gets to improve stuff for everybody and the YSA gets their premier turf to do with pretty much what they want. They just don't get to load it on the backs of people that don't want it or can't afford it.
How's that for a counter offer YSA? How about stepping up to the plate and putting YOUR money where YOUR mouth is?
Anyone see any flaws in this plan?
Dick Saunders
Oh by the way, in tht counter plan, I'm sure the turf installers have some ort of maintennce plans available where they maintain and do repairs. I'd suggest the YSA get that too since this will be their baby to keep up!
Here's the beauty of the counter-offer plan.
1} The YSA gets out from under their annual $30,000 JMA obligation.
2) They STILL have available all of the current fields in the MTL inventory, perhaps in a little better condition since the muni doesn't have the responsibility or expense of maintaining Wildcat and Middle.
3) YSA get to run and use the revenue from the Wildcat/Middle (only from these 2 fields) sign revenue. If they can get some sucker advertiser to pay $100,000/year for a sign they're home free.
4) They don't have to answer to anyone, its their's to use as they wish as long as they meet codes. No more fighting with Lebocitizens.
So everybody, what pitfalls did I miss?
Dick
OK 11:06 AM, let's try it another way. True or False: Youth sports never use the high school stadium track or field.
Elaine
11:24 you asked for a rebuttal, you got it here.
Chime in whats wrong with it. I'm sure there are some bugs in it, as there is with your YSA plan... like where do we get the $1.125 million to use ONLY on artificial turf.
Want to work together or is it your way or no way?
The commissioners can read the plan here and see how its progressing. Why present a plan before it's flly developed and people are on board with?
Oh another perk to the counter plan offered here.
The YSA could sell the naming rights to their little piece of heaven to 'get the ball rolling.'
Foor, Dalesandro, Brumfield Franklin etc. etc. Field has a nice ring, how about it guys? You'll be immortalized forever.
Anon 11:24
Be careful what you ask for cause you just might get it.
Love it.
YSA/Franklin Field.
The field of dreams... build it and they will come.
For those who think no counter-YSA plans for Municipal fields have been offered to the Commission heretofore; I beg to differ. I know several people who wrote the Commission with ideas - I was one of them. Some wanted to proceed along the lines of what Mr. Saunders @ 12:56pm proposed - others suggested selling the fields outright to the sports groups.
For me the bottom line is simple - taxpayers should not be placed in the position of having to fund entertainment venues that serve only 18% - 20% of the entire population of the Municipality. And frankly, I don't think the Municipality should be in the entertainment business at all - but I realize that my view on that subject is not popular, even with people who might otherwise agree with me.
RG, I had said that to Dave Brumfield when he said that we had a shortage of fields, so we had to turf McNeilly, then Mellon, and now Middle and Wildcat. I believe I had said, "That it is not your problem, Dave."
No counter YSA plans? Ha! What do you think we have been saying at commission meetings, Joint Discussion Sessions,Recreation meetings, budget meetings, unassigned funds meetings, and all the emails that have been going to the Commission. Why does it always come back that we didn't do something right?
Elaine
Richard you are exactly right. The YSA proponents love to misdirect and mislead.
We have to look no further than the JMA accounting for proof.
I don't think divesting of all the rec facilities is a good idea, same as I don't think the library or road maintenance or plowing should be privatized. There are some things we as a community must carry. How much is the issue before us.
I've offered a plan here that gives the YSA what they want and reduces the financial strain on the municipality.
Is it workable, I'm not a lawyer or accountant.
Nor am I going to step up to help the YSA Field. If I or my kids want to use "their" artificially turfed facility we'll have to pay them.
That brings up another plus... the YSA could sell time to senior softball leagues, company tournaments to help pay for "their" facility when they're not using it.
Dick Saunders
DS,
And when you file a RTK regarding JMA accounting, you get this.
RTK extension
Elaine
A simple request, in my mind. Even Chip said that if I asked Jan for it, she would give me a copy since his paperwork was "at home."
So how did a copy of the exciting YSA proposal get in the residents' hands? A commissioner passed it out at the meeting - without having to file a RTK.
Elaine
True or false, guys?
Elaine
Elaine exactly my point in handing over the Wildcat and Middle Field to YSA.
It their 'want' and their 'obligation'. I don't have to file RTKs r anything. They can run it as they see fit. If they want to steal money, burn money, buy the YSA administrators weekend getaways in Aruba, I don't care give a sh*t.
The only thing we do need to set up in the beginning is how the YSA bankrupcy is handled and what happens when they default on their debt to the turfing company.
Dick Saunders
Gee 11;24 isn't saying much!
Blogs that allow anonymous posts have ZERO credibility.
Oh, you're so funny! That is all you could come back with? Not even True or False? I guess you got nothin'.
Elaine
Mr. Saunders-
Not to be negative but has someone filled you in on McNeilly.
Soccer was to give the Municipality money to purchase the field-never happened. Other sports promised support to develop the field and never did anything. Now what? We have an almost $2m bridge to nowhere...or shall I say Baldwin.
3:33
Does that include LeboFields? They accept anonymous post so I guess they aren't credible either?
3:46, I know about McNeilly. If the YSA want McNeilly let them turf that one and we'll keep Wildcat and Middle as they are.
The "Now What" is the YSA wants the ciommunity to fork over $1.125 million dollars to satisfy THEIR wish list. All I'm suggesting is let them fulfill THEIR wants.
I'm too busy trying to figure out I'm going to pay for the high school, the library, storm drain system, pension plans, roads.
Elaine,
You have done a terrific job of exposing the dishonesty of both Business Managers, the YSA, the Commissioners and the District. This all reflects poorly on the Board, the Commission and the Chief Executive Officers and Business Managers of both the Board and the Commission as well as the elected officials on both bodies. I knew Mount Lebanon had problems but I never knew the depth of the lies and dishonesty of both the District and the Municipality until your blog.
How can anyone who has followed tour blog consider a gift to the District's $30,000,000 fundraising?
If the Board and the Commission don't clean house and reduce the dishonest staff who can't respond to a RTK request without paying the Solicitor for an extra 30 days work then they surely have something more to hide. That is unfortunate for our community. Eventually the dirty laundry will come out.
I had a conversation with a quiet member of our community and that person can't stand
Posti or "the Fat Guy." So don't think the community is unaware that we have big problems even if the details are not widely known.
As far as the YSA is concerned I don't believe they can be trusted with money and neither can either business manager. If we can't trust these persons to be honest with money, why do we trust them with our children?
Anon 4:26 PLEASE run for office! You have a grasp of reality!
"Gee 11;24 isn't saying much!"
What am I supposed to say? That challenging people to offer a counter-plan and then seeing the same damn posts over and over is great? Or that I merely pointed out policy won't be made on a blog yet one of the posts was the tired old "Well, we tried once"? Give me a break. If any of you want actual change, then go make it happen. I love that Elaine does this blog. It opens up dialogue, exposes local corruption and, more than anything, make the elected clowns in Lebo realize people are watching. But as long as people with real concerns and ideas hide on this blog and don't go any further, the longer people like Franklin get their way.
Here is another RTK response that I got today. Remember how there was discussion about David Huston's approach to filing his RTK concerning the Super releasing YSA from their 2008 debt? Remember how some readers thought that it was too specific which lead to his response being there was no such information? I got another RTK extension today. It was pretty general and yet it might not be public information. Here it is.
RTK response 2
The email had been cc'ed to two attorneys, Tom Peterson and Gavin Robb, so does that make it double legal bills? The other RTK was also copied in the same manner. Are the extensions in place to buy time until another JMA is approved? Or are the extensions there to buy time until the YSA enters an agreement with the Commission and SD to turf the two fields? Is there a Mt. Lebanon attorney out there who is NOT a member of YSA?
Elaine
Oh jeeze, 4:36 PM, if they can't raise $30,000,000, they are going to blame this blog! It usually comes down to things being my fault, so I can see it coming.
Red light because of Lebo Citizens blog. Sorry. So pay us the balance due for the feasibility study, School District. Signed, Pursuant Ketchum
Elaine
You say fault, I say victory. It's all about perspective.
4:42 your whinning sing song is really getting old. I'll try and make it real simple for you as you really have a difficult time comprehending.
