YSA 990 2004 Statement 1 shows $30,000 contributed towards agreement
YSA 990 2005 Line 43a shows $26,000 contributed towards agreement
YSA 990 2006 Line 43a shows $30,000* contributed towards agreement
YSA 990 2007 Line 43c shows $30,000 contributed towards field maint. & improvements
Since the last batch of YSA 990's didn't all match the school district's numbers, I would be curious to hear what Jan Klein's records show.
From what I understand, YSA was not designated a 501(c)(3) until 2005. There are no detailed public financial records on the YSA prior to 2004.
*Corrected amount. See page 17 of the PDF file YSA 990 2006, "Statement 1 - Form 990, Part II, Line 43 - Other Functional Expenses."
Update May 18, 2012 8:25 a.m.
From: egillen476@aol.com
To: commission@mtlebanon.org, schoolboard@mtlsd.net
Cc: TSteinhauer@mtlsd.net, sfeller@mtlebanon.org, davefranklin4@gmail.com
Subject: Joint Maintenance Agreement
Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 22:42:04 -0400 (EDT)
Dear Commissioners and School Board Directors,
I would like to bring to your attention several posts from the Lebo Citizens blog involving Youth Sports Alliance and the Joint Maintenance Agreement concerning maintenance of school district fields.
Watching you agonize over cuts at the latest school board meeting, it might make sense to go after the low hanging fruit. Collecting YSA's outstanding payments could help eliminate some tough decisions for you.
Elaine Gillen
Update May 18, 2012 8:46 a.m. Minutes from the 11-23-09 Commission meeting where Dan Miller asks some tough questions about the Joint Maintenance Agreement. Note Bill Lewis' comments too!
Update May 18, 2012 8:46 a.m. Minutes from the 11-23-09 Commission meeting where Dan Miller asks some tough questions about the Joint Maintenance Agreement. Note Bill Lewis' comments too!
18 comments:
Just a slight correction: YSA contributed $30,000 to field maintenance, per their agreement with the District, in 2006. The $33,234 figure includes $3,210 for "Dues" and $24 for "(Bottle of wat" - whatever that means! (Maybe "Bottle of Water"?) See page 17 of the PDF file YSA 990 2006, "Statement 1 - Form 990, Part II, Line 43 - Other Functional Expenses."
For the period 2004 through 2007 YSA is down $4,000 against their guaranteed field maintenance agreement. They contributed a total of $116,000 for the period against a pledge of $120,000.
Thanks, RG, for clarifying that. I will make that correction on the original post. So overall, they are down around $54,000?
For those who watched or listened to Monday's school board meeting, the board spent quite a bit of time discussing amounts much less than $54,000 on the budget reductions list. Yet, they have been allowing YSA to slide all these years!
Elaine
Now you know why commissioner Brumfield said they didn't know how the sign revenue would be handled yet! They haven't figured out how to handle and TRACK money from agreements made 7 years ago.
It's not hard to figure out why the McNeilly Park plan can ever be started.
Its Sickening
I think it's time for a serious audit of both the municipality and the school district.
Actually, those audits are way,way overdue.
Maddie Miller
The $50,000 shortage from the YSA along with $16,000 from the Commission would make the $70,000 to fix the Bird Park drainage problem and not one commissioner has figured that out yet. Why not ask the Soccer folks for the $50,000?
John Ewing
I'm going to submit several comments over the next couple of days about these latest YSA Form 990 discoveries and the YSA and the Joint Maintenance Agreements generally. I'll start with comments about YSA representations concerning their purpose and their program accomplishments.
The YSA responds every year to the IRS Form 990's requirement for a statement about its "..Primary (tax) Exempt Purpose" as follows : " To improve and establish safe and playable athletic facilities for the youth of Mt. Lebanon". A very noble statement. Since this representation by YSA has remained the same for years, the Federal Government & Lebo citizenery could easily conclude and believe that (a) all athletics, not just field sports, are the concern of the YSA and that they are actively working as an organization in behalf of all sports, and that they have been and are achieving success in their purpose ; and (b) that this success supports their charitable qualification as well as not only their income tax exemption, but also their ability to offer federal tax deductability to those who might donate money or in-kind services to them.
But can in fact the YSA document that they devote time, energy and money towards accomplishing their exempt purpose for other than field sports, like ice hockey & figure skating, golf, tennis, basketball, crew, rifle, you name it ? And , can they document any measurable degree of success in any sport as a result of their specific efforts ? In other words, is their stated purpose on a federal form verifiable, or is it just a bunch of words in order to maintain exemption, etc. ?
