An open letter to Mr. Broadhurst

The following letter to Brooks Broadhurst comes from Mt. Lebanon resident and Lebo Citizens blog commenter, James E. Cannon III.

Mr. Broadhurst,

Thank you for commenting. And to demonstrate the willingness to have an open and honest debate, something happening less frequently lately with our local elected officials, I am signing my name to my comment.

First off, I'm not sure a blanket indictment of anyone critical of the YSA "plan" is the best way to start a conversation. Stating that those opposed to the idea of artificial turf either don't value sports or don't understand them is rather simplistic and somewhat insulting. To the contrary, I submit that those opposed to a somewhat haphazard plan as the one that has been publicly delivered actually do understand organized sports and do, in fact, care about the well-being of the children who participate.

Anyone who lives in Mt. Lebanon has to at least acknowledge the emphasis placed on athletics here. While many of us believe that emphasis is entirely too strong at times, we accept it as part of the larger picture, as do residents in surrounding communities who live much the same way. That larger picture includes another major component--public education. I am a product of our local system and since graduating in 1987, have been thankful for the challenging curriculum I had to endure. While personnel come and go over time, our community's overall commitment to providing a strong academic base for our kids has not. For that continuity, and that alone, the school district should be commended.

There are many other aspects to living here that help create the notion it is an attractive place in which to reside. All that said, you and the handful of pro-turf folks are missing the point entirely. I have not heard one person thus far say they are opposed to organized sports. In fact, many of those involved in the discussion have or had kids involved in those activities. What we (the alleged sports haters) are against is using public money to pay for a pet project. Because in the end, that's really what this is.

The reality is there is no basis in fact that artificial turf is advantageous. I offer a letter with several links*  that point to just the opposite conclusion. That, Mr. Broadhurst, is far above and beyond any evidence offered in favor of the fields and the four “youth athletics experts”, whatever that means.  For those who live vicariously through their childrens' athletic performances, keep in mind that professional athletes, for the most part, prefer grass as it isn't as hard on their body. And while teens generally think of themselves as invincible and are typically more physically resilient, injuries do occur, so why risk it? After all, aren’t some parents and children really banking on their supposed superior athletic ability to carry them through life? If so, why take a chance on the investment bottoming out due to something as innocuous as the playing surface? One could say those of us opposed to the turf idea actually care more about sports and the kids playing them than those rallying around the idea. We’re simply looking out for their health and well-being. That aside, though, the big hurdle is how to pay for it. We've seen enough reckless spending in our community with little transparency and little actual input from the community And Mr. Broadhurst, I would submit that we all deserve better. All of us.

If the group in favor of turfing the fields delivered a realistic and viable plan outlining how the project would be funded without using tax dollars, and then maintained similarly, I would personally help dig the trenches for the drainage system as an act of pure benevolence. But unless that happens, the idea of spending more of our money on something that isn't necessary, and poses a physical risk to those using it, seems irresponsible, especially given the current economic environment.

I understand and appreciate your enthusiasm for youth sports. Yes, it instills teamwork and camaraderie and, one would hope, a more robust work ethic (as do other things in life like church or the military). But at the end of the day, it’s all still recreation. There truly are more important things in life than throwing a ball or catching one.  I would suggest the commissioners take a breather and focus on addressing issues that actually affect the entire community instead of a small interested group.

In the interest of fairness, as I have always offered, I’m open to a personal discussion regarding my views. If anyone would like to sit down and have a conversation regarding this matter, let me know. I prefer breakfast so if you’re an early riser, you go to the front of the line.

Respectfully,

James E. Cannon III

*Story links of interest:

1. http://ajs.sagepub.com/content/40/5/990.abstract

Study from the American Journal of Sports Medicine. Salient points are:

a. Results: The ACL injury rate during games (8.06 per 10,000 athlete-exposures [AEs] 95% CI, 6.80-9.42) was significantly greater than the rate during practice (0.8 per 10,000 AEs 95% CI, 0.68-0.93). Players were 10.09 (95% CI, 8.08-12.59) times more likely to sustain an ACL injury in competition when compared with practices. When practice exposures were analyzed separately, the injury rate was significantly greater during scrimmages (3.99 per 10,000 AEs 95% CI, 2.29-5.94) compared with regular practices (0.83 per 10,000 AEs 95% CI, 0.69-0.97) and walk-throughs (0 per 10,000 AEs 95% CI, 0-0.14). There was an incidence rate of 1.73 ACL injuries per 10,000 AEs (95% CI, 1.47-2.0) on artificial playing surfaces compared with a rate of 1.24 per 10,000 AEs (95% CI, 1.05-1.45) on natural grass. The rate of ACL injury on artificial surfaces is 1.39 (95% CI, 1.11-1.73) times higher than the injury rate on grass surfaces.

b. Conclusion: Between 2004 and 2009, NCAA football players experienced a greater number of ACL injuries in games compared with practices, in scrimmages compared with regular practices, and when playing on artificial turf surfaces. This latter finding will need to be confirmed by additional studies.


2. According to Reuter’s Health, April 30 2012:

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_124675.html

Story includes a quote from Dr. James Bradley, chief orthopedic surgeon for the Steelers.

3. http://images.nflplayers.com/mediaResources/files/Surface%20Survey%202010.pdf

Every two years the NFL Players Association surveys its members about playing surfaces. (You can see the entire surveyhere.) Not surprisingly, more than half (69.4%) prefer to play on a grass field as opposed to artificial turf. Only 14% preferred the artificial turf, while 16% indicated they had no preference or the question was Not Applicable.

For the first ten years of the survey the fields were ranked regardless of playing surface. The top three spots were always held by grass fields. In 2006 the survey began dividing the favorites into Best/Worst Grass Fields and Best/Worst Artificial Fields.

Recurring comments noted at the end of the survey include this one: “Artificial turf is much harder on the body with joint soreness and makes for tougher work. Southern grass fields are the best.” More than 89% of the players agreed, believing artificial turf to be the cause of more soreness and fatigue that playing on grass. The majority (82.6%) also believe that artificial turf is more likely to contribute to injury and almost 90% believe that playing on artificial turf is more likely to shorten their career.

But the NFL is obviously not taking the players’ concerns seriously, as almost 42% of the NFL stadiums have installed artificial turf. Who’s not listening?