You write:
"What am I supposed to say?"
You asked for a counter plan, I posted one here for discussion. I don't know if its feasible or liked. If people like it and we can flesh out some of the details, we'll so so and then present it to the commissioners. Until then its a transparent plan here for all to see. No secrets, no special deals.
"That challenging people to offer a counter-plan and then seeing the same damn posts over and over is great?"
Really 4:42? Gideon's plan seems different than mine. I know people that have sent suggestions on improving the natural turf to the commissioners. Ask Kelly she has the Cranberry Feild Maintenance Manual. How come this escape your all knowing eye?
Or that I merely pointed out policy won't be made on a blog yet one of the posts was the tired old "Well, we tried once"? Give me a break. If any of you want actual change, then go make it happen.
This is really great 4:42. You're asked to comment on the lease arrangement. Is it feasible? Does the YSA have any money? Do you want to work with people or just play the same old song? Can you think outside of the box? No, like a spoiled child you expect mommy and daddy to buy you everything. There is no dialogue with or you would have torn apart the idea.
I love that Elaine does this blog. It opens up dialogue, exposes local corruption and, more than anything, make the elected clowns in Lebo realize people are watching. But as long as people with real concerns and ideas hide on this blog and don't go any further, the longer people like Franklin get their way.
This last paragraph is special 4:42! You certainly have a high perception of yourself don't you? You're the only person with REAL concerns, right? Elaine is just busting her butt here cuz your harrassment and innuendo are so pleasurable. No one is hiding on this blog. This blog is an open forum for ideas. The commissioners hear from us. And the idea presented here will be presented once it is developed and should it prove to be a popular alternative to yours. If its not, why waste time?
C'mon 4:42 you wanted an alternative, there is one here or ask Gideon for his. I'm sure he'll share it with us again.
4:42 want to know what the "the same damn posts over and over is?"
The YSA saying: "we have a plan and we'll put in X amount of money!"
Trouble is at the end of the day the YSA never delivers on their promise. You (or they) keep singing the same old song.... buy me this ____, buy me this _____, buy me this _____.
Its old and your credibility is shot. You want to work with people, lets work. You want to cry go have coffee some where.
If you had any doubt regarding Susan Morgans' bias, just know that MtL magazine posted the YSA presentation on their Facebook page. What the Kluck... We truly live in a socialist community.
Thanks, 7:13. I asked this question in an email to the commission:
"Did you post Kelly and Matt's plan? Just curious.
Elaine Gillen"
Susan would not have posted that YSA plan on Facebook without Feller's permission.
Hey Gang,
Larry wants $30,000,000 and more fields . . . think about it! The architects didn't think we needed more fields; they put a swimming pool over one field and suggested moving the HS tennis courts to Markham with bathrooms and changing rooms for girls and boys. In other words the architects thought we needed fewer fields. Kinda makes you wonder how Larry wants to spend the $30,000,000???????
Will we ever really know with all the fundraising - and who knows what else - being conducted at the Cohen law firm?
Not only did Morgans NOT post anything about Matt and Kelly's plan, there's no expose about how Cranberry manages to keep their natural turf fields playable. Nah, it's not possible that another community might have a better idea than Morgans pals!
Hey Morgan, how about publishing the Cranberry Field Maintenance Manual so we can keep our fields playbable until we sort this out.
To difficult for you Sue. Wouldn't want to stepon your pals toes.
4:42 lets compare nortes.
I count out least five plans.
1. Do what we've been doing
2. Keep the natural turf and improve field maintenance proceedures (Cranberry Field Maintenance Plan)
3. Privitize the fields (Gideon Plan????)
4. Monday night's YSA PLan
5. The Leased field plan forwarded here for discussion
Seems you only heard one from your pals. Maybe you ought to have your ears and eyes checked before spouting off.
NOw do you want to work with people or just whine some more.
I am going to ask again. True or False: Youth sports never use the high school stadium track or field.
My guess is False. Why didn't you put it in your analysis? How many slots would that be?
Elaine
The soccer association uses the HS turf on about 15 Sunday afternoons throughout the year - strictly for travel games in the older age groups who require a larger field.
The football association uses the HS turf on 1 day in July for a 2 hr pre-season camp and then on 4 or 5 Saturdays for a few hours for games. This scheduling is subject to change on a daily basis, and will probably be reduced with the loss of the Rockpile as a HS practice facility. Chip does his best to get the youngest age groups at least one game at the turf. Most of youth football is played at Mellon and in the outfield of the Foster baseball fields.
That's pretty much it . . .
I think it was so considerate of the PIO to clean up the YSA presentation. It was too difficult to read in the form that was presented at the meeting. What I scanned last night was what was projected for all to see. It is much better now. Check it out both on Facebook and on the municipal website. Always glad to see my tax dollars at work.
Elaine
The school district in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, is considering whether to cut its kindergarten program because of its financial troubles, noting that a novel idea to privately pay for kindergarten through tax credits for businesses may not happen. This situation could be played out in other districts in the state. Should Mount Lebanon fund kindergarten programs or new turf?
This project would be funded on the muni side, but the maintenance would come out of the SD budget. Good thing we reduced the guidance counselors and library staff so that the District can maintain some more fields. They do it so well. It's for the kids.
Elaine
Andrew Mellon summed up the solution to “turf entitlement”
. . . Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farms, and liquidate real estate. When the people get a . . . brainstorm, the only way to get it out of their blood is to let it collapse . . . It will purge the rottenness out of the system. High costs of living and high living will come down. People will work harder, live a more moral life, values will be adjusted, and enterprising people will pick up the wrecks from less competent people.
She altered the YSA presentation before posting it?? So Susan Morgans is now clearly taking sides. She's no more a public information officer than she is an astronaut. Hey, Lebo, want to save money? Get rid of her. She has no business being partisan. Of course I'm sure she loves the attention. That woman is right up there with Posti as not the best, brightest or most useful. There is one of those dumb things online "what I would wish for" or something equally juvenile. It's so tempting.
Someone did. Look at the one here and the one on the muni website and Facebook. Check it out for yourself. If it was the YSA, they should have cleaned it up before they made the Commissioners's binders and exciting presentation.
Elaine
Ah yes, Mr. Franklin once again puts on his coat of many colors. How quaint, he's taking the high road now. He has no time for people that pen anonymous comments.
Gee before he goes off and bashes bloggers on Lebocitizens, maybe he should criticize the anonymous comments made on his own blog.
What the matter Dave, the LeboFields high road not wide enough for you to make a U-turn. Cast out the sinners on your own blog before dispensing with your holier than thou judgements of others... neighbor.
Remember Dave, one of your supporters over at Lebocitiozens saud that blogs that accept anonymous post have ZERIO credibility.
I am willing to accept anon comments and let people decide for themselves. My recent comment related to the impact or weight of anonymous comments, especially those that simply scream and antagonize. Thanks for again proving my point.
Am I missing something here?
Elaine
Over at Lebofields, Elaine at 9:54 Dave claims he's taking the high road.
OK Mr. Franklin what point are we proving?
That if we allow you to define the podium, the forum, the schedule, that you're right?
I don't want to discuss "a plan" on your terms. We were asked to produce a counter-plan and presented it to the commissioners. To which you or one of your buddies derails the conversation and formulation of a plan.
Do you want to reach a compromise we all can live with Dave or not? Did you get to set the deadline? Do you get to decide who participates or not?
If it's your way and only your way Dave, you presented your plan to the commissioners. Nobody interrupted it's creation.
Now several of us are formulating ours. Sorry you don't like the way we're going about it, but quite honestly if you don't want to contribute shut the hell up and get out of the way.
Tell me Dave, is there a deadline in effect here? Sorry I missed the announcement that we had to fix our fields by what June 30th?
Do you want to work together or not? And no you don't get to dictate the way everybody goes about the task. Sorry.
Dave you say: "I am willing to accept anon comments and let people decide for themselves."
But over at Lebofields you write two paragraphs on why anonymous comments aren't appropriate in the field discussion and how those anonymous posters won't step up to the podium.
Doesn't sound like you're willing to accept anon comments and let readers decide for themselves.
You can't have it both ways.