Lets then move on to what they say annually on their 990's about themselves in response to a required "Statement of Program Service Accomplishments" : "Joint Maintenance Agreement with Mt. Lebanon Township and Mt. Lebanon School District. Intent of Agreement is to have regular meetings between parties involved to discuss conditions of facilities, and to give input and formulate ideas for maintenance and capital improvements. "
Their statement of accomplishment covers only field sports and athletic fields, but no other sports or ice rinks, golf courses, tennis courts, basketball courts, you name it. Therefore their actual purpose appears not to be what they say or imply it to be, and their singular focus is field sports & fields, period.
But have they actually accomplished their purpose in only field sports in the 13 years the Agreement has been in effect ? "To improve and establish safe and playable athletic facilities" ?
From all the bellyaching we have contended with from the YSA during its 13 years, one could easily conclude that Lebo has third world quality fields, many of which are unsafe. So, is the YSA speaking out of both sides of its mouth or saying anything that needs to be said in order to achieve its ends ?
Maybe the YSA will repond here and put us all at ease.
Bill Lewis
In the final football game of last season Mt. Lebanon lost to Woodland Hills by a score of 46-6 in the WPIAL playoff. We couldn't even score the extra point or a field goal.
The only way for Mt. Lebanon to lose by 40 points is if most of the Mount Lebanon players quit playing during the game.
I'd like to hear how the YSA, the Board, and Commissioners think supporting quitters is grounds for charitable tax-exempt donations by parents and extra millage on everybody's property?
I'd also like to know how a turf field keeps players from quitting in an important game?
John Ewing
The YSA's Form 990-EZ returns to the IRS only go back to calendar year 2004, while the Joint Maintenance Agreements started in and go back to 1999. The reason that the 990's don't go back before 2004 is that the YSA was not a 501(c)(3) prior to that. They were at best only a private corporate entity registered with the PA Dept. of State, Corporation Bureau prior to 2004. Or, less than that, perhaps an unincorporated association. Assuming that the terms of the Agreements since 1999 call for YSA payments to the District of $30,000/year, as they have for the known past and current 8 years (important to note that absolutely no allowance has been apparently been made for inflation and the cost of labor, materials & equipment in the string of Agreements, at least for the past several years), have YSA annual revenues been sufficient to fund known and presumed $30,000/year payment requirements of the Agreements since 1999 ? Have they fulfilled their "legally bound" commitments ?
Form 990's require historical revenue histories and indications of general sources. As such, the earliest available 990 provides YSA revenue history from 2004 back to the year 2000. And here's what it says :
2000 = $ 0
2001 = $20,175
2002 = $36,327
2003 = $22,716
2004 = $42,392
Draw your own conclusions. For the next few years :
2005 = $29,225
2006 = $38,411
2007 = $19,994
2008 = $18,518
Again, draw your own conclusions. Now for a couple of more years :
2009 = $40,700
2010 = $5,915*
*not from membership dues. There were $0 membersip dues.
How then could the YSA honor its "legally bound" Agreement requirement in years where its revenues fell below $30,000 ? To a limited degree based on the above YSA data, some deficient years could use the surpluses from a prior year if those surpluses had not been expended for things other than the Agreements. Another way could also be that the YSA began 1999 or 2000 with a very large net asset cash balance or fund balance from large donations (not tax deductible) or a prior sale of assets (taxable), and used those funds to help meet the payment requirements. Did such exist or occur ?
Makes you wonder a bit, doesn't it ? Here are known cash balances from 990-EZ's in hand :
2004 $8,620 beginning, $20,530 end
2005 $29,530 " , $22,300 "
2006 $22,300 " , $27,088 "
2007 $27,088 " , $15,143 "
Match these to the revenue years above and see what you conclude. I have to run to an appointment. Will provide a few more years later with some added commentary.
Bill Lewis
I'm back. Here's the data for the last few available years :
2008 $15,143 beginning, $29,562 end
2009 $29,562 beginning, $39,765 end
2010 $39,765 beginning, $31,918 end
So lets take a look at just the year for the most recent data available, 2010. The total reported YSA revenue for 2010 was only $5,915, and that was not from member dues...the reported payment to the District was only $10,000 rather than the "legally bound" $30,000....and the cash fund balance on hand at year end was $31,918, with more than enough to have covered the $20,000 outstanding balance owed to the District at year end, but didn't.