New Meadowlands, home of the New York Giants and New York Jets

Cowboys Stadium, home of the Dallas Cowboys

Louisiana Superdome, home of the New Orleans Saints

Ralph Wilson Stadium, home of the Buffalo Bills

Georgia Dome, home of the Atlanta Falcons

M&T Bank Stadium, home of the Baltimore Ravens

Gillette Stadium, home of the New England Patriots

CenturyLink Field, home of the Seattle Seahawks

Edward Jones Dome, home of the St. Louis Rams

Paul Brown Stadium, home of the Cincinnati Bengals

Ford Field, home of the Detroit Lions

Mall of America Field at Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome, home of the Minnesota Vikings

Lucas Oil Stadium, home of the Indianapolis Colts


4. http://www.bethelfarms.com/blog/tag/artificial-turf-vs-grass/
Artificial vs. Natural Turf – The Hard Facts

Thursday, October 6th, 2011

There is a risk of injury with every sport, on every surface. But the fact is that risk increases when the playing field is artificial turf. Studies have found a higher incidence of surface to skin injuries and muscle strains and spasms on artificial turf. We looked at the dangers of surface to skin injuries in the last two posts, with both sanitary and heat-related injuries.

In the 2010 NFL Players Association Playing Surfaces survey, over 82% of players indicated they agree that there is a higher incidence of injury on artificial turf surfaces compared to natural turf. When asked which surfaces contributed to muscle soreness and fatigue, 89% responded “artificial turf.”

It’s not just opinion however. A five year study of eight high schools reported that athletes incurred more injuries on artificial turf surfaces. Of every ten games played, athletes incurred injuries 15.2 percent of the time when playing on artificial turf versus 13.9 percent of the time when playing on natural turf.

As Anaheim Angels’ Troy Glaus said after sustaining an injury on artificial turf in 2004, “You can’t simulate grass. No matter what you do, you can’t fake it…”


5. http://www.synturf.org/playersview.html

This page has 44 different blurbs from news stories regarding artificial turf and involves both football and soccer, domestically and internationally.

6. http://journals.lww.com/cjsportsmed/Abstract/2010/01000/Incidence_of_Injury_Among_Adolescent_Soccer.1.aspx

Conclusion: Adolescent players routinely training on AT for prolonged periods should be carefully monitored, even on AT conforming to new standards.

 

Presenting the Youth Sports Alliance Proposal Continued

I don't know how else to do this, so I am starting a new post, which is a continuation of the previous post, Presenting the Youth Sports Alliance Proposal. After 177 comments, it has gotten to be a little time consuming scrolling down to the end of the comments. Please read the final comments, including the thoughtful and respectful comment from Brooks Broadhurst. I am not snipping the thread, just asking you to post your comments on this one. I don't want to lose the momentum, but scrolling through 177 comments is a bit much. Thanks for your patience and cooperation.

Denied!

Want to know who had over $800,000 in unpaid parking tickets? So do I. I filed a Right To Know and received this letter in my mailbox today. Outstanding Parking Tickets RTK Among other things, the Drivers Privacy Protection Act was one reason my Right To Know request was denied.

The parking amnesty program resulted in payment on 111 tickets for an income of $1300.

I am learning quickly that the unreasonable, the uncooperative, and those who are above the law are the ones who seem to be ahead here in Mt. Lebanon.

Presenting the Youth Sports Alliance Proposal UPDATED 2x

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

The problem begins with all of us.

This letter to the editor comes from reader and frequent commenter, Charlotte Stephenson.

Elaine,

Since I originally composed this letter to the editor a few days ago, there have been numerous comments posted that may make this seem a bit redundant. Nonetheless, I am willing to post it anyway. Here is goes:

We really do have a problem in Mt. Lebanon and the problem begins with all of us. It’s true that we should feel angry and upset over the way our elected officials choose to spend our money without demonstrating an understanding of the impact of their decisions.

Money for turf may satisfy some families here, but the cost will impair others because the money will come from the taxpayers and the ongoing cost of this project does not appear to be fully understood. How can we be paying for turf when we don’t have enough money for our entire road repair or other infrastructure needs? The uncollected sum of $800,000.00 in parking violations among other chunks of dough that have fallen through the cracks according to Dave Egler demonstrate completely irresponsible fiscal management by someone and yet we do not really know much loss there has been or exactly how it happened. We have seen that the decision to overspend on a high school renovation project has already cost more to the taxpayers due to a recent change order and a fundraising feasibility study and at the same time we are cutting service to our students. Oh, and did or didn’t the YSA live up to their end of the bargain? The school district claims they have, but the IRS tell us differently. So if the payments weren’t made, who has been paying for all of the field maintenance? You know who has! How about the perpetual audits, we all know that a change in players from time to time is a good idea, but why hasn’t that happened?

What about the basic Sunshine Law? When I became frustrated for not getting information about the School District’s decision to conduct a feasibility study relative to the donor as we were promised by Board President Josephine Posti, I eventually filed a RTK. I am including the documentation here, but what is disturbing to me is the obviously blatant effort being made to keep our residents out of the loop as the directors and administration conduct business that we pay for.  Go ahead and read it, see what you think.

The situations discussed on this blog are concerning and frustrating, but venting our frustrations is not going to make any difference because anyone who has approached these authorities with their logical concerns has seen first hand that the sitting elected majorities (not everyone) are entrenched, inflexible and frankly incapable of changing their minds on these and other highly controversial issues. It’s politics at best, or worst around here depending on where one sits in the fiscally conservative department. So, what can we do?

If people really want to make a difference, it’s time to start recruiting potential candidates for the next election cycle for the open Commissioner and School Board seats. (Make sure they understand that a sitting official will stop at nothing to impair their campaign including authoring a slanderous letter under a fictitious name for illegal distribution throughout the community). Form an election committee and start soliciting donations NOW. Finally, keep a list of the egregious actions we continue to observe of those who will be running next time. The only way anything will change will be when new and motivated candidates who really want to serve the community and not their own agendas are sworn into office. Be sure to add some time in to motivate voters to actually go to the polls!

This community is learning the hard way why being an informed active voter makes a difference. If anyone can appeal to the Commissioners as to why spending a huge amount of money for artificial turf is irresponsible, good luck. It's about special interest politics plain and simple. The decisions the School Board made to spend too much on the high school, among other items and those that the Commissioners are making on turf will have far-reaching impact for a long time to come. These people may feel they are serving the next generation, but what they are really doing is ensuring that the next generation won't be able to afford to live here, one poor financial decision at a time. Everyone should be careful what he or she wishes for!

Finally, where have our other local representatives and senators been? Quite honestly, Elvis has left our building. How many times have any of them reached out to those of you who have made your concerns known? When I was featured as “A Newsmaker You Should Know” regarding the petition effort, I received a note and copy of the article from Matt Smith, but he never offered to talk further and see what he could do to help. Tim Murphy’s office has been an impenetrable fortress. They always ask for my donation and vote when the time comes, but there is obviously little interest in trying to deal with our local situation. Sure, local votes and local money matters, but beyond that these issues appear too hot to handle. It’s time for change all the way around, so who is willing to get started? We must remember, if we always do what we always did we'll always get what we always got!

