11/16/2011
PT plan comes with price
By Terri T. Johnson Almanac staff writer tjohnson@thealmanac.net
Recreation programs in Peters Township are extremely active and supplying fields on which various sports will play, comes at a high price to taxpayers.
The school district is in the midst of a nearly $2.5 million upgrade to athletic fields above Pleasant Valley Elementary School. The fields will have lights, a sound system and artificial turf, along with a concession stand and rest rooms.
On Nov. 14, township council voted to spend $204,000 for the installation of lights on Field 5 in Peterswood Park. The contract was awarded to the lowest of 11 bids, Schultheis Electric.
Work on a design to install artificial turf on the same field will continue with the total estimated cost to improve the field reaching about $1.4 million. The design contract was let earlier for $39,500 and does not include surveying the field. That cost could reach an additional $2,000 to $3,000.
To help with the turf costs, the soccer association has agreed to contribute up to $250,000 on the condition the soccer association receives scheduling priority during its season. Council hopes the field will be graded at the end of the spring soccer season, with the new turf installed in the summer in anticipation of the fall 2012 soccer season.
In another area of Peterswood Park, the township is currently spending about $2.5 million to expand additional fields.
Both the township and the school district are funding the projects with proceeds received through bond issues.
The electrical contract was passed by council on a 6 to 2 vote. Councilman Gary Stiegel Jr. was absent. Voting against were Council members Monica Merrell, who did not give a reason for her vote, and Robert Lewis, who has made his opinion known in previous votes involving expansion of or upgrading to facilities for youth sports.
Lewis said he believes too much money is being spent on youth sports and that funds should be directed to other recreational activities.
I can't speak to the source of the PT funds, nor does the article suggest that those funds are actually on hand. It may be that those funds will be contributed over time as was recently proposed by Dan Miller.
ReplyDeleteIt is no secret that the Mt. Lebanon Soccer Asociation has funds remaining from certain real estate that it sold following a previous effort to develop fields. It is my understanding that the association remains willing to put these funds towards field improvements/development should the municipality or school district ever agree to a support such a project. To date, every time the subject has come up, the Commission has shot down the project.
Dave Franklin
Dave, I am the first to admit that I know nothing about soccer or the association. Is Bird Park the only field that is used for soccer? Do other organizations use Bird Park? Is a soccer field the same size as other sports' fields - larger or smaller? Would the Mt. Lebanon Soccer be willing to sink the money into repairing Bird Park? I hear it is a mess.
ReplyDeleteOr here is a thought. Maybe they can take the funds from the sale of the property to develop/improve Robb Hollow Park's ball field for soccer.
Elaine
Soccer through the MLSA uses Bird, Jefferson Oval, the Turf, the Rockpile, Markham, Foster and Jefferson Pony Baseball Field. Soccer through the Rec Dept uses Dixon Baseball Field, Lincoln Baseball Field and Middle/Wildcat Baseball Fields.
ReplyDeleteA regulation soccer field is larger than a football field. We don't really have a regulation soccer field, but that generally only impacts the high school teams. The high school teams use the Turf and Bird. Lacrosse also uses Bird.
The MLSA has discussed spending money to improve Bird, but the Municipality would obviously need to grant permission etc. Now that Bird is showing it's age I think those discussions might increase. I also think the MLSA would consider contributing to any project that improves/increases playing space. Unfortunately, the Commission has had difficulty getting any project from the drawing board to implementation. We'll keep trying.
Dave Franklin
The money generally comes from the annual fees charged by Soccer Associations to the "members" children/parents, plus fund raising that includes government & private grants and gifts.
ReplyDeleteIn Mt. Lebanon's case, however, a particular source of funds and trail of those funds is quite interesting and of particular note.
About 12 years ago, the leaders of the Mt. Lebanon Soccer Association (MLSA) formed the Mt. Lebanon Soccer Foundation (MLSF) to accept and hold title to a 4.5 acre parcel of land in the 3rd. Ward...a tax deductible gift from a local Krebs family who had been unable to develop the parcel in the manner desired because of zoning restrictions and economic conditions. The various transactions were handled by former Commissioner and State Rep. Tom Stevenson's law firm that included now former SB member/pres. Alan Silhol. A soccer complex was planned by MLSA/MLSF that did not materialize for a number of good reasons. Now, follow what becomes the money trail :
1) the MLSF sold the property around 2002 to the Fitzgerald brothers (raised locally who ran/run a landscaping business in Scott Twp.) for $125,000 about 9 years ago, who intended that it be developed residentially...they gave that up and later sold it to Mark Kossman for $175,000...but, I digress ;
2) the MLSF's $125,000 next shows up on a 2003 Lebo DCNR grant application as a pledged funding contribution for the PURCHASE of the 23 + acre McNeilly property owned by a Rooney family that was to become McNeilly Park. Note that the grant application, subsequently approved for $200,000 and awarded to Lebo, was for the PURCHASE of the property, not its development. Note as well that Lebo, for unknown and questionable reasons, did not obtain the $125,000 for the PURCHASE of the property...follow the money trail ;
3) after purchase of the McNeilly property for $1,832,000 plus closing costs in 2003, funded by a $2,000,000 Lebo bond issue, the same MLSF $125,000 shows up on subsequent Lebo Capital Improvement Program project schedules for 2 consecutive years as a donation towards the DEVELOPMENT of McNeilly Park into soccer & baseball fields, stadium seating, concession stands, lighted parking lots, etc. at a then total additional cost of over $3,000,00. Because the then Commission could not obtain enough additional youth sports funding towards the McNeilly development during those 2years, a proposed bond issue to fund the development was denied ;
4) the same $125,000 was then subsequently earmarked to be contributed to a Mt. Lebanon community foundation that was being created by a number of well meaning individuals. The foundation was initially established as an Agency Fund under The Pittsbiugh Foundation, and is now the independant Mt. Lebanon Endowment Foundation ;
5) the MLSF $125,000 apparently did not find its way into the Endowment Foundation because it is also now being talked about as a possible, or even required, contribution towards a renewed attempt to develop McNeilly.
