My goodness gracious, looks like Lebo has been caught in the acts of nefarious, trickery, chicanery and deceitful behavior.
The Plaintiff's attorney cites a bunch of what seems to be very convincing case law supporting their allegations. Don't see any reference, however, to Mt. Lebanon's purchasing rules and regulations governing how the bidding should have been overseen and managed; but, see Chapter I of the Mt. Lebanon Code, Administration and Government, Part 1 Administrative Cod, Purchasing System, Sections 147 to 152.
I'm sure the Plaintiff will obtain a copy of the written Purchasing System referred to in Section 148 which "shall provide the regulations, policies and procedures covering the acquisition of goods and services of the Municipality".
And, Section 151.8 Bid Procedure covers the bid opening. "Bids shall be opened at the appointed time by a committee of at least three (3) members of the administrative staff ." And, "Any bids received after the bid opening has commenced shall be returned to the bidder unopened." Who were the committee members ?
It will be interesting to see if Mt. Lebanon tries to use the following as a defense - Section 151.9 Bid Award, "The Commission shall, at all times, reserve the right to reject any and all bids received and to waive any and all bidding formalities or other requirements of the invitation to bid and/or the specifications." to cover their asses. And if they do, what case law and a judge might say about that. It's another classic case of a government law controlling the absolute conduct of the public but exempting itself from compliance if it so wishes.
John Ewing has the file on the high school turf farce. Please tell us about it John. Wasn't there some sort of a back room, behind the scene switch on turf system contractors from one recommended by a consultant or committee to a favored one by an admin person ?
All I clearly remember is that it was done before and separate from the high school renovation to keep it out of Act 34 costs and referendum risk. The contractors wanted to use the stadium field for staging and equipment and materials storage. The athletic supporters nixed that.The contract was spec'd and bid on the basis that the existing turf "E" layer could be retained and reused. Not so, and the project went over the budget of $550,000 + or so. The stadium track was also to be refinished at a cost of some $160,000 but that didn't happen either. Did those funds pay for the turf cost overrun ?
I would prefer spending for program change improvements than the extra $760,000 of debt service we spent to structure the second high school bond issue to avoid a small millage increase.
11:31,absolutely correct ! And a warranty was also purchased for the new turf. It will not surprise most of us to know that the District holds graduation ceremonies on the turf with hundreds of occupied metal chairs digging into the turf, plus large awning structures, speakers podiums and platforms, tables, women in high heels and many disposing of gum onto the turf, all prohibited in the warranty. This practice will negate the warranty and shorten the expected life of the turf, just like it did with the previous installation. The District doesn't care at all. They all behave with impunity.
Getting back to the subject of this thread, and with respect to the anonymous post of August 29, 2013 at 5:57 PM, perhaps someone in the know will comment as to whether there have been previous bids let where the Municipality appealed to Section 151.9 after the bids were opened. I don't recall any, and I would think that if there were it would have triggered a suit at that time. Still, it's an interesting point.
I'm not a lawyer, but I think Waller Co. could take this to the State or Federal levels if the company feels it has a good shot of winning a discrimination suit. Perhaps one of the many attorneys who frequent this Blog will offer an opinion.
Many felt the old turf was not at quite at the end of it's life, but was disdained because it was not the best for certain sports. The timing of new turf purchase prior to HS renovation was desired to ensure it could happen without financial complications.
I would think Gateway Engineers is in deep Williamsburg Park doo doo, since they provided the instructions to the bidders. Perhaps they were there at the bid opening. They should have known better. I imagine Steve Feller and David Donnellan were there too. Could be the final nail in the coffin for Feller. Elaine
The Mt. Lebanon Home Rule Charter, Section 326, empowers the Commission to make an internal investigation into the affairs of the Municipality and the conduct of any department, office or agency, etc.. It can subpoena witnesses and records, require the production of evidence, administer oaths, take testimony, issue contempt citations and institute appropriate proceedings in any court having jurisdiction over the person(s)of the party so neglecting or refusing.