-Charlotte Stephenson

Is the School Board President accusing County of mismanaging property assessments?

Josephine Posti updated her blog the other day with this post, Property Appeal Information. Posti writes:

The Board did decide, however, to send representatives to all commercial and residential appeal hearings, so that the appeal results would only be based upon valid evidence.

Is Posti accusing the County of basing appeal decisions on "invalid" information? According to her, is the County incompetent? Does she know that evidence other than "VALID evidence" is being considered?

Posti takes a shot at the Commission:

We need to better understand the Municipality's position on helping to pay for the current practice that the District has been fully funding on its own for six years.

Josephine continues about Commissioner Fraasch's ward:

How would homeowners in the other wards feel if they knew that a large number of homeowners in one ward are appealing their assessments and the Municipality and District aren't sending representation? 

Sounds like she is pitting one ward against another. Class warfare? The majority of Commissioner Fraasch's ward falls in the range as identified on Blog-Lebo and in James Fraasch's letter to Judge Wettick here.

Finally, Josephine's parting words:

I'm looking forward to hearing more discussion from the Commission on this issue as well as the issue of whether they would like to re-implement their practice of appealing recently sold residential properties that sell for substantially higher than their last assessment.

Nice try, Josephine. In a Commission meeting, Dave Brumfield said that you were going after the under assessed properties next year. It is rumored that you have no intention of doing that.  Which is it, are you or aren't you?

From a long silent voice

Elaine, Would you please consider publishing my email (below) to you? Good luck and from the silent majority, thank you.
Hello Elaine,

It’s been a while. I would like to thank you and the others who have sacrificed so much of their time, experience and insight to inform our community about so many of the problems in Mt Lebanon. One thing that is very clear is that our community has a number of very serious matters that need to be corrected by competent leadership and qualified management.

Something else that has become very clear is that the battle has now come to you. Have you noticed that “the other website” stopped posting comments? Have you also noticed that actors from all of the factions in the community are chiming-in on the colorful commentary on your site? The simple truth is that they all fear you Elaine. They know that you and the others who are contributing to your cause have the means to end the madness and permanently change the direction of Mt. Lebanon. If they didn’t believe that you have this power in your hands then they wouldn’t be here, they wouldn’t be listening and they wouldn’t be trying to define the rules of the game – their game, that they want you to play.

Please don’t play their game Elaine. Instead, focus your energy on developing new leadership for the community. Form a leadership that has the vision and the strength to appoint qualified management who will translate your vision into a meaningful strategy that will restore the founding values that made Mt Lebanon great for so many years.

You’ve communicated the burning platform and established a sense of urgency. You’ve energized the silent majority who share your values. Please plan, organize and get out the vote. Both parties have fragmented leadership and very little infrastructure. Nobody may have told you that you hold the destiny of the community in your hands Elaine, but I just did.

God bless you and from the silent majority, thank you.

Sincerely,

John David Kendrick

They have a lot of nerve!* UPDATED 2x

On Lebo Fields blog,

Field Proposal To Be Presented on June 25

The Mt. Lebanon Commissioners previously requested that the youth sports groups develop a proposal/plan for adding synthetic turf to one of our existing field spaces. Since that time, members of the youth sports groups have met with representatives from various turf companies, lighting companies, field space consultants, the municipal staff and the Commissioners. The plan will be presented on Monday June 25 @ 6:15PM during the Commission Discussion Session in the Commission Chambers. Please come and listen to this exciting proposal.

Here is the official agenda to Monday's Commission Discussion Session. 

My week has been consumed with YSA related activity.  Blogging, doing research on artificial turf vs. natural grass, filing Right To Knows over their contributions [or lack of], going to meetings, meeting with Commissioners, and writing emails are just some of the things I have been doing.

So now, the organization that owes over $140,000 to the School District is going to make an "exciting proposal" to the Commissioners. Unbelievable.

*Both the Commission and the YSA

Update June 22, 2012 4:45 PM I realize that the YSA says that this blog doesn't know what we are talking about, but as a mother and grandmother, I cannot sit and watch this happen.  As a taxpayer, I cannot sit and watch this happen.  What does it take to get the public involved?

From a reader:

The public should be aware of these issues before the turf presentation Monday.

From San Francisco parks & Rec Dept.

https://sites.google.com/site/sfparks/hpf

New York City (February 10, 2009)

        First Deputy Parks Commissioner Liam Kavanagh said that “The controversial material made from recycled tires will no longer be used in synthetic-turf fields for parks and schools." The officials said they stopped using it because it could pose a health risk.”. Officials said yesterday, "New York City will replace the crumb in all city fields."

New York City (February 3, 2009)

      US District Judge Paul Gardephe in Manhattan ruled that “toys containing a plastic-softening chemical [phthalate] linked to infertility and testicular cancer in men must be removed.” Artificial turf has been found to contain phthalates.

San Jose: CA (January 22, 2009)

      The San Jose Unified School district voted no to tire waste synthetic turf on environmental and health grounds.

   

Connecticut (January 2009)

      Connecticut State Representative Kim Fawcett will seek a moratorium on the installation of new synthetic turf fields until "such time as an honest assessment of its risk can be had."

New Jersey

      University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey set forth the findings of a scientific investigation into absorption of lead form artificial turf infill crumb rubber granules into gastric fluids. “[A] new study by researchers at the UMDNJ-School of Public Health finds that when children or athletes ingest the tiny rubber granules in synthetic turf, it is likely that a significant portion of the lead in the granules will be absorbed by their bodies' gastric fluids,”.

  

Dallas, Texas

       Fields in two well-known high school stadiums, including the one made famous by the book and movie "Friday Night Lights," were announced to have lead levels far exceeding the Environmental Protection Agency's standard for soil, according to independent tests.

Update June 23, 2012 4:30 PM The following links are from a RTK request filed several years ago 

concerning artificial turf for the high school, turfing Mellon and Wildcat fields, swimming pool issues,  and building an indoor sports facilities. 

Attachment 1
Attachment 2

Attachment 3

You're invited!

Reader and frequent commenter, Richard Gideon will be pointing out the differences between a flag that complies with code and one that most of us commonly see during a free lecture at 2 p.m. Sunday at historic Old St. Luke's Church. 

Expert: Many U.S. flags don't comply with code

June 21, 2012 5:02 am
By Carole Gilbert Brown

While most Americans know how to properly pledge allegiance to their country's flag, it's likely many don't realize that the flag they're saluting probably isn't fabricated to correct specifications.

Richard Gideon, 64, a Greene County native who lives in Mt. Lebanon and is a vexillologist, said the majority of correctly made flags flown today are only found in the military.