4:40 I've considered it, but as long as we have 29% voter turnout and allow nonsense like the the illegal rule break pre-election bashing of candidates, I'm not wasting my time.
We serve the representation we get. I've seen Posti win twice barely beating Alan Silhol by 37 votes to get the last seat on the board. And now she's SB president.
Elections and issues in MTl are no longer won, by the brightest, or the on the best platform. Winning depends on whether you have the correct pedigree or connections, by whether you can steal your opponents lawn signs faster than they can steal yours.
And 71% of the electorate doesn't care.
Mr. Franklin, I love the YSA plan you presented to the commissioners. Love it, absolutely love it!
I beg you commissioners, the YSA has a great plan start it right now- today.
How's that for support Mr. Franklin?
You can turf Wildcat and Middle every year until doomsday. Put up a giant big screen scoreboard, a food court and skyboxes. Do it right, build whatever you want.
But commissioners don't spend one thin dime of my tax money on their scheme. Lease them the field for nothing and then let them work their magic.
They get what they want and nobody has to pay for something they don't want.
I can't think of a more equitable compromise.
Did someone call Dave Franklin a neighbor? I don't think of him as my neighbor. I don't think of the president of the YSA as a neighbor either.
A $200,000 contribution makes up the $140,000 shortfall of the YSA and adds only $60,000 to the pot for a field costing $1,1 million.
Oink! Oink! Oink, Dave Franklin.
9:00 AM, technically, the $140,000 is owed to the school district., but you are right that they are only adding $60,000 to the pot. If the municipality is dumb enough to go with this plan, I can't wait to see the YSA's 990's in future years. What wasn't revealed in their plan was how they planned to pay it. Is the SD going to waive their yearly contributions for seven years? Is this going to be another agreement where they are going to pay $20,000 a year over ten years?
As far as leasing, that is a good idea, but that only helps the field sports members of YSA. Unfortunately, YSA seems to ignore the other groups. Did you know that the man who presented the plan at the meeting is from lacrosse? Do you know how much they have contributed to YSA? Zero. Also, look at the first page of the presentation. Chip's associations are not YSA members. So what is really going on here?
Elaine
I updated the original post by adding a link to the cleaned up version of the YSA proposal. I noticed that all the exclusions by the vendors in their proposals were eliminated from the original presentation. I can see that there will be many hidden costs with this cleaned up version. I caution the commissioners and staff who are in full support of this plan to look carefully at the bids. You are not getting what you are lead to believe by the YSA.
Also, for this to proceed, it would have to go through the unassigned funds because that will require three votes by the commissioners. You will still have a shortfall. To get what you really need will require four votes for a bond. If there are three votes to use the unassigned funds for this project, you should resign. You are not representing this community. This is the high school renovation all over again. That shouldn't surprise me since two of you were quite vocal about the high school renovation.
Elaine
Elaine correction to your assertion that they're only adding $60,000 to the pot.
Until they actually write a check and it clears the bank they haven't added anything, zip, nada... zero.
And to paraphrase a commenter here...
"[YSA promises] Have ZERO credibility." signed Or anonymously made.
As for the "lease" plan not doing anything for other groups it actually does. The maintenance and man hours spent by the municipality on the upkeep of Wildcat and Mellon can now be diverted to other projects. Whether it be the pool, the Rec center, the parks or golf course.
That to me is the beauty of the plan. The YSA gets exactly what they want, they don't lose anything they current have, they still get to use Brafferton, Howe, Foster etc. and the muni cuts their field maintenace budget. Everybody wins!
Unfortunately, the YSA knows they can't deliver on their promises, and know the parents aren't going to stand for the participation fees the YSA will have to charge.
Unfortunately, Franklin and his pals love grandiose ideas, they just hate paying for 'em!
On another topic, isn't it interesting that the real wallet buster is the reassessment and SD battle with appeals. Yet that discussion only gets 17 comments.
Good luck to Dave Franklin in his efforts to get 100 signatures on his petition. We had 4,000 signatures opposing the high school plan and look where it got us.
In this town, it isn't about petitions. It is about the elected officials and their agendas.
Elaine
Oh I didn't say he was a GOOD neighbor!
Ok, let's look at the situation...
The YSA and the Sports Field Special Interest (SFSI) group say that the state of the fields is deplorable.
We, the responsible citizens say that there's no money for another Taj Mahal project in Mt Lebanon.
Both points should be easily accepted.
So, based on the first premise, it's fair to say the group managing the fields is doing a bad job of it. Why else would the fields be in such a bad shape.
And Mt Lebanon needs to find a way to get more liquidity in their finances. Why else would they need to raise taxes each year.
So, the only logical outcome is something Richard Gideon suggested. SELL THE FIELDS to a private company that can properly manage them. The YSA and the SFSI can then lease time on the fields at a market rate. Outside entities (ie American Legion baseball, travel Softball/baseball orgs) could then also lease time on the fields as well, bringing extra income into the mix. The entities that owns the fields could then advertise and use those revenues to pay for the upkeep of the fields.
I wouldn't be against selling the fields to the YSA and the SFSI. Then, they could eliminate the burdensome yearly fee they seem to have problems paying (and they could then deal with the bank when they default on their obligations).
I believe this model already exists for the tennis courts (I may be wrong - I do not play tennis). Don't you have to pay to play on the tennis courts?
I want to hear why this would be a bad idea. I want to hear why a government and a school board which are financially strained must bear the burden of maintaining fields they cannot maintain properly?
Here's a question for Mr. Halter and the YSA.
The presentation claims a 62% increase in field time. I find that figure unbelievable but let's go with it if it makes you happy.
Let's say we get 11 years out of the turf. That means a $100,000/yr investment for how many more participant games over the present field?
What is the break out. Are we spending $100/kid/game for artificial turf. $1,000/kid? $5,000/kid/game? What is the number YSA?
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines athlete as:
": a person who is trained or skilled in exercises, sports, or games requiring physical strength, agility, or stamina"
Yet the cleaned up version of the presentation shows this claim:
YSA: representing the families of 2,500 athletes" Really YSA!?
You throw a t-shirt on a 7 year, make him stand in right field for an hour, an promise him a snack do he don't cry... and that makes him an athlete!
Sorry, guys but Morgans just isn't that good a copywriter, despite what she thinks of her abilities!
"you can fool all of the people some of the time, and you can fool some of the people all of the time. But, you can't fool all of the people all of the time."
Jack, that's basically what my Wildcat/Middle lease plan does with one essential difference.
I'm not ready to privatize every field. Let's say I and my kids want to go bat some balls, shag some flies.
Of fly a kite. There should be some fields that a resident can use at their leisure without paying some "company" to do so. If the kids want to play a pick-up football game they should be able to go to a vacant field and just play without busting open their piggy bank.
The rest of your plan I agree with. If the YSA wants to build a world class stadium complex and charge for it's use and that pays for it - great. Mr. Franklin and his buddies can play with their balls to 4 am in the morning in middle of January if that's their thing.
are always rational or are unswayed by passion and illusion. It only means that people are capable of reason, and that a community of people who choose to perfect this faculty and to exercise it openly and fairly can collectively reason their way to sounder conclusions in the long run. As Lincoln observed, you can fool all of the people some of the time, and you can fool some of the people all of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.”
― Steven Pinker, The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined
I have been what you might call a lurker on this blog for quite some time and I just have one question: Why do so many of you have to be so cruel? Whether or not you agree with the YSA Plan why do you have to degrade and speak poorly about it's purporters? And the same goes for anyone calling people "Green Weenies" or anything else. Using "pig" terms to describe a person or saying that because the YSA has not done their job in terms of payments and bookkeeping that they should not be trusted with children - that's totally unacceptable. Would you say that to their faces? I have a strong hunch that it's easy to name call and talk negatively from your computer but that those same individuals, in person, would not be willing to call Dave Franklin a pig to his face. And what is really so wrong with what Mr. Franklin is trying to do? He's clearly passionate about sports and he's helping to champion a cause that benefits the interest of his family, his kids and similar minded people thereafter. But he's not making the decision. He's not the mayor saying "I'm doing it and there's nothing you can do to stop me". No, Mr. Franklin and the YSA are going to OUR elected officials for THEIR approval. If turfing Middle/Wildcat does or does not happen, the town will have the commissioners to thank and/or blame. The decision of any addition or change brought to our commission relies solely on that commission. Whether you believe your commissioner actually represented his or her constituency accurately is a matter you have to address when voting, but it's counter-productive, mean and to put it bluntly, WEAK, to name call and put down people whom, at their core, are no more than either loving parents, dedicated coaches, blogging libertarians or just citizens concerned about the fiscal well being of our town. Be passionate, use facts, spout opinions all day, every day - but leave the nasty where it belongs - USC.