The old adage...."follow the money"...certainly applies here, as does "the devil is in the details".
Bill Lewis
Elaine,
ReplyDeleteYou asked how soccer got so much money ($250,000) in Peters). Notice there is a condition of first scheduling attached to that offer.
Mount Lebanon Aqua Club had a sweetheart deal on pool rental and said they would put up $100,000 for first scheduling privileges in our swimming pool in addition to their cheap rent. A $10,000 check came in from one donor and that was the end of the giving. I recollect the check was never cashed and was returned to the donor.
in other words it was just another false promise from the D. A. S. Do you really think Peters will perform any differently?
I think if our soccer association had any intention of giving their $125,00-$150,000 than that money would have been on the table for McNeilly Field. I never heard it was.
The Deadbeat Athletic Supporters are up to their old devices again with David Franklin and David Brumfield as their VOICES. Both individuals are on the Board or Chip Dalesandro's Youth Football Association.
Unfortunately, the Supervisor of Athletics and the AD are Out to Lunch on the field folly.
It appears from Mr. Lewis' comments that the the Deadbeat Athletic Supporters have been the
ReplyDeleteDeceitful Athletic Supporters since 2003. Do you really believe the lawyer VOICE of the Deceitful Athletic Supporters really doesn't know anything about this after 8 years? He is active in more than one sport and has three kids in school.
It appears to me that the VOICE of the Deceitful Athletic Supporters is the kind of lawyer that gives the other 99% of lawyers a BAD NAME.No wonder 4,000 folks signed a petition agains the HS project. The VOICE of the Deceitful Athletic Supporters is giving both local governmental units, and the Athletic Parents, a poor reputation.
Mr. Ewing, defamation is covered by your homeowners policy. We can contribute the proceeds towards field development. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteThe Lawyer
Dear Anon. Lawyer,
ReplyDeleteThe more I peel the onion about the Soccer Association, the more my eyes water.
It seems you have promised to use the sales proceeds from the field on more than one occasion.
What a rotten example your Board is setting for your own kids. Ask your Vice President if he is conducting himself in a manner his children would be proud of?
Elaine, when I answered your questions I did so with the good intent of advancing a meaningful dialogue. Clearly, that seems impossible with the likes of Mr. Ewing. Not to worry though - after a meeting yesterday to discuss field issues I came away with the sense that the Commission is equally tired of his rhetoric. If you would like more details on the field projects going forward, feel free to email me directly. I probably won't discuss then here in the future. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteDave Franklin
Dave, since I don't have your personal email address, I will continue to ask questions here. If you choose to respond, on the blog or email me privately, either way is fine with me.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Once again, Mr. Franklin avoids the issue of the $125,000 the Soccer Association/Foundation could contribute to McNielly field.
ReplyDeleteI’m not sure what I’m avoiding. There is no project to fund.
ReplyDeleteResolution R-16-11 provided that prior to requesting bids for fields at McNeilly, the Municipality would publish a list of items that would NOT be funded by Municipal dollars. At a minimum, this list was to include the cost of bleachers, field lights, storage rooms, etc. According to the Resolution, such items would be left to private groups or other fundraising efforts. Similarly, the Resolution required that BEFORE accepting any bid for field improvements, the Municipality shall have received a capital contribution from youth sports of at least $100,000.
I think most reasonable people can conclude that had the project been allowed to move forward, the soccer association (and all of the other associations), would have contributed in either one or both of the methods outlined by the Resolution.
Unfortunately, as Mr. Ewing well knows, the proposal failed to satisfy Commissioners Kluck and DeIulius so it did not move forward and no money has been contributed.
With respect to Mr. Lewis's comments, I think it is important to note that in each instance, the funds to be contributed were tied to development of field space, which as we know, has not occurred. Also, it should be noted that the soccer foundation did, in fact, contribute $10,000 to the Community Endowment. In fact, I think the soccer foundation's donation was one of the very first received by the Endowment in 2007.
I find it troubling that there are people in our community who, instead of trying to help, would rather criticize those who have already contributed and who continue to contribute.
Dave Franklin
Mr. Franklin, if I may offer a suggestion. If McNeilly is a dead issue and Bird Park is in the sorry state you say it is and the the youth organization have the $100,000 or so in the bank... wouldn't it be in the organizations' best interest to invest say $50,000 or so in improving a field that it has in hand rather than pursuing one in the bush?
ReplyDeleteThats just a suggestion from a rather uninformed resident with empty pockets - on these matters.
If the organizations exist for the kids and they got the money from residents for that use... it serves no one by sitting in the bank. Just a thought, take it for what you will. I'd like to contribute more, but not in this economy.
Giffen Good