"When you see a code flag up against a commercial flag, you get a completely different feeling," he said.

He'll point out the differences between a flag that complies with code and one that most of us commonly see during a free lecture at 2 p.m. Sunday in historic Old St. Luke's Church in the Woodville section of Scott.

He plans to give a 15-20 minute lecture followed by a question-and-answer period.

Commercial flags will have the proper appearance in terms of pattern and design, they often lack the right aspect ratio, or correct proportional relationship between width and height, he said. The flag's length should be 1.9 times its width.

A stickler for detail and a history lover who became interested in vexillology -- the study of flags -- while researching his family's genealogy, Mr. Gideon's lecture is timely: 100 years ago this month that President William Howard Taft signed Executive Order 1556, which set uniform specifications and a pattern for the U.S. flag.

"That was the first time in history that the U.S. flag got some specifications," Mr. Gideon said, adding that the nation's rapid growth from 13 to 50 states was starting to make the flag "look like a bed sheet."

Although Taft amended his June 12, 1912, executive order four months later to explain his reasons for the first order, the next and last executive orders involving the flag occurred when Alaska and Hawaii joined the union in 1959 and 1960 during President Dwight D. Eisenhower's term. But, there have never been any penalties placed into the Flag Code, which is why Mr. Gideon believes differently proportioned flags are flying today.

When questions arose about proportion during the Eisenhower Administration, the president indicated that he was more concerned with "the spirit of the law" than strict adherence to specifications.

Although he understands why no one wants to penalize demonstrations of patriotism, Mr. Gideon believes correctly proportioned flags should be displayed at least in some specific places.

"I think public and government buildings ought to fly code flags," he said.

A veteran of the U.S. Air Force, Mr. Gideon started reproducing historic flags in 1994 as a hobby, but turned it into a business, Richard R. Gideon Flags, a year later.

He has authored 37 articles about flags and collaborated on flag books. Information: www.gideonflags.com.

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/local/neighborhoods-west/expert-many-us-flags-dont-comply-with-code-641346/

Another hole in Jan's story - Updated 2x - 990's added - Trib's correction

None of this is adding up.  June 7 Trib article:

The forms show that the YSA paid the district $10,000 in 2010, $3,597 in 2008 and $26,000 in 2005 -- about $50,000 short of what it owed. But district Finance Manager Jan Klein said the forms don't reflect that YSA members did $4,000 worth of work in 2005 to the fields.[YSA Payments from 1998-present from today's RTK request] Then-school Superintendent George Wilson John Allison* dismissed the amount owed in 2008 because of the group's insufficient funds; [John Allison was hired in June 2007 and left in the summer of 2009.] and the organization paid the $20,000 balance for 2010 last year. [No payments are shown for 2011.] 

"The payments weren't always made on exactly the dates in the agreements... but our records are very clear," Klein said. "We've confirmed every one of the payments in their records, and we're completely in agreement."[I don't think so.]

          YSA 990-2008 Line 28 shows $3597 contributed towards agreement
          YSA 990-2009 Line 28 shows $30,000 contributed towards agreement
          YSA 990-2010 Line 28 shows $10,000 contributed towards agreement 

For 2011, which hasn't shown up yet in the online IRS records, the YSA paid $10,000, and will soon write a check for the other $20,000, Klein said. [Sorry, but that is not what is being shown on the RTK I received today.] The payment for 2012 will depend on renegotiation of the agreement. In all, the only outstanding payment is $20,000 for last year, Klein said. [I calculate over $100,000 according to the RTK.] 

For the record, I never did see the statements from Jan Klein that Chip Dalesandro was referring to in the post, I had a visitor today...  How could George Wilson dismiss the amount owed when he wasn't even the superintendent? Who dismissed it? The School Board at that time? Or was it Jan Klein?

I think this needs to be investigated, Folks. Nothing is adding up.

*The article now reads, "John Allison."

Can't even title this due to my recent development of Tourette's

I am trying very hard not to interject any profanity for this post. My RTK was just granted.  Here is a copy of the email.

Cc: Dr. Timothy Steinhauer TSteinhauer@mtlsd.net, Thomas Peterson TPeterson@tuckerlaw.com, Jan Klein JKlein@mtlsd.net

Gillen response 2012-30 

Dear Mrs. Gillen,

Thank you for writing to the Mt. Lebanon School District with your request for information pursuant to the Pennsylvania Right-To-Know law.

On June 18, 2012, we received your request for a copy of the YSA payments made by date for years 1998-present which Dr. Steinhauer presented to the school board directors at the June 11, 2012 school board meeting.

Attached is a response to your request.

Please acknowledge receipt of this email.

Sincerely,

Jeanine Szalinski
Administrative Assistant/Open Records Officer
Superintendent's Office
Mt. Lebanon School District
7 Horsman Drive
Pittsburgh PA  15228
412.344.2077

YSA Payments from 1998-present

Have fun with this one, guys! Don't miss the response. No document was presented to the Board at the June 11 meeting. I want to thank Mrs. Szalinski for providing the information I requested.

Who cares about the poll? UPDATED

I sent this letter to the commissioners this evening.

Commissioners,
On my Lebo Citizens blog, I have extended the deadline for the latest poll about artificial turf. I mentioned Dave Franklin's blog hoping to give the community the opportunity to learn more about Dave Brumfield's plan. As of today, your project has the support of 25% of the voters. 61% of the voters do not want any artificial turf. 13% would rather have other fields improved instead of Wildcat and Middle fields.
I would like to include two articles about turf.
http://www.westcoastturf.com/pdfs/real3.pdf Check page 4 for the costs and requirements of Franklin's maintenance-free artificial turf.
http://www.redhenturf.com/pdfs/TheTruthAboutArtificialTurf.pdf The case for staying with grass is overwhelming.
Elaine Gillen

I got this nice response from Dave Brumfield.

Thank you for your input. I have seen those articles and they do represent one perspective. As to the poll, it is a shame that such a minuscule portion of our community participated.
Thanks again for your efforts.
Dave

This thoughtful response was from John Bendel:

Elaine,  

Thanks for the articles. I read both of them. I have seen similar ones plus others that have different conclusions. The second article was particularly interesting. The one thing that isn't considered in these articles is the use-ability of synthetic turf fields vs. grass fields. For example, installing synthetic turf will increase the use-ability of these fields, i.e. more games and practices. This would be especially true for wildcat and middle. The current use of these fields is predominately for baseball. Using synthetic turf will continue to allow for baseball plus it would accommodate full a full size soccer, lacrosse and football fields. This is not possible with the dirt and grass surface at wildcat and middle. The size of the same surface field (all synthetic turf) would permit more than one team to practice simultaneously, which isn't practical under the current configuration. So when considering cost, grass vs. synthetic turf, in my view, use-ability is a more appropriate way to measure cost-benefit vs. simply using annual cost. 