Thanks for reading. I agree with everything you say except the part of USC. There are very nice people who live there just as there are here.
I have been getting emails to start a counter petition. I am sorry. I just don't have it in me to take on one more thing. If anyone is interested, please email me at EGillen476@aol.com. I have been given some really good ideas, if anyone is interested. Personally, gathering 4,000 signatures was not an easy task and it did us no good. Sorry for the bad attitude.
Elaine
Anonymous June 27, 2012 1:52 PM
I am willing to accept that point that not all fields would be sold. You also could put in, as part of the purchase agreement, than non-organized sports activities would need to be permitted at no cost. There are legal points behind it but I'm sure it's doable.
I do have to question if your child would be able to play on the newly turfed fields since their usage will be raised by 60%. That's quite a bit of time spent on a field. I don't think with usage raised by that much they'd even have times to clean the fields. I have to guess that this is a "shock value" number to get people's attention.
2:13 where was your righteous indignation when the PTA sent out malicious emails about candidates and their families in the last election? Where were you when specific individuals ripped down candidates signs at polling places?
Both are far more malicious and furthermore illegal than some name calling.
So spare of the holier than thou thrumping.
Go over to Lebofirlds and read his comments about taking on debt. But make sure after you read his diatribe you then read the news from the LA Tines on Stockton, CA.
"Stockton bankruptcy: 'All that's left is sadness' for city
June 27, 2012 | 6:11 am
This post has been corrected. See note at the bottom for details.
With the city of Stockton moving to become the nation's largest city to seek protection under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, Tuesday night's City Council meeting was quiet, with an evident sadness on faces in the packed chambers.
Many residents said they were there mostly to hear for themselves that the day so long expected had finally come.
For at least a moment, blame and anger seemed to be set aside.
LIVE CHAT: Will other cities follow Stockton into bankruptcy?
"All that's left is sadness," said Gary Gillis, who grew up in Stockton and served as fire chief until he retired. "Stockton has the most good, solid, down-to-earth people you'll ever meet. And now things are going to get even harder for many of them."
The working-class port city -- from where many of California's agricultural exports set sail -- lived largely on credit during economic boom times. The city borrowed millions of dollars for ambitious, eye-catching projects in the mid-2000s. Up went a sports arena, hotel and promenade. The city booked a Neil Diamond concert as a kickoff to better times. Houses in sprawling tracts sold quickly and with high mortgages.
When the bust came, few places fell as hard as Stockton. It has the second-highest rate of foreclosures in the nation. Property tax money dried up.
In a desperate effort at solvency, the city made $90 million in drastic cuts over the last three years, including reducing the Police Department by 25%, the Fire Department by 30%, and cutting pay and benefits to all employees.
As of July 1, the city will still face a $26-million shortfall.
The city has stopped making bond payments, and City Manager Bob Deis said he expected to file bankruptcy papers immediately.
Still, some, such as Rev. Dwight Williams of the New Bethel Baptist Church, tried to stay positive.
"It's in our DNA to take the bitterness of lemons and make sweet lemonade," Williams said. "We remain optimistic and we will continue to take care of one another, but I think most people around here would laugh if you said Stockton was going to be bankrupt."
Mr. Franklin could just as easily ruin our community as improve it!
We could recruit the real estate agent who recently signed Franklin's petition. She seems to be quite successful unloading, I mean, selling houses in Mt. Lebanon.
Elaine
Jack, i'd prefer to give the YSA as free a rein as possible.
Obligating them to keep the field open to free use after they foot the bill to me doesn't seem fair.
That would be like saying: "I don't want to pay for your turf, but I'd sure love to play on it!" No, if the YSA builds it and I want to use it for a game, I should pay to play!
That's only fair.
Did people fall asleep here.
The district is laying off staff, cutting hours (but on the other hand handing out raises and vacation time), charging students for parking, looking for donors to pay got the HS project and the municipality isn't paying off bond debt for McNeilly, borrowing money for street repair, instituting "fees" for infrastructure maintenance.
Yeah I'll wager Stockton went from the land of plenty to bankruptcy in 24 hours.
Could it happen here... Nah this is Leboland, nothing bad ever happens here.
You know who's laughing right now? Dave Franklin. This whole discussion should have been dead on arrival if those of you posting on this site all day would have gathered your thoughts and links and data on paper and presented it to the commission. Any sane person who can read at a third grade level would look at it and realize this whole idea is just half-assed. It's not necessary, it's not fiscally responsible and the guy presenting it isn't honest. Instead, you all sit on the blog and complain. Go fix it by doing a counter-petition or presneting in front of the commission. yeah yeah I've already heard from the clowns here who have said I don't listen or have no argument or am not paying attention. Well neither are the commissioners, the ones who actually, at some point, will decided this. But the failure here is letting the idea even get this far.
Anonymous,
Well, the YSA wouldn't be the only group footing the bill. There would be advertising revenue and outside entities that would also be footing the bill. It wouldn't be out of the ordinary for the group that purchases the fields be forced, as part of their agreement, to give community time such a free play or time on say the 4th of July to community efforts. But, as part of the agreement, I would also NOT restrict the purchasing group from making a profit (we're not a bunch of communists here - ok, well, at least I'm not). A property tax abatement program could be implemented if the selling parties felt it was worth it (it would certainly sweeten the deal).
I believe this plan reaches all of the said goals - Fiscal responsibility, better playing surfaces and community responsibility.
2:52 what in my suggested plan wasn't honest??? So I'm a liar? Really, and I'll bet you're one of those people that think anon post have ZERO credibility - isn't that right, Dave?
Jack and I are having a serious, adult conversation regarding a plan. Do you have anything to contribute besides running interference?
2:52 what's your solution? Do you have a plan for us to back?
Oh yeah, you like the YSA plan... I thought so.
Tell us o'enlightened one- 2:52 what is half-assed about the plan (or plans) being discussed here.
Contribute something other than peddle it to the commissioners... that's obvious.
Show us the pitfalls, why it can't work. No it's easier to call people names isn't it - Dave!?
Jack, thanks for your input. Seems it's just the two of us talking a plan.
I could see your free use, but I think itales it less attractive to the YSA. But if the YSA isn't going to dance, even if we present it to the commissioners, they can't force the YSA to take on the turfing themselves. Then the plan becomes moot.
Unless maybe individual sports chime in like Girls Softball or Lacrosse. If they stepped up and said this is workable YSA get in or we're out, things might start to happen.
How do you know how many are planning? I am so confused as to who is saying what. Nobody is signing a name, real or not. I can't keep track.
Elaine
I should saying that nobody except Jack and RG.
Elaine
This morning I wrote the Mt. Lebanon Commission, outlining in eight steps the rational for privatizing the Wildcat/Middle field complex. The Commission has read these arguments before, but I felt that this was an auspicious time to lay out my reasoning to them again. I started with what I consider to be the basic premise of a local government, and concluded that it would be in the public interest to sell the complex to the YSA. As my letter was crafted to engage the Commission I did not feel it necessary to slide a copy of it over to this Blog. However, several Blog correspondents have brought up the privatization angle, both pro and con, and that has prompted this post.