The entire pool project has "smelled" since day one, and the lawsuit confirms it. This project was very likely rigged from the get-go beyond just the bid opening allegations. It is the duty of the Commission to clean up this mess, find those at fault, fire and file suit against them for recovery of damages. An investigation should be conducted regardless of the lawsuit and its outcome and the findings made entirely public. Otherwise the Commission will be viewed as being complicit in this sordid affair, and many will feel it is only symptomatic of the conduct and behavior of our government per-se.
Confidence and trust in this government is at an absolute low point.
12:31 PM, I agree. I remember saying that the school board members could learn a lesson by watching the commissioners. Boy, those days are over! There was a time when I enjoyed going to commission meetings. The commissioners listened to their constituents. Now we have back room deals - you support my project and I will support yours. Seems to be the commission's preferred modus operandi. There better be an internal investigation. The staff seems to be calling the shots. Why do we even have a manager? Why isn't he managing? Commissioners, why aren't you managing the manager? Feller, Donnellan, and the architect really screwed up. Good for Anna Pappas! It is time to clean house. Elaine
Elaine, Correct you are? The architect needed to put the specifications and interpret those recommendations by the engineer precisely in the RFP recommended . Apparently this did not happen. We are super screwed. Connie.
What is so maddening, for me anyway, is this "all or nothing" approach to the maintenance of so-called "public facilities" (I'll skip the sermon about privatizing some of our recreation facilities). Who amongst us, not having the funds to completely renovate our homes, would not do what repairs we can with what funds we have? In the same light, if one of the major gripes about the pool is its changing rooms, why not renovate the changing rooms. Some might say, "the cost of money is low now, and if we renovate the pool in stages we may have to pay more." That argument is logically consistent only if there is enough money available to fix the essential items of infrastructure first, and the total cost of everything - essential and nonessential - does not overburden the taxpayers. Our officials have all but conceded that there isn't enough money to do everything they would like to do, and have therefore decided that the pool gets first dibs. Even so, they seem to have run afoul of the law in order to get the job moving.
If our officials shortchange those things that are the primary responsibilities of local government - police and fire protection, and infrastructure - in favor of entertainment facilities then the only result is the immediate approbation of certain recreation interests, and the longer term opprobrium of the community at large. Just ask the people whose homes are flooded at every major downpour.
RG, here is what is going to go down. The commissioners will issue another rec bond to cover all things that were planned for the first rec bond. I am sure they will want to include upgrades to more fields while they are at it. Connie, you are absolutely right. Elaine
Elaine, suspect you are right on target with you're prediction that we will see another bond larger or supplimental bond float so that we'll get turf. There are suspicions that is the rational behind the bid lawsuit to delay pool improvements until they can piggyback turf into the new funds. One would think with all the lawyers in this community acting as advisors, we wouldn't be involved in all these imbroglios on a regular basis. The money wasted, fighting over four parking spaces, defending bid processes, surveys, natatorium projects that fail, teacher grievances, soil surveys, change orders, leaky municipal buildings and on and on. Somebody's not doing a very good job.
But when you, anonymous contributors or named 'wingnuts' ask questions or suggest alternatives, the immediate reaction is... how dare you question us! You hate kids, you hate sports, you hate dogs, 'what the kluck' you didn't invite 'ME' to your town hall.
You and your friends, Elaine, are laballed uncompromising haters. Yet at every turn it turns out we're right to questiin. McNeilly was a dumb purchase! The high school was never going to be done for under $100 million! They were warned the school budget would be overwhelmed by all the spending. It is overwhelmed and that can't be denied! Otherwise explain to me why we now have a hired panhandler making more than a teacher with 10 years experience.
Thank God Elaine, for your blog that offers are meeting place for rational and unfortunately some irrarional discussion.