As you may know, some of our sports teams are renting fields in other communities because fields are not available in Mt. Lebanon. That has motivated me to explore options to meet the needs of our players and families. Because we have limited options to create new full sized fields, I believe we should enhance the condition of our current fields like we have started to do with the drainage improvements at Bird field. Similar improvements can be made at Brafferton. Likewise, I view the use of synthetic turf at wildcat and middle as a field enhancement and a viable option that should be seriously considered. Finding a site large enough for a full size field is difficult in our built community and would likely cost at least as much to develop as turfing wildcat and middle. Even the second bullet on page 16 of the "red hen turf" article that you sent concludes that synthetic turf should be considered if a school (community) doesn't have land near it to expand and the field will be used for multiple sporting events all year round. I think Mt. Lebanon meets that criteria. 

The red hen turf article contains a good set of questions that we need to address. In addition, we need to better understand the maintenance of synthetic turf. Finally, the sources of funds to complete the project need to be discussed. 

Thanks again for forwarding the articles.

John

And from my commissioner, Kristen Linfante's reply:

Elaine,
Thanks for forwarding the articles and alerting us about your poll. I was not aware of the poll, and you did not mention the number of people who participated in the poll, but based on Mr. Brumfield's email, I imagine it was, unfortunately, a very small number.

Both articles make interesting points, however, I second Mr. Bendel's comments and observations which he so eloquently stated in his email. I too believe that turfing Middle and Wildcat would dramatically improve the usability of those fields - especially since they would become a single multi-purpose facility that could accomodate all field sports. My goal is to find a solution that can accomodate the largest group of people/players. Just as I am willing to support a skate park to serve our skating community, I would like to be able to serve the needs of as many sports groups as possible with a field solution. In my mind, turfing Middle and Wildcat would do just that. It would be very difficult for me to single out any one sports group and say that they deserve more field time and space than others. By developing a multi-use turfed field, we can address the needs of virtually every group involved in field sports. We could not accomplish this anywhere else in Mt. Lebanon due to space limitations. While I and my family are not particularly interested or involved in sports in Mt. Lebanon, I still recognize that sports and outdoor recreation in general are valued by a good number of adults and children in the community, whether it is skating, or baseball, or lacrosse, or football, or any of a number of activities. This is a fact that I am not willing to ignore.

Thanks again for sending the articles.
Kristen Linfante
Commissioner, Ward 3

Looks like a done deal, so I am closing the poll, even though I previously extended it. I wanted to be fair after letting people know about Dave Franklin's blog, Lebo Fields. They really don't care what we think. Dave Franklin, you win.

Update June 20, 2012 12:55 PM The following is a very long email, which is too long to post as a comment.

Bendel's Email
Permission to share.

It's been interesting watching the machinations surrounding the artificial turf issue.  I understand there is room for difference of opinion, but what I don't understand is when somebody is convinced of something that is logically not possible and I especially do not trust commissioners that refuse to do their homework.

Mr. Bendel states:
"Using synthetic turf will continue to allow for baseball plus it would accommodate full a full size soccer, lacrosse and football fields"

Wait, how in the world is this possible unless you are expanding the footprint of the field.  But these fields are surrounded by fences, a hill and a street.  I don't see how there could be any expansion to allow for these other field sports. Indeed, if the field is big enough after turf to house these sports, then they should be able to use the field today in the same manner. On this point it appears that Mr. Bendel has been sold a line of goods from the snakeoil salesmen in Mt. Lebanon.  Maybe Mr. Bendel thinks the dirt infields will also be turfed? If so, then the main purpose of the fields (baseball fields as he points out earlier) changes from baseball to all-purpose and the baseball experience gets degraded because of the change.  If they do change to all turf, who would be responsible for raising and lowering the pitching mound?  I know, small potatoes right?.

Mr. Bendel states:
"Even the second bullet on page 16 of the "red hen turf" article that you sent concludes that synthetic turf should be considered if a school (community) doesn't have land near it to expand"

Did Mr. Bendel not read the proposal put forth by Commissioners Fraasch and Kluck?  There is space to expand.  There could be a field where public works is currently letting all their equipment sit idle (forcing public works to clean up their act and stop using land not dedicated for their purposes). There could be a full sized field at Robb Hollow.  Each of these solutions would cost less than turfing Wildcat and Middle.   Since the staff and others have said that we have a field SPACE issue and not a field CONDITION issue, adding a new grass field would make sense.  Adding two or three hours a day of practice time by turfing does NOT give the same benefit as adding 10-14 hours of practice time that a completely new field would allow.  I am sorry, but being able to practice on turf in the occasional rain shower does not provide the level of convenience needed to justify such an extravagant expense. Do your homework, Mr. Bendel.  Read the proposals by other people besides your 1st ward athletic supporter in chief! Decide for yourself which proposal makes economic sense!

Mr. Bendel then states:
"...we need to better understand the maintenance of synthetic turf"

This is a lie as the rest of his email response already indicates that he has decided on artificial turf.  But, the statement is true.  The Commissioners all need to know the answers to the following questions before they move forward with artificial turf:

1. Who will maintain the artificial turf? Will it be a current employee that will attend the classes and training to properly maintain the field or will they have to have a new Full Time position dedicated to this? What is the cost of this?
2. What does the municipality need to maintain the turf? What money needs to be put in the budget annually for the cleaning (to combat MRSA)? What money needs to be budgeted for equipment to clean and maintain the field (heavy duty vacuums are needed for proper maintenance and warranty protection)?
3.  How will the municipality budget for the turf replacement in 7 years? Will they increase taxes to pre-pay the replacement? Or will they simply try to find the hundreds of thousands of dollars to replace the turf when the time comes leaving it to future commissioners to decide?
4.  What is the 10 year cost of turf (including replacement) versus the 10 year cost of maintaining a grass field?

My guess on this last point is the following:

Turf:
$1,100,000 installation
$400,000 replacement in year 8
$25,000 maintenance equipment (we definitely don't have this)
$200,000 annual maintenance (cleaning supplies, vacuuming, 1 ft employee w/benefits) (10 years is $2,000,000)((see: http://www.piedmont.k12.ca.us/forms/turf/mondoturf/Mondoturf_Maintenance.pdf)

$3,525,000 total 10 year cost

Natural Grass:
$0 installation
$0 replacement in year 8
$25,000 maintenance equipment (assuming we don't have it already)
$50,000 annual maintenance (this would INCREASE our current budget for Middle/Wildcat fields so that we can properly maintain it with better draining/fertilization/etc)

$525,000 total 10 year cost.