I exchanged several spirited but polite messages with Commissioner David Brumfield. Mr. Brumfield replied that based on my argument of what constituted the moral obligations of a local government, and that providing entertainment venues is not one of those obligations, "..we would sell the library and pool, stop publishing the magazine and get rid of the parks." I replied, in essence, that he understood me correctly, and that, "There are several towns in the West that have privatized their libraries. What is to stop a private company from running the swimming pool and recreation facility? Are you saying that only government knows how to do these things? As far as parks are concerned - the issue I adduced had to do with fields. One may have an argument for government sequestered wild areas, but I believe you are falling into the logical trap of the "false alternative." I also pointed out that Mr. David Franklin once debated this very point with me over on BlogLebo. He once asked me if I would charge people to use the library. I replied, "yes." I believe my blunt, unequivocal answers shocked Mr. Brumfield, as they did Mr. Franklin. People tend to take care of things if those things come at a cost, even a minor cost. In a subsequent exchange, Mr. Brumfield said, "Not to put words in your mouth but I take you believe my job is to ensure that the core functions of government are provided as well, and as efficiently, as possible. I believe my job is to be responsive to the needs of the residents and to make Mt. Lebanon a place where residents want to stay and non-residents want to move to. I see government as neither good or bad I see it as a tool that allows people to work towards collective goals." I conceded the point that Mt. Lebanon is indeed a collectivist community and that libertarian ideas are far outside the comfort zone of most residents; and Mr. Brumfield did not put words into my mouth; he correctly inferred that I do, indeed, believe that his job is to ensure that the core functions of government are provided as well, and as efficiently, as possible. And to illustrate that even people with divergent ideas may find some common ground, our last exchange was rather positive, in that Mr. Brumfield asked me for any studies available from the Reason Foundation (I'm a supporter) that might pertain to Pennsylvania’s Transportation Revitalization Investment District (TRID) Act.
Fellow residents; is the money you make yours, or does it belong to someone else? Do you feel you have the right to make decisions about what you will or will not purchase, or do you feel that someone else is better fit to do that job? If you see a need that you could fulfill do you do it, or do you wait until someone else forces you to do it? And finally, if upper-middle class residents are possessed of the resources to make life better for their children by providing them recreation, do you think those residents should do it; or do you think they are entitled to benefits collectively from all the residents of this town?
RG submitted a suggestion to the commissioners for privatizing the fields.
I offered up a rough suggestion to just "privatize" one to the YSA for their use and management. Giving them the turfed field they want and freeing up money/manpower for improving other rec. facilities.
Jack is the only one that seems interested and Franklin obviously wants no part of it.
Nobody else has chmmed in so I guess the commissioners have to go with the YSA plan or do what they've been doing with the fields.
Oh well.
Richard, I think if I read you ladt post you made a pretty good suggestion/plan.
I'm not sure if this is nitpicking or essential to making the idea work.
My suggestion was to let the YSA (lease, manage, whatever) Wildcat/Middle Field. Harrisburg has been discussing doing something similar with the turnpike for years.
YSA becomes the operator of that field and that field only. THings continue as they always have in their use of the SD and muni remaing fields. THey no longer pay $30,000 to the JMA.
As managers of Wildcat and Middle (WCM) they control scheduling, fees, signage, snack bar income for that field. They pay all maintenance, turfing and electrical bills on that field. The muni will continued to maintain the parking lot and easements.
If that is your plan I agree and if you're going to make a presentation to the commissioners I'll show up.
Just a thought here. I attended a commission meeting where the topic of the two properties, 788 and 794 Washington Road were up for discussion. The Historical Society was hoping to buy one of those buildings. They were told to buy it, it would be placed onthe market and they would have to make an offer. I would think that in order for the YSA to manage, lease, whatever the case, they would have to make that offer to everyone, wouldn't they? Why don't we lease McNeilly to them? Or better yet, why don't we go with the Fraasch/Kluck plan? It accomodates more people than just field sports kids.
Elaine
Mr. Franklin, Mr. Gideon, Commissioners, just did some rough calculations and financially it looks feasible to me. I'd love to hear why its not at least open for consideration.
Freed JMA commitment - $30,000
Sign revenue - $ 5,000
(est. 10 @ $500 ea.)
2,500 athletes - $25,000
(fee increase of $10)
Rental/tournaments - ?????
Snack bar/YSA shop - ?????
Naming Rights - ?????
Clinics/Camps - ?????
Just for the first three items the YSA has $60,000 a year to pay for their sports field.
If the plan they presented to the commissioners is good and the turf last fifteen years, their almost all the way to the $75,000 annual cost without the last three items. If they add another $15 instead of $10 to participants registrations they're practically there to the number they need.
And the commissioners and the taxpayers don't have to do anything, except lease them the field.
I can't believe they wouldn't jump at this to have their Field of Dreams!
Just to leave no doubt; my proposal to the Commission was to sell Wildcat/Middle to YSA, not lease it. However, understanding the mindset of the community as I believe I do, I would support leasing the facilities to YSA, under very generous but strict terms, as "plan B."
I don't think from the word I get anybody wants to have anything to do with McNeilly. Plus to get fields in their the YSA would have to come with $2-3 million which I don't think they can do.
Kluck's /Fraasch's plan seemed worth discussing, but since the YSA showed what they'd like I thought they might jump on a lease management plan.
Apparently they're only interested in the taxpayers footing the bill for their desires.
Agreed RG under very, very strict terms. And no co=signature leaving us stuck if they default.
I also don't see why we can't amke the Historical Society the same deal. Their take over the house, the maintenance, the utilities etc. Why should they have to purchase it when they're doing something for the community.
We should be helping them rather than fighting them.
To continue my financial analysis, since returfing the field after fifteen years is infinitly cheaper than the initial ibstallation the YSA could actually end up making money at some point.
Which they could bank for an indoor facility at some point.
6:26 I see what you are saying. The YSA gets there artificial turf, after all it is based on THEIR presentation to the commissioners. They get everything they want, how can they fight it?
C'mon Halket, Foor, Dalesandro, Franklin, Brumfield where are the holes. What aren't we seeing that you are?
I' say if you work real hard maybe you field signs will generate $1,000 per sign. Isn't that what you said commissioner Brumfield, $500 to $1,000. Naming rights, that's got to be big too. Plus Coke or Pepsi will probably pay for an electronic scoreboard.
This is looking better and better for you guys. You asked for an alternative and here it is. What's the rub? Why can't it work?
Giffen Good
Just read
Just read your latest post over at LeboFields Mr. Franklin and you have this item there:
"South Park - 2005 - Non-profit entity built soccer field turf facility on land leased from Jefferson Memorial Park. This complex is the first turf facility in the South Hills not affiliated with a school district."
Thank you, I rest my case. And thank you Mr. Good for concurring.
The rub is ....they would need to come up with the funding themselves instead of tax payer $.
Gee if one reads the South Park non-profit facility article it only cost $600,000 to $700,000.
The YSA by my calculations should be able to that easy. They don't even have to pay a lease we giving them the field.
I don't know 7:42, chip and dr. Tim are claiming they paid the $30,000 JMA obligationnevery year.
They claim in their presentation they have 2,500 athletes that should be ready willing and able to pay a measly $10 to play on plastic grass. If the South Psrk non-profit can make it work, is the YSA saying they can't?
Hate to say it Kluck/Fraasch fans but their "plan" was absurd. Look at the revenue projections then consult reality. I know, I know.. "at least they (fill in whatever)" but if you just take a quick glance at you will know that their projections have no foundation.
The real beauty in the WCM lease plan is that not one cent of the municipality's $1.3 million fund balance gets touched.
That money can then be used to upgrade the remaining fields, pave some more streets, pay down some of the debt on McNeilly or make improvements to the pool.
The YSA gets the recently presented turf plan, taxpayers get a break or we get some much needed debt relief or improvements.
Helping to prevent a situation like Stockton, CA.
Everybody wins!!!!!!!!!!
Interesting because they based it on fact using our engineers' numbers and what was recommended by our manager in the budget. We don't need a mower for the golf course, huh? Sorry to say this about a reader, but you must be a YSAer.
Elaine
You mean a YSA hole.
8:11 the YSA plan is to spend $1.125 million on turfing basically one, that's one field Wildcat/Middle. They uses up neatrly all of the $1.3 million undesignated monies available.
But if we let the YSA do what the South Park non-profit did and lease and turf it on there own, the muni keeps there $1.3 million for other things.
Don't you get Franklin's homily, no not our Frznklin, the famous smart one, Benjamin Franklin.
"A penny saved, is a penny earned!"
There is no more $1.3 million unassigned fund balance. It is now down to approximately $725,000. The commission approved $583,060 of the unassigned fund balance on Monday night.
Elaine
Not enough for Franklin's plan, is it?