1:54 PM, let me clear that I do not support your statement about the pool lawsuit is a delay to allow for turf improvements. There is a lawsuit because there were laws broken about the bids being awarded improperly. What the manager, architect, and rec manager did was illegal. As Kristen likes to say, Period. Elaine
Elaine, i did not make a statement that the pool lawsuit is a delay to allow for turf improvements. I said there are SUSPICIONS out there it may be a factor. No accusation. As I said, if was true an email, a document or some other hard evidence should be presented to back the claim. I do agree with the suit what little I know of it, it does seem improper to me to modify bids after all the bids are in.
Anybody have the entire project or even just the detailed construction cost estimates for the pool project - base costs and each of the 14 add-alternates - just before it went out for bid ? And who was it who decided to go multiple prime rather than single prime ? And who was supposed to be the owners representative to oversee and manage the 5 multiple primes, unnamed and whose costs were not included in the project costing ? If the Muni tells you it would be the architect or Rec Director that would only further demonstrate their incompetence and ignorance.
I don't think we have a say. Our commission is consumed with dogs, turf, and hosta. They don't have time to concentrate on flooding, lawsuits, or managers. Elaine
1:54 the "somebody" that is not doing a very good job is those who do not vote. It does not take a Mt. Lebanon lawyer to figure what the problem and solution really is. The community is becoming a joke. Period.
5:39 AM, not sure I am following what you are saying. The manager, architect, and director of recreation screwed up. Are you saying it is because people don't vote? You can't vote for those people. I believe Feller returned to Mt. Lebanon as manager in 2001. How many commissioners have come and gone in that time? Plus, you can only vote for one commissioner in your ward. From what I understand, the commissioners were not present at the bid opening. Let's not blame the nonvoters this time. Elaine
8:28 the community as a whole must vote in their respective wards for the best candidates willing to offer their time for community service. That elected group collectively must work together to lead in selecting employees who will serve the community with distinction on a day-to-day basis. Standards must be set for performance measures and adhered to. This will take more than one or two elections to accomplish. It may never happen! Without a choice at the polls, it most likely won't improve. The "somebody" is everybody.
That is all well and good, but what about the lawsuit and the pool bids? I would rather save the "Let's go out and vote" speech for another time. Elaine
33 comments:
My goodness gracious, looks like Lebo has been caught in the acts of nefarious, trickery, chicanery and deceitful behavior.
The Plaintiff's attorney cites a bunch of what seems to be very convincing case law supporting their allegations. Don't see any reference, however, to Mt. Lebanon's purchasing rules and regulations governing how the bidding should have been overseen and managed; but, see Chapter I of the Mt. Lebanon Code, Administration and Government, Part 1 Administrative Cod, Purchasing System, Sections 147 to 152.
I'm sure the Plaintiff will obtain a copy of the written Purchasing System referred to in Section 148 which "shall provide the regulations, policies and procedures covering the acquisition of goods and services of the Municipality".
And, Section 151.8 Bid Procedure covers the bid opening. "Bids shall be opened at the appointed time by a committee of at least three (3) members of the administrative staff ." And, "Any bids received after the bid opening has commenced shall be returned to the bidder unopened." Who were the committee members ?
It will be interesting to see if Mt. Lebanon tries to use the following as a defense - Section 151.9 Bid Award, "The Commission shall, at all times, reserve the right to reject any and all bids received and to waive any and all bidding formalities or other requirements of the invitation to bid and/or the specifications." to cover their asses. And if they do, what case law and a judge might say about that. It's another classic case of a government law controlling the absolute conduct of the public but exempting itself from compliance if it so wishes.
Best wishes to Anna !
the high school turf had an unusual bidding process that the board did not want to discuss.
stay tuned sports fans!
It's sad...ML used to be the community to emulate; now it's become the one to be avoided.
How far we have fallen!
This is why voter referendums are a good idea...especially when large amounts of taxpayer dollars are being spent.
Now we get to the flaws in the current Home Rule charter, which I hope the committee assigned the chore of rewriting eliminate.