Cost difference over 10 years of $3,000,000 (not including interest on a likely loan for the turf)

Maintenance for artificial turf will not be less than that of grass. In fact, in all likelihood, it will be more.  Most professionals recommend you have someone on staff that is properly trained in artificial turf maintenance if you are going to install the stuff.  That person does not exist on our current staff and would have to be trained or hired.  Otherwise, most turf companies can include in their bid an annual maintenance amount so that the company will properly maintain the field and therefore maintain the warranty. As part of the turf bid, I would recommend that the commissioners include this cost just for comparisons sake.

Until and unless the staff at the municipality can put forth a comprehensive analysis (better than the back of napkin stuff above) then nobody should be voting on anything.  To my knowledge, none of this has been done.  This is why it is so disappointing to see commissioners like Bendel jump on the turf bandwagon when they have no idea what the costs are.  What if staff put together the calculation and showed that turf was $10,000,000 more expensive over 10 years due to increased maintenance and liability? I don't think that would make a single of the pro-turf commissioners even blink an eye.  This is why this topic isn't about what is right for the community, Elaine.  This topic is one of commissioners paying back their friends for helping to get them elected. And we all thought Quid Pro Quo was something left to the US Congress! Local elections matter, folks! Someone should do a RTK for any and all emails related to artificial turf for both the commission and school board.

You won't know who I am, but I will be actively campaigning against any of the commissioners that do not do their homework on this and vote blindly for artificial turf.  In the end, turf is a WANT, not a need. In times of budget contraction, how in the world can anyone justify this additional burden on taxpayers?


Citizen_A

No contract for appeals!!!!!

David Huston filed a Right To Know on June 14, 2012 asking for the most recent version of the contract with Diversified Municipal Services. This is the company hired to represent the School District during the OVER assessed appeal hearings as reported in this post Wouldn't this be a cheaper way to go for everyone? UPDATED David's RTK was granted today. Right to Know response To summarize, there is no contract!

Let's go back to last night's school board meeting.  David Huston asked our solicitor about the appeal process. Link to podcast Listen to the tail end of the meeting. It is in the Questions or Comments from Residents portion of the meeting.

In an email to Tom Peterson, David wrote this:

Mr. Peterson,
  According to the P-G, attached,  "Shortly afterward, (March 2006) the school board decided to hire the firm Diversified Municipal Services to represent the school board at appeal hearings."

My RTK request revealed there is no agreement with DMS.

How can the District use their services without any written agreement?

David was able to locate the meeting minutes that included the agreement.

From the 18-SEP-2006 meeting minutes:

It was moved by Garson and seconded by Rose that the Superintendent [Wilson] is authorized to retain representatives for representation of the District at residential tax appeal hearings before the Board of Property Assessment Appeals and Review.

ROLL CALL For: Campbell, Garson, Remely, Rose, Silhol, Walton, Rodella

Abstained: Posti

Against: None

MOTION UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED

Posti and Remely were the only current directors on the board at the time. Wilson was two superintendents ago. Posti abstained because she was in the process of appealing her own assessment. Does this authorization extend six years, two boards and two supers later? At Monday's meeting, Peterson referenced the authorization of 2006.

Other Districts, such as West Jefferson, hire DMS on retainer at $1000 a month. Their agreements are online. Ours is $100-$150 a case because we have more appeals. There is no written agreement for ours.
I want to know if there have been any recent appeal hearings in which DMS was not present. Any feedback from readers?
Listening to Elaine Cappucci's report, she really took a shot at the commissioners for not sharing the expense of the appeals. Rumor has it that Josephine Posti has no plans to go after the underassessments. Of course not.

Let's hear it for Directors Ostergaard and Goldman!

Last night, the school board directors voted and approved raises for head custodians, administrative assistants, supervisors, specialists, custodial/maintenance employees and administrators (3%). June 18, 2012 School Board Meeting Agenda  Scott Goldman explained why he was going to vote no. Dale Ostergaard also explained why he was voting no. Watch the meeting or listen to the podcast and hear Josephine Posti publicly scold Dale for his reasons. Larry Lebowitz also chimed in and supported Josephine. We knew it was going to go that way since Josephine included in her monthly report how Dr. Steinhauer deserved his raise. Here is the best part. Scott Goldman asked Tom Peterson if the vote was 9-0 against the raises, would the staff still get the raises.  Peterson said, "Yes." Then Goldman asked why even vote if it is guaranteed. Peterson said that's the way it's always been done.
It's on the podcast.
Remember what USC's superintendent did? Is Steinhauer in this for the money? Evidently.

The never ending story about YSA contributions

Last week, I had sent the following email to the school board.

From: egillen476@aol.com [egillen476@aol.com]

Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2012 10:12 AM 

To: School Board Email list 

Subject: YSA payment schedule 

School board directors, 

Would one of you be so kind as to share a copy of the YSA payment schedule which Dr. Steinhauer passed out to you at last Monday's meeting? Since Mrs. Szalinski is working on so many other RTK's that are coming her way, perhaps you can lighten her workload a tad and share this information with me informally. 

Elaine Gillen

From:  Josephine C. Posti <JPosti@mtlsd.net>

Date:  Mon, Jun 18, 2012 1:43 pm

Mrs. Gillen,
In accordance with Commonwealth law, please send in a Right to Know request and 
Mrs. Szalinski will process your request.


For the Board,

Josephine Posti
President
Mt. Lebanon School Board
412.667.1479
http://jposti.blogspot.com/

Mission: To provide the best education possible for each and every student


________________________________
MTLSD DISCLAIMER: THIS TRANSMISSION IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL, AND 
EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED 
RECIPIENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THE MESSAGE TO 
THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, 
RETENTION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY 
PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY THE 
SENDER IMMEDIATELY.

So it looks like I have to file another Right To Know. 

While I am on the subject of RTKs and the YSA, a RTK was granted today with these results.
RTK George Wilson/YSA

So that puts a hole in the story that Jan Klein told the Trib.

12 Year Old Girl Outdoes The YSA

A former Mt. Lebanon resident sent me this link from the Chartiers Valley Patch. http://chartiersvalley.patch.com/articles/softball-player-working-to-get-lights-for-field The resident wrote:

Thought it was interesting that a 12 year old has a plan and proposal to have lights installed on a local field with no cost to taxpayers, while the Lebo YSA, full of adults, can't get a plan together, and expects taxpayers to pay for everything.

I attended the meeting, she will apply for a grant through Duquesne Light.
You should see the field she wants to light. In the last 3 years the STAA (Scott Township AA) has taken it from a beat up field with only wooden benches and totally transformed it.
Dugouts, scoreboard, regraded it, bathrooms, etc. All at very little cost, if any to the taxpayers. Lots of fundraisers, donations and blood, sweat and tears. A group of dads worked 10-12 hours a week for a year to complete it.