Lets now take a look at 2008. Total reported revenues were only $18,518....payments reported to the District were allegedly only $3,597, but the District reported never having received that or any YSA "legally bound" payments during 2008....and the cadh fund balance on hand at year end was reported to be $29,562.
If significant cash balances were available, why weren't at least some portions or greater portions applied to payments to the District ? And, why is the YSA revenue history so variable when the dues streams from the sports groups would be, should be, rather constant and much higher than reported based on the alleged playing memberships of the sports groups ?
Does anybody doubt from just the above that something is obviously amiss with the YSA ? Would any of you want to partner with the YSA in a "legally bound" Agreement that contains absolutely no remedies, recourses or penalties for default or breach of contract to protect you ?
Should we just sit back and allow the District and the Municipality to extend the Agreement without question or added protection and controls without strong objection ?
Bill Lewis
I sent an email to the Commission and School Board, and copied Tim Steinhauer, Steve Feller, and Dave Franklin. The email is included as an update to this original post. Dave Franklin responded to us all. Hopefully he will share his response on this blog.
Elaine
As a second update, I posted minutes from the 11-23-09 Commission Meeting where Dan Miller asks some pretty tough questions to Steve Feller about the Joint Maintenance Agreement. Don't miss Bill Lewis' comments. You can find the minutes here, as well.
11-23-09 Commission Minutes.
Elaine
The following are some miscellaneous comments about the YSA and Joint Maintenance Agreement while I wait to see if Mr. Franklin will submit his response on this blog to Elaine's letter to the Commission and School Board today :
1) while many may think the YSA is a large organization with a large governing board, a full complment of officers, etc. for all the *noise* they make, the roster of officers and board members is extremely small, terms are very short and complete board turnover is very frequent. This may offer a clue as to one reason for their operational disarray.
Because the YSA does not have a website, a site where one would normally be able to learn such information, I could rely only on YSA's 990-EZ filings where the names of officers, directors and trustees if any, have to be provided. Numbers alone can tell a story. The following is the sequential number of total officers & directors of the YSA for each of the 7 years of available 990-EZ's, 2004-2010 : 6, 5, 4, 2, 6, 3, 2. Amazing, huh !
2) YSA's revenues vary widely from year to year, and fall far below what should be results for thousands of alleged youth sports registrants in Lebo according to p dues requirement of $12/player-year. Annual revenues from 2000 to 2010 have been reported above in my May 17 4:23 PM comment.
Which youth sports organizations have been submitting dues to the YSA, and how much have they been contributing ? Well, wouldn't you know it that information is only spotty at best on the 990-EZ's. This information was not included at all in YSA returns for 2004, 2008, 2009 and 2010.
Here's what was reported for 2005 :
Aqua Club $ 917
Soccer Assoc. 8,208
Baseball 12,000
Softball 8,100
-------
$29,225
That's all there was, folks ! Where was football ? And all the other sports ? Hmmmm.
Here's what was reported for 2006 :
Aqua Club $ 1,085
Soccer Assoc. 9,036
Baseball 12,000
Softball 7,680
Basketball 1,218
Football 1,000
Lacrosse 2,200
--------
$34,219
I omitted a couple of non-club revenue sources. Note football came aboard, but at $12 per, $1,000 gets you only 83 players..thought football claimed hundreds ?
Here's what was reported in 2007 :
Aqua Club $ 924
Baseball 12,000
Girls Softball 7,020
--------
$29,924
This excluded an $85 non-club item.
Where's football, again, and all the other so-called YSA members ?
Note particularly, however, Baseball which stepped up to the plate big time each year as well as Aqua Club !
More coming next comment
Bill Lewis
Back again, waiting.
Well, whats next for the YSA hit parade ? My previous comment shows that the YSA seems to have a leadership number deficiency and turnover rate that is not in keeping with successful non-profit 501(c)(3)'s. To this is coupled erratic revenues and inconsistant contributors lists, incomplete and underpaying sports groups. Is disarray an adequate descriptive characterization ?
Here are a couple of further observations about the YSA :
1) The IRS Form 990's include a question that must be answered : "Did the organization engage in any lobbying activities ?"