Elaine
Can someone tell me how the $1M YSA plan is piggish but the $7M Fraasch/Kluck plan is Nirvana?
I think we are talking about two different plans. Matt Kluck and Kelly Fraasch had come up with a plan, as all commissioners were assigned to do, for the use of the unassigned funds. Their plan was picked apart by Kristen Linfante and Dave Brumfield. John Bendel was away on business. The $7 million plan is for a possible rec bond, if I am not mistaken.
Please email the commissioners for a better explanation. Only the YSA gets their plan posted on the municipal website and Facebook, not the commissioners.
Elaine
Mr. Franklin,
Are you willing to put up the credit limit on your American Express Card as collateral for the bond payments? Maybe you could get Dave Reese or Dan Goff to help you?
Don't change the topic. Never said the YSA plan was piggish. Some of us here are saying good ahead give the YSA Wildcat to work with and do what the South Park non-profit did.
As for the K/F plan, no I don't and never did support it. Parts of it maybe but certainly not all of it.
I DIDN'T CHANGE THE TOPIC; I ASKED MR. FRANKLIN IF HE IS WILLING TO CONTRIBUTE HIS OWN FUNDS AND HOW MUCH? LET HIM ANSWER THE QUESTION.
Wasn't directed to you Mr. Ewing meant for 9:11.
The topic is the YSA plan and entire we wanted to turf Wilcat for $1.125 million.
If we could just use names, this wouldn't happen, folks.
Elaine
So here it goes-YSA is going to go after Fraasch because she doesn’t like turf.
YSA has a field plan which benefits one field space for over $1 to the tax payers.
Brumfield has a plan which is $4 million of hard costs only to the tax payers. By the way add 10%.
Fraasch/Kluck give a final plan for undesignated funds only. I believe they were asked to by the staff right Elaine?
Fraasch has a list that she would consider and wants to still talk about.
She is being attacked because she is willing to share documents people ask her for and she is willing to say she still has some Recreation items on the table to consider.
I would rather have someone figure out all the items on the table before presenting two crap proposals that have very little thought except artificial turf.
11:05 PM, you nailed it. Remember the yelling in the coffee shop that Kelly had to deal with? YSA.
Kelly wanted to share her plan with anyone who wanted to see it. A question was raised about putting her plan on the website. No, we couldn't have THAT happen, yet we can see the YSA plan that is full of holes. Yeah, let's sign that petition, Daves. No dollar amounts listed on the petition, yet we were criticized for putting a cap of $75 million on our petition. Whatever it costs, right? Sure! Give us turf! We'll sign it and we don't live in Mt. Lebanon or even Pennsylvania! Your petition has holes.
Elaine
Hey Elaine-
I wanted to do some research on this topic and thought I would check the commissioner websites. I know Posti takes a lot of heat but is there any doubt that she puts out more on her website than all the commissioners combined? Take a look at these sites. It seems that no one on the commission makes a concerted effort to do any of that. Has it always been this way? Is this a way that the school board is more open than the commission?
Brumfield- davebrumfield.com (1 relatively recent posting)
Linfante- valuemtlebanon.com (5 postings since in office)
Fraasch- kellyfraasch.com (5 postings since in office and no votes listed since January)
Kluck- mattkluckcommissioner-2ndward.blogspot and mattkluck.blogspot.com (2 separate sites? no postings whatsoever?!?)
Bendel- votebendel.com (found campaign site, not updated, seemingly no online presence at all?!?)
Sorry to be late to the party but you need to read this stuff.
http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/natick/2012/05/natick_changes_graduation_time.html
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/jan/15/fake-grass-has-drawback-it-gets-too-hot-study-says/
http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/eode/eode-turf.shtml (search "hot")
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/bronx/macombs-park-turf-hot-handle-critic-thermometer-hits-150-degrees-article-1.399392
Is the YSA really going to be putting our 6-8 year olds on plastic grass that can get to be hotter than 150 degrees?
Did the 62% (completely false) calculation take into account days lost to heat?
Will days lost to the turf being too hot be more than or less than the days that would have been lost to rain?
Every article above says that people DO NOT USE THE TURF when it is hot and they define hot as 90 degrees. That means the turf would not be able to be used for the next five days since our forecast calls out 90+ degree days coming up.
Guess what? You don't have that problem with grass. There is no crumb rubber infill in natural grass. There is no urban heat island effect with natural grass. There is no sliding into second base and getting rug burn with grass and dirt infields. There is no need for a magic floating pitching mound with natural grass. There is no need for a bond float with natural grass.
Get real.
The problem with ideologues is their rage clouds their vision. I am the 2:52 poster. And for those willing to take deep breaths while reading, I'll clarify. What I'm referring to as half-assed is the YSA plan. Typical of the me-first mindset, there is no plan beyond ripping out grass and putting in turf, no thought given to maintenance, new drainage systems, environmental impact, lighting, cleaning, prioritizing use, general use by residents or parking. And no, I'm not Dave Franklin and no, I don't support his plan. But your nasty response is exactly why people like Franklin are laughing.
My overall point is this entire idea wouldn't have gained the traction it has if instead of camping out on a blog and having the same ideas bounced between three people, it would be helpul to organize those ideas and present them in a formal setting like Franklin did. His plan isn't really a plan, it's unfunded and illegitimate. But guess what--he followed the right route and that alone gives credibility to an otherwise ridiculous idea. Stop with the childish accusations when someone points out the flaws in your approach and maybe you'll make some headway.
Holy Smokes. Could the anonymous posters at least use a pseudonym so it's easier to respond to people? I'm not against anyone trying to protect their name but it's hard to have a conversation with people if we have to refer to them as 'anonymous x:yz'
It's good that we're having this discussion. It seems that this page has the pieces of a better plan than any offered.
After 146 comments, it is unclear to me at least, who is making "childish accusations" in your opinion, 8:08 AM. Can you hear De Niro asking, "You talking to me?"
Elaine
8:08 you're right Franklin and the YSA stepped up and presented a plan.
When this whole discussion started I preferred trying something along the lines of the Cranberry Field Maintenance Manual to see if that approach didn't improve our fields for the least amount of spending.
It is still my preferred choice and I voiced that to the commissioners a month ago by name.
Now I've commented here about the lease/private enterprise once it became obvious that the YSA was going to try and ram their plan thru the commission.
I broached the lease option as a compromise giving the YSA their turfed field while minimizing the financial hit to taxpayers. Not being a "rocket scientist" I'm not even sure it is legal for the muni to lease a field to a private concern.
But I wanted to float the idea, see if it was workable before walking into the chambers with something that may not have been realistic.
But as usual on everything Mt. Lebanon the battle lines are drawn and name calling starts and nothing happens. Then we get stuck with crap!
If this thing goes through using artificial turf, I would hope that the municipality releases itself from any liability issues concerning the turf temperatures. When the parents register, they should have to sign a release form so that we, the taxpayers don't end up footing another lawsuit. I am sure that wouldn't be a problem since the field sports people want artificial turf in the worst way.
I have another suggestion, for what it's worth. Since the high school turf isn't being used as much as it should, according to the slot count I requested, why don't the field sports groups approach the school district and see if they can get more use of the high school, just as they requested gym use on Sundays?
Elaine
Commissioners:
LeboFields has circulated a petition stating:
Approve a plan to install synthetic turf on Middle and Wildcat Fields.
Our community's existing field space is insufficient to support the needs of the thousands of families who participate in youth sports and other recreational activities. The recent and continued growth of certain field sports in our community has underscored the need to improve our field situation. By installing turf at Middle and Wildcat we can maintain and improve upon our marquee baseball facility while also increasing the number of available multipurpose field practice and game slots by over 60%. This would allow more playing time for our young athletes, many of whom are currently being turned away or are forced to find practice and game fields outside of our community."
I would sign the petition except for one missing item. Who pays for it?
If you want to satisfy the YSA petition then do so by all means by either leasing or selling WIldcat/Middle Fields to the YSA. Then they can turf it.
You people don't get it. I point out that posting to the blog won't change the dynamic of the conversation and what happens? Someone writes "Dear Commissioners" on a blog. Since none of you are actually folloiwng the same path as Franklin, which like it or not is the correct path, then heis plan will ultmately pass, you will all pay for it and your chance to have your say will be long gone. Will you complain this much after that happens? You're actually doing Fraklnin's work for him by not participating in the process.