The Patch article includes pictures of the field. There is resistance from local residents over the lighting.

Kelly's and Matt's plan reduced to this

On April 19, 2012, the Commission held a special meeting to get input on parks/rec maintenance, and improvements. Link to special meeting. Unfortunately, the applause tends to get annoying.  According to the rules, applause is frowned upon and discouraged.
On April 23, 2012, the Commission held a public hearing on the unassigned fund balance for certain capital projects. Link to the Manager's Recommended Ranking of Potential Capital Improvements Kelly Fraasch and Matt Kluck put together a plan which was picked apart by Dave Brumfield and Kristen Linfante. It included a mower for the golf course to replace the broken one.  It was eliminated!  Turf war? includes a letter from Kelly Fraasch explaining the plan.  Dave Brumfield's plan is to turf Middle and Wildcat fields, which are the Municipality's finest fields. Here is what is left of the ordinance which will be voted on at the next meeting. http://mtlebanon.org/DocumentCenter/Home/View/8935
May I remind everyone of an event which will be taking place in October? Plein Air Comes To Town October 2- 7; artists will be coming from all over to Mt. Lebanon neighborhoods to paint over 200 pieces of art and sell them. We will be able to request locations, in hopes that an artist chooses it. Do you think we should be spending money on artificial turf for fields that are already in great condition? That money will go far in beautifying our community for this event. Or we could spend it all on artificial turf. Your choice.  Please vote accordingly.

Yet another "story" about YSA's contributions

Remember what Jan Klein wrote to Richard Gideon in this post, YSA vs. MTLSD - Updated? Remember the YSA 990's that I linked to in the same post?

Then we have the Trib reporting in my post, NSF YSA Makes The Trib!

Then-school Superintendent George Wilson dismissed the amount owed in 2008 because of the group's insufficient funds; and the organization paid the $20,000 balance for 2010 last year.

Now we have Dr. Steinhauer reporting that the Joint Maintenance Agreement has served us well. In fact, the YSA had paid $30,000 in 2008.  Huh? Listen for yourself on the podcast.  It starts at approximately the 58 minute mark. June 11, 2012 School Board Meeting

How many more versions of the story are out there?  Someone is lying to someone somewhere!!!

I do want to thank those school board members who questioned Jan Klein and Dr. Steinhauer. It is appalling how we can't get a straight answer.

They sure like to take care of themselves...

The agenda for Monday's School Board meeting has some items listed that should be highlighted.
June 18, 2012 School Board Meeting Agenda

(6) Approval of Administrative Salaries: RESOLVED, That the Board approves the 2012-2013 list of annual salary adjustments for administrators effective July 1, 2012, reflecting an average increase of 3.0%.

*(7) Act 93 Administrative Agreement: RESOLVED, That the Board approves the Act 93 Administrative Pay for Performance Plan as presented effective July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2017.

Whereas Upper St. Clair administrative salaries are frozen, here in Mt. Lebanon where students are charged for parking, our administrators get a 3.0% increase.  Nice, huh?
I believe Jan Klein falls under Act 93. I haven't heard the podcast yet, but is this an increase or a decrease?

And the infamous Nello Change Order has entered the picture again.

*(6) High School Project Change Order #GC-001: RESOLVED, That the Board approves Change order GC-001 dated June 7, 2012 to Nello Construction in the amount of $189,306 for the importing of new earth material and changes in waterproofing and grade beam work substantially in the form presented.

*All matters of new business were considered and discussed by the Board at its Discussion Meeting on June 11, 2012, except as noted (*).

Holy Cross Food Festival!!

Wednesday marks the beginning of the 40th Annual Holy Cross Village Festival. Lunch is available from 11:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. and Dinner is available from 4:30 p.m. to 9 p.m. Wednesday through Saturday.

Parish Festival Menu 

Takeout orders can be phoned in (412.854.6001) or faxed (412.833.0982) Fax Order Form 11:30 - 7 p.m. Wednesday through Friday and can be picked up in the lower level of the Community Center.
For more information, visit http://www.holycrosspgh.org/festival.htm

Evening Entertainment

Kali Orexi!
(Bon Appetit or Good Appetite)

What is a sharpshooter?

At Tuesday’s Commission meeting during Citizens Comments, I said that Matt Santoni’s article Deer culling program weighed in Mt. Lebanon stated that the USDA was using sharpshooters, where in fact, the USDA hires biologists who are not sharpshooters. I got an email from an outraged reader who said that they are sharpshooters by definition since they were using high powered rifles and are hired to kill deer with as few shots as possible from a distance. I disagree.  If I gave a monkey a high powered rifle with a couple of bullets, that does not make him a sharp shooter. The reader went on to say that there are good sharpshooters and bad sharpshooters, which combines contradictory of terms. I decided to look up the definition of sharpshooter.  According to Merriam -Webster, a sharpshooter is defined as a proficient marksman. The second definition is a consistently accurate shooter (as in basketball).  Thefreedictionary.com defines sharpshooter as 1. One who is highly proficient at shooting and 2. The second military grade of proficiency in the use of rifles and other small arms. 

According to page 28 of the safety report http://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/nwrc/Safety_Review/content/Firearms_Report.pdf, one of the problems defined was that Wildlife Services was faced with the possibility of hiring biologists and field employees with little or no firearm experience due to the shortage of sharpshooters.  This should be a great concern to our commissioner who is a proponent of deer culling. She felt that we could have a deer culling in parks and not on private property.  That is a problem since I reside next to a park.  Kristen Linfante suggested using our parks which are not close to homes. I would be curious to know which parks fit that criteria. 

I hope the reader doesn't get upset when I make this statement.  The article says that the USDA uses night vision goggles.  Hate to say it, but I saw this with my own eyes. They use flashlights.  Sorry.

Don’t get me wrong.  We have a deer problem. Actually, last night, my dog was pushed down the steps and cornered at the bottom of the driveway by a doe who was protecting her newborn fawn. We made an emergency visit to the vet where my dog was treated for cuts and scratches, nothing serious - thank goodness. Two hundred dollars later, I still understand that the deer was doing what mothers do naturally. 

This brings us to the Deer Management Town Hall Meeting that will be held on Monday, July 9 at 7 p.m. in the Commission Chambers. All I hear is that something has to be done, but what?  Bring your ideas to the special town hall meeting. Please don’t suggest introducing mountain lions to the community.  Commissioner Brumfield cracks up every time he hears that option.  I agree, not a good option.

Matt Smith signs on to House Bill 737, Unpaid Parking Tickets Bill

A reader sent me this information today.

Dear Elaine,

Thank you for your honest blogging.  I’ve been reading it since Day One.  I  have been following the parking ticket issues closely.  I read where someone on your blog wrote:    

            Anonymous said...