In each and every 990 submission on hand, the YSA answered "No" to this question. It appears fairly obvious that the Schedule C instructions were not read or considered here, because it is patently obvious and many of us have the evidence that the YSA has been engaging in what the IRS classifies and defines as both "Direct lobbying communications" and "Grassroots lobbying communications" for years with Municipal, District and heavens know who else personnel. Personal private meetings, presentations and testimony at public meetins and public hearings, telephone, e-mail, you name it communications with public officials, elected and appointed, lobbying for everything that would constitute athletic-related legislation (ordinances, resolutions, motions) and spending. The YSA has failed to file correctly and acknowledge its lobbying. And has failed to submit the required additional information required in Schedule C, Parts 1 and 2 of the 990's. This also assumes the YSA or its leadership did not do any lobbying for or against any particular electoral candidates along the way...or have they ? Anyone have any evidence ?
2) In PA, the PA Attorney General is, by law, automatically a member of the board of all 501(c)(3)'s registered in PA. The AG has some very interesting powers in that regard for any mis-doings or shenanigans by the entities. "I'll say no more about that" - Forrest Gump.
Bill Lewis
I forgot to add something to the lobbying segment of my preceeding comment.
In 2010, the YSA turned over only $10,000 of its "legally bound" requirement of $30,000 to the District. They ended the year with $31,918 in the bank with no other liabilities...in fact they indicated no liabilities at all, short term or otherwise, even though still owing the District $20,000 at year end. Another reporting error.
But the connected lobbying point is this. While unwilling to pay their entire bill to the District, they did come up with a $2,250 donation for the Lebo "Veterans Memorial Park". While patriotic, it has nothing to do with their purpose; and, expenditures for things not directly connected with their designated purpoise have to be separatly reported and explained on 990's, and it was not. But as you think about this a bit more you have to ask, was this donation possibly made in an attempt to influence any elected or appointed public officials directly connected to and responsible for fundraising for the Park ? I certainly hope not, because in discovery that might result in some very serious consequences.
Bill Lewis
Bill, I checked the IRS instructions for Schedule C (Form 990 or 990-EZ) under Grassroots lobbying communications (bottom of page 2) and it says:
A grassroots lobbying communication is any attempt to influence any legislation through an attempt to affect the opinions of the general public or any part of the general public.
A communication is generally not a grassroots lobbying communication unless (in addition to referring to specific legislation and reflecting a view on that legislation) it encourages recipients to take action about the specific legislation.
A communication encourages a recipient to take action when it:
1. States that the recipient should contact legislators;
2. States a legislator’s address, phone number, or similar information;
3. Provides a petition, tear-off postcard, or similar material for the recipient to send to a legislator; or
4. Specifically identifies one or more legislators who:
a. Will vote on legislation;
b. Opposes the communication’s view on the legislation;
c. Is undecided about the legislation;
d. Is the recipient’s representative in the legislature; or
e. Is a member of the legislative committee that will consider the legislation.
A communication described in item 4 above generally is grassroots lobbying only if, in addition to referring to and reflecting a view on specific legislation, it is a communication that cannot meet the full and fair exposition test as nonpartisan analysis, study, or research.
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i990sc.pdf
Gee, has there been any lobbying in this community for fields or turf? How about athletic wings or field house or press boxes? What about purchasing parks?
Elaine
I wonder if the Pennsylvania Association of School Business Officials wiil consider retracting their Award of Achievement to the YSA for the Joint Maintenance Agreement if they thoroughly considered everything that has been laid at the feet of the YSA on this blog, particularly in the past week.
If not, that would confirm their lack of credibility.
And, isn't it totally in character for the YSA to have held the Muni & District hostage until they agreed to all the YSA terms in the 2009 Joint Maintenance Agreement. The Agreement was to have been effective in June, but was not finally approved until November 23, 2009 ! And then the YSA breached the Agreement in 2010.
Mt. Lebanon is actually a community of too many characters lacking character.
Bill Lewis
Still waiting, Dave !
Bill, not only are you waiting for Dave Franklin to share his letter here, we're waiting for the super duper YSA Plan that Dave Brumfield announced in his preview of coming attractions.
Elaine
In the post, Working Together 101
I gave my email address and asked for data so that residents would begin to work together and develop a plan that is fair and doesn’t break the bank. Nada. What I did hear from Dave Franklin was, "It seems like you have done a good job alienating yourself from much of the SB and now you've moved on to the Commission. That's unfortunate. I wish you luck in your efforts." Since your wife is now head of YSA, would you allow her to use the computer and comment on what has transpired so far? Dave, you have suddenly become quiet or are you just shy? Perhaps Mrs. Franklin can step in for you and take a leadership role in this. After all, her name will be on this year's 990EZ, if the YSA submits one.
Elaine
Post a Comment