Should the commissioners decided to follow the YSA Plan or any plan for that matter, since MTL is a home rule municipality could a group of residents file to have the action put on the ballot in the next election?
Anyone up to speed on the ins and outs of home rule?
Watch this video. While it's made by a company involved in artificial turf, after watching this, tell me you can take care of excavation/removal, install drainage, a base, sub-base, compelte the land devleopment paperwork and pay for labor all for 977k. There's a word for that in enlglish--BULLSHIT. NOte the video mentions the "dynamic base", the same one in Franklin's horribly designed presentation (seriously, I've seen 8th graders do a better job with PowerPoint). And what is a "youth athletic expert"? I'd imagine any parent who has spent time going to practices and games with thier kids and volunteering to coach could be considered a "youth athletic expert". Or does Pitt now offer some formal certification in that?
Here's another vid regarding the health hazards (from ABC news), which Franklin didn't even address:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8h0189MLBQ&feature=related
Wonder if Dave and Kristin are willing to be liable for possible long-term health problems? Pretty sure they would be if they approved something they knew was hazardous.
12:13 how o you know that everything being said here isn't being said to the commissioners?
Also, while perusing some of Lebofields articles on turfing, happened to a google search on South Pak and this one popped up on a lacrosse field. No its not South Park, Pa, but that does't matter. Look at the price to build a natural grass lacrosse field $75,000.
Makes me wonder why we can't do that over at McNeilly? A lacrosse/soccer field for under $100,000 seems doable and finally makes McNeilly useful.
http://www.spyasports.org/news-detail.cfm?news_id=FFDA9837-F963-46FE-D9CB7E5178E52950
SPYA breaks ground on new dedicated lacrosse field.
Date Posted: 5/24/2012
The South Park Youth Association(SPYA) Board has agreed to pay for the building of a dedicated lacrosse field at the current Carmel Middle School Auxiliary Field. It will cost approximately $75K to build out the field and there will be ongoing costs for water and maintenance. This is fantastic news for the South Park Lacrosse program as it will have full usage of the facility starting in Spring 2013. It will be a regulation size lacrosse field, fenced in and fully irrigated. Starting in 2013, the program will have two fields at it's disposal, Carmel Road Park and the new South Park lacrosse field.
Contractors broke ground this week on the field and expect to have it ready for seeding my mid-June.
SPYA is a 501c3 so any one who makes a donation to support this effort will get the tax benefit. We welcome any financial support you would consider. Additionally, we will create an advertising program with signage spots on the 8 ft end line fences. If any donor with very deep pockets picks up all of most of the tab for building the field we would definitely consider naming it. Please contact Rob Russell at rrussell@spyasports.org if you are interesting in financially supporting this effort.
Regarding my post on the South Park $75,000 lacrosse field.
Makes me wonder, is the YSA interested in getting kids to play sports or are they interested in building monuments to the YSA?
http://www.wwhiteland.org/Community%20and%20Economic%20Development%20Publications/Referendum%20Handbook.pdf
Tells you what's possible and what isn't regarding referenda. there are options in Lebo but you would all have to seriously coalesce and work together.
Forgot the first link that shows the installation process.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckjloEis_OQ
Sir G: Thanks, that ABC news video is very disconcerting especially considering the high incidence of asthma related problems here in MTL.
Everyone should watch your link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8h0189MLBQ&feature=related
Wonder where our illustrious guardians of the environment - The MTL Environmental Sustainability Board are hiding? Must be having coffee at Panera's.
Those of you who support (and even the open-minded portion of you who don't) either a direct sale of some of our fields or a public/private lease partnership might find the Privatization and Public-Private Partnership Trends in Local Government portion of the Reason Foundation's 2011 Annual Privatization Report interesting - especially the section on page 51 dealing with parks and recreation. I sent the entire Annual Report to the Mt. Lebanon Commission.
I updated this post with an email from Susan Morgans, PIO for Mt. Lebanon. Clarification from Susan Morgans, PIO
Elaine
I received an email from a reader asking why I have not posted her four comments. I have nothing pending in the folder. I have been publishing everything I have received so far. If there are others experiencing the same thing, email your comments to me and I will add them directly. Blogger is free, but it does act up from time to time.
Elaine
Susan admits she is the manager's puppet!
Richard, enough already with selling the fields. We get it. You want them in private hands. Ain't gonna happen but thanks.
As for Susan, perhaps she should be more cautious in the FB/muni page relationship. She's basically saying that you can post whatever you like on FB and it will show on the township page...Oh, really..Excuse me for a few. I have some stuff to do.
Here is a" toe tapper."
You can even sing along.
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=5u03KAcEbEo
Why the atitude 5:30? Someone asked an Gideon provided some evidence privatization is in the relief possibilities.
To bad YOU didn't sign your name. Since you let us all know YOU decided it ain't gonna happen.
Who made you king... Or 'queen'.
Gee, 7:27, I notice YOU didn't leave a name, either. And who made you king? Think selling the municipal fields to a private entity will happen in this community? Bah! You must not be from here.
Anon again/Anonarma, I debated about publishing your comment. Richard Gideon is a perfect gentleman. He also signs his name to every comment. It was pretty lousy of you to take a shot at him as you did. The word "bully" comes to mind. Nothing has been decided, unless you are privy to some inside information. Mr. Gideon offers solutions. What do you have to contribute besides rudeness?
Elaine
Anon again, nobody made me king! I never claimed to have the answers.
Stockton, CA residents never believed they go bankrupt and I bet you if you had asked a MTL native 20 years ago, would the school district be laying off staff and beggin for money, they'd have said just what you did... bah!
I really don't care if you sign or not. It's your egotistical rudeness I can't stand.
Ms. Gillen:
Thanks very much for the kind words, but I assure you that the anonymous poster did me absolutely no harm. If such people feel relieved by taking a shot at me then, by all means, I invite them to do so; I would feel bad if they felt so frustrated at me that they built up enough pressure to explod in front of their computer, and thus mess-up their walls.
You undoubtedly know how I feel about anonymous posts. I may address points raised in such posts, but I never - or rarely - address the anonymous person himself (or herself).
Two things I try to avoid on Blogs: debating ghosts, and intellectually dueling with an unarmed man (or woman).
20 years ago, I'm pretty sure they did lay off staff since they put some buildings in mothballs. Or is that just egotistical rudenss? And I have kicked in an idea-stop complaining about the YSA.
After viewing the video on what takes to install artificial turf has anyone considered where will students park if the installer fills the Wildcat parking lot with equipment and material?
Can it be accomplished entirely from the end by the batting cage?
You could wait until summer next year, but then where do pool visitors park?
Seems anything done might have to wait until the completion of the high school project.
Just a thought, has it been considered?
This is the first time I have made a comment on this blog, or quite frankly even read it. It was recommended to me by many friends that said I should read this string because of the overall community interest in the issue of fields.
But first I want to say that I am appalled by people that are ANONYMOUS making comments, on both side of the issue. So in case you didn't see it, my name is Brooks Broadhurst and I live at 649 Racine Ave. If you have a problem with my post, please do not reply if you are anonymous. Stop by my house, and if I am home I would be happy to talk about this issue with you face to face. Hiding behind ANONYMOUS and being hateful to very good members of our community is just ridiculous and childish.
My thought on the issue of fields is simple fact...our commmunity fields are in deplorable shape. I am not one at all who thinks we need to have the nicest fields in town, but we need to have serviceable ones. I have 3 kids that play every sport offered.
I have gathered from reading the comments this evening that many of you simply do not see the value in team sports. In my mind, team sports teach kids a wide range of skills. Dealing with other kids, dealing with losing, showing up on time, working hard, and the overall value of being part of a team. And I won't even go into details about the wellness issue of the generation growing up today. Unfortunately the fields we have in our great community do not provide anywhere close to a good experience for our kids and their parents. And if you think fields aren't important to the overall community experience, then why have other local communities spent massive amounts of money upgrading their recreation facilities?
We don't need to have the best, and the proposal by the YSA (all of which are great, civic minded folks that are interested in bettering their community) by no means puts us even on par with our neighbors throughout Western PA. But it is a good proposal that will give access to all of our different sports and will enable kids to play outside in sports they love.