While I think it's good that Dave and Dave and Bill and Bill and other are bring these things to light. Have you ever considered that the reason they don’t listen is because of the way you express yourselves? In the last 3 PA posts you have attacked the municipality, the fomer PA board, the Auditor, the solicitor, the employees. After reading the way they are treated I would ignore you too. Maybe if you were nicer they would listen. Maybe not.

June 11, 2012 12:16 PM

I’ve also read things on your blog about how people don’t do anything about the wrongs that are happening, so I decided to hunt for ways to expose the people whose unpaid parking tickets have caused this mess. The people who are responsible for not collecting the ticket money are not doing their jobs.  Therefore, I started to research parking tickets and found how millions and millions of dollars are not paid to towns and cities all over the Commonwealth and even the Nation.  If you break the law, you should have to pay the consequences.  I found House Bill 737 and saw that this Bill has been sitting in the Transportation Committee for 16 months.  Why would it be sitting there for 16 months? So I made calls to all the legislators, including Matt Smith at 412-571-2169.  He called me back today and thanked me for calling him about the Bill I found.  He called the Transportation committee where this bill is hung up at and “signed on to it” and is “pushing” for this bill to be discussed in committee.  He asked me to get the word out and said I could put it on the blog.  He said to post “Leadership” Mike Turzai’s office, at 717-772-9943 so that this Bill can get going.

If we are nice, we get ignored and the aggressive people get their fields turfed with our money while streets are not getting fixed, unless we float bonds. I hope your readers call Mike Turzai’s office.

Strike Three. You're Out! - UPDATED

This was submitted as a comment to an earlier post, but I thought it deserved its own space.

The YSA has failed to produce a field plan proposal once again! At the "Town Hall" meeting on April 19, they promised a plan by the next Commission meeting, which was held on April 29th...a YSA no show, “Strike one.” They then promised a plan to the Commission by the end of May.  “Strike 2,” they wiffed again. Last night, a special public Commission meeting was held to discuss various recreation plan proposals, and guess what, “Strike 3.” No YSA plan was available; but the Franklin's were in attendance, silent, in the very last row near the exit door. To me, 3 strikes and you're out...or, no promised plan and you forfeit the game. Either way, the YSA proves once again it is all no-show and no go!

I was at that meeting last night and posted the podcast this morning. I believe the YSA plan has morphed into the Dave Brumfield plan which is to turf Middle and Wildcat Fields for roughly $800,000. I don't quite understand the logic behind that since those two fields are the Municipality's best fields. Does it make sense to improve the good fields and let the bad fields get worse? Help me out here. I just don't get it.  This was part of Dave's plan for a bond. Kristen Linfante was the keeper of his papers. From what I understand, Dave's plan was submitted around 5:00 yesterday. The meeting started at 6:30. 

Kelly Fraasch wanted to reach out to all the sports groups and speak with them individually and not just rely on Dave Brumfield's input. Bill Lewis pointed out that of all the organizations, Field Sports are the only ones who don't contribute any funds and yet Dave's proposal is for fields. Kelly would also like to collect any outstanding commitments from the various sports groups.  I am so glad she is on that commission. Thank you, Kelly!

Update June 12, 2012 4:30 PM Please cast your vote in the new poll concerning artificial turf in Mt. Lebanon.  It would help the commissioners. Thanks!

Former Assistant Director of the Mt. Lebanon Parking Authority Speaks Out

It is finally time for me to enter the rarified air of the blogosphere.  I would like to start with answering a few questions related to the $800,000+ ticket issue and who may or may not be responsible. 

• Didn’t anyone else know about the problem of unpaid tickets? – Most Authority employees knew there was little effort in collecting unpaid fines, but they had little recourse.  Since their supervisor and Board members were the problem, and there was fear of reprisal, you get the picture. 

• Payments made by cash in the ticket envelope and dropped in the fine box may not have been marked as paid. – I am unaware of any tickets not processed properly.  The clerical staff responsible for entering and processing these payments, were capable and honest individuals.

• Mr. Brumfield was a former Parking Authority Board member. – Commissioner Brumfield together with the other four Commissioners took over in the final days of the Authority when the Parking Authority Board was dissolved.  During this short period of time, the Commissioners did not have much time to look into the former Authority’s problems.  Commissioners Brumfield, Kluck, and former Commissioner Miller should be applauded for their efforts in the consolidation.

• Were the problem individuals retained by the Municipality? – The Board, Solicitor, and Executive Director were not retained.

• Try Multi-tasking and looking down the road.  Instead of always looking back to blame people, how about looking forward and figuring out how to PREVENT it from happening again. – Excellent suggestion and I believe this is already under way with the Municipality creating an ad-hoc board to provide advice on the future of parking needs in Mt. Lebanon.  As far as looking back, how else can we learn from our mistakes if we don’t investigate? 

If anyone thinks that unpaid parking tickets are the only issue, they are sadly mistaken.  Here are just a few of the other negligent acts of the former Authority.

• Lease at 794 Washington Road – Over $25,000 lost in rental revenue, together with payments for utilities.  When the Municipality vacated the old Tax Office at 794 Washington Road at the end of November, 2004, The Authority had many months of advance notice.  Unfortunately, the Authority failed to successfully negotiate a new lease with the remaining occupant (SHACOG) for nearly two additional years.

• Lease at North Garage office space (Pepperberry’s) – Lost over $20,000 in lease revenue due to procrastination over negotiations.  LaPomponnee’s finally came to the rescue and offered to lease the additional space.  

• 424 Washington Road rent – The Authority failed to pursue over $11,000 in rent and utility charges by a real estate developer.  This debt is still outstanding today.

• Academy Avenue Lot – Significant cost overruns from the original estimates (I believe in the area of $800,000) in excess of budget for acquisition of properties and construction of the Academy Ave. lot. 

• Meter rate increase – Rates were increased in 2001, then rescinded in 2003, and reinstated in 2006.  Unfortunately, the new rates were not charged until starting in 2010, and continuing through 2011.  For each year the new rates were not charged, an estimated $100,000 was lost annually.  This would equate to approximately $700,000 total meter revenue lost. 

The way I see it, the unpaid parking tickets are just the tip of the iceberg.  As I said above, these are just a few examples of the past negligent acts.  We need to investigate now, and get the answers so this never happens again.

I made an attempt in 2006 to inform the entire Parking Authority Board of the various negligent acts by letter, but I received no response.  I had also requested over the past two years at Commission meetings, that the Commissioners get a copy of the booting/scofflaw list.  This list with the $800,000+ in unpaid fines was unfortunately not made available to Municipal officials until after the consolidation of the Parking Authority.

Dave Egler