If you don't think team sports are important, then you will never agree with anything that is proposed. But if you do, spend some time talking with the members of YSA or others in the community, like me, that think doing something to improve our community is important.
First of all, welcome Brooks. Thank you for taking the time to read and submit such a thoughtful comment. I think all the commissioners will agree that the fields are in deplorable shape. Kelly Fraasch and Matt Kluck had proposed a plan to upgrade Bird Park and Brafferton, as well as add a field on Cedar Blvd. by Public Works for what it would cost to turf two of our nicest fields. Dave Brumfield said no to all of these ideas. He went as far as saying it wasn't worth doing anything to Brafferton. Of course, none of this is known in great detail because the Fraasch/Kluck wasn't published on the municipal website like the YSA proposal is linked.
Unfortunately, the turfing issue at Wildcat and Middle Fields is not a well thought out plan, at least from my perspective. There are real concerns with zoning and variances. There is the cost and how it will be funded. And there are logistics as far as working around the high school project. Then there is the liability issue concerning health issues using artificial turf.
I can see that this is becoming yet another issue that is dividing Mt. Lebanon. For those who are not in support of the artificial turf will soon be labeled as fear mongers, or anti sports, or just that we hate kids. It is unfortunate that these bullying tactics are used. What is more unfortunate is that they work here in Mt. Lebanon.
As far as your comment about anonymous comments, I agree with you. I hate anonymous comments. I have had this blog for 2.5 years and this comes up all the time. Yes, I can delete those comments, but where else can people give their opinions? I guess they can go on Dave Franklin's blog, who also comment anonymously. Talking about taking the high road, I posted a comment on his blog announcing that I had uploaded the YSA proposal on Lebo Citizens, which at the time, was the only place that had uploaded it, and then the very next anonymous comment was slamming me. Well, forget that! I removed my comment. If you read his blog in its entirety, you will find some pretty negative comments directed at those of us who are not in support of his plan. In fact, I am getting quite a bit of heat for stepping forward publicly about my feelings towards artificial turf, just as I did over the high school renovation. I am trying to give people the opportunity to express their thoughts. Now I am getting complaints from someone who allegedly submitted a comment four times, but it never showed up. Now she is upset that I published her comment because she didn't want me to publish it for her. I asked her several times, but heard nothing. Silence is consent in my book. I can't win. I am damned if I do and damned if I don't.
Then there is the whole issue about YSA and making their payments towards the Joint Maintenance agreement. From what I gather from earlier comments, the School District was not maintaining District fields as they should have. According to the YSA plan, the District will be maintaining the Middle and Wildcat fields. I wouldn't bet on that. They can't even take care of their own. In the detailed Joint Maintenance Agreement, you will see where the District "dropped the ball."
I hope people will respond to you and have the guts to sign their names. Previously, people were taking shots at Chuck Bachorski and Richard Gideon, to name a few because they have opposing viewpoints. So it happens on both sides of the issue. It is unfortunate that people don't have the fortitude that you, Richard Gideon, Chuck Bachorski, Bill Lewis, David Huston, I or a handful of others show on this blog.
Thanks again for posting.
Elaine
Brooks, I forgot to add that the very same commissioners who are proposing artificial turf for our two nicest fields since our fields are in deplorable shape, are also against replacing the broken mower at the golf course. Go figure.
Elaine
Brooks, your reassessment went down. Consider notifying thecounty of their error so your taxes will help to improve our fields.
I wasn't sure if I was supposed to publish that, but it is a good comment. Just wish you signed your name to it.
Elaine
Mr. Broadhurst:
The issue is not about the "..value of team sports." The issue, for me anyway, is about who benefits from the use of the Wildcat/Middle field complex, and who should pay for those benefits. I did not read one entry in this thread that denigrated the concept of team sports. Personally, I've played team sports in my youth, and I served in the U.S. Air Force from 1966 to 1970; which is also a team.
I lose patience with the argument that public ownership of something somehow makes it "pure." Hypothetically speaking, if I owned Wildcat/Middle would you refuse your children to play on it? If there is a huge demand for playing time on that facility, would it not therefore be in my interest to make sure that it was kept in top-notch condition so that I could charge reasonable fees for its use? Would I not be performing a public service by paying property taxes on the facility, and removing part of the burden that facility currently places on the many taxpayers who will never use it? I suggest to you that when everybody owns something, nobody owns anything.
I have already conceded the point, made by Commissioner Brumfield, that this is a collectivist community. I have also agreed in principle to a public/private partnership - under the right circumstances. But I don't concede that the argument is about the salubrity of team sports. To do so would buy into the Schopenhauer technique of dragging an issue away from its central premise.
You are definitely correct about one thing; anonymous postings give cover to outrageous comments that, in the end, accomplish nothing of value.
Mr. Broadhurst,
I would like to thank you for your frank, timely and named post on this blog. It is very refreshing to see someone with the fortitude to express their opinions and stand behind them.
However, I do take exception to your position that all of those opposed to turfing Wilcat & Middle are also opposed to team sports. Personaly, I am very involved in MTL athletics and also understand the benefits of team and individual sports.
I also agree with you that the fields in our community need work to say the least. Now the issue becomes one of approach. Do we turf one location, or do we make improvements as best we can to multiple facilities with the finacial resources available?
My thoughts are to make as many improvements as possible with resources available. Let's remove all of the YSA comments and name-calling from this consideration. There are three levels that I have considered. First, ther are financial concerns. Second is consideration for the larger community and third are the long and short-term effects of synthetic turf.
Financially, I think we can all agree that the current climate is very unsteady. This uncertainty ranges from the global to the local. I understand that monies are availabl at very attractive rates. However, ths community is involved with an aggressive high school renovation, a potential ongoing teacher's union grievance, pension liabilities and the new property assesments. Although most of these matters are school-district realated, it is just a matter of which community pocket payment will come from. Thus is it a burden that makes any large-scale spending very risky in my opinion. Floating a bond, even though inexpensive, is not the right move at this point.
Second is the community at-large. Althugh needed, field maintenance and/or the turf option only addrsses a narrow bandwidth of our community. The comunity swimming pool, ice rink, golf course, neighborhood parks, and infrastructure need resources as well. Should we ignore these matters and concentrate on one single project? As I stated previously, I am deeply involved in sports programs and completely understand the frustrations caused by inadequate number and maintenance of facilities. In addition to lacrosse, the travel basketball program has been relegated to BEGGING adjoining communities for gym time. empathize with this pain, but also look at the biggr picture.
Third, there are heated opinions on the long and short-term effects of artificial turf. I for one am not a proponent of this type of surface. However, if a logical argument can be made for this type of surface, I would be open to it. Perhaps, it would be best to have an outside agent do the cost/benefit analysis. This would remove any bias from either side of the discussion. Then, if budgets permit,I would not oppose a turfed field.
With regards to the YSA, I would highly recommend that EVERY sport both recreational and competitive be under the YSA umbrella. In this maner, the increased user fees would help to develop and maintain the fields and gyms on which we depend for play.
Once again, I appreciate your candor and openness.
I'm posting again in case Mr Broadhurst is just following this thread.
I'm sorry but "you hate sports" is a straw-man argument. If that's the best someone's bringing to the table, it will be hard to have a constructive conversation.
Let's put things in the scope of how you would run your house. If you wanted to have a landscaper work on your yard, you would probably look up reviews or talk to people who have used a landscaper. If you read reviews or heard word of mouth references to the effect that "the condition of my yard was horrible" you wouldn't use that landscaper.
So when you translate that over to the ball fields, I have a question for the YSA. Do you really want an entity that has let the fields to into such bad condition manage the fields in the future? Wouldn't you prefer the opportunity to actually buy a field(s) and then choose someone who will maintain the fields to your standards and desires? Wouldn't you prefer to be less captive to the whims of local government and focus your energy on making better fields for the kids?
Being suckled to the government does nothing good for you. The only logical direction the YSA should be arguing is privatization of the fields so they don't have to worry about this situation in the future.
I know it's scary going it on your own but you'll find down the road that you have a better field and complete control of your destiny.
Post a Comment