Its doubtful they will identify the loopholes, but we can watch and hope.
John Ewing has the file on the high school turf farce. Please tell us about it John. Wasn't there some sort of a back room, behind the scene switch on turf system contractors from one recommended by a consultant or committee to a favored one by an admin person ?
All I clearly remember is that it was done before and separate from the high school renovation to keep it out of Act 34 costs and referendum risk. The contractors wanted to use the stadium field for staging and equipment and materials storage. The athletic supporters nixed that.The contract was spec'd and bid on the basis that the existing turf "E" layer could be retained and reused. Not so, and the project went over the budget of $550,000 + or so. The stadium track was also to be refinished at a cost of some $160,000 but that didn't happen either. Did those funds pay for the turf cost overrun ?
They're all morally and ethically corrupt.
The turf replacement cost approximately $410,000.
I would prefer spending for program change improvements than the extra $760,000 of debt service we spent to structure the second high school bond issue to avoid a small millage increase.
Mount Lebanon, you are screeewed.
That turf was to replace turf that was ONLY 7 years old I believe. Well short of the 10 to fifteen year advertised life expectancy.
Keep that in mind folks when people tell you how cheap turf is vs natural grass.
11:31,absolutely correct ! And a warranty was also purchased for the new turf. It will not surprise most of us to know that the District holds graduation ceremonies on the turf with hundreds of occupied metal chairs digging into the turf, plus large awning structures, speakers podiums and platforms, tables, women in high heels and many disposing of gum onto the turf, all prohibited in the warranty. This practice will negate the warranty and shorten the expected life of the turf, just like it did with the previous installation. The District doesn't care at all. They all behave with impunity.
That irregular bidding process resulted in selecting a company that has since gone out of business, from what I hear. No warranty anyway.
Elaine
isn't that the law firm that Dave Franklin is at?
Getting back to the subject of this thread, and with respect to the anonymous post of August 29, 2013 at 5:57 PM, perhaps someone in the know will comment as to whether there have been previous bids let where the Municipality appealed to Section 151.9 after the bids were opened. I don't recall any, and I would think that if there were it would have triggered a suit at that time. Still, it's an interesting point.
I'm not a lawyer, but I think Waller Co. could take this to the State or Federal levels if the company feels it has a good shot of winning a discrimination suit. Perhaps one of the many attorneys who frequent this Blog will offer an opinion.
Many felt the old turf was not at quite at the end of it's life, but was disdained because it was not the best for certain sports. The timing of new turf purchase prior to HS renovation was desired to ensure it could happen without financial complications.
Eckert Seamans was the Municipality's previous counsel.
Elaine
I would think Gateway Engineers is in deep Williamsburg Park doo doo, since they provided the instructions to the bidders. Perhaps they were there at the bid opening. They should have known better. I imagine Steve Feller and David Donnellan were there too. Could be the final nail in the coffin for Feller.
Elaine
I understand that Gateway isn't the issue. The architects are probably in deep Williamsburg Park doo doo.
Elaine
The Mt. Lebanon Home Rule Charter, Section 326, empowers the Commission to make an internal investigation into the affairs of the Municipality and the conduct of any department, office or agency, etc.. It can subpoena witnesses and records, require the production of evidence, administer oaths, take testimony, issue contempt citations and institute appropriate proceedings in any court having jurisdiction over the person(s)of the party so neglecting or refusing.
The entire pool project has "smelled" since day one, and the lawsuit confirms it. This project was very likely rigged from the get-go beyond just the bid opening allegations. It is the duty of the Commission to clean up this mess, find those at fault, fire and file suit against them for recovery of damages. An investigation should be conducted regardless of the lawsuit and its outcome and the findings made entirely public. Otherwise the Commission will be viewed as being complicit in this sordid affair, and many will feel it is only symptomatic of the conduct and behavior of our government per-se.
Confidence and trust in this government is at an absolute low point.
Coould this happen to our Turf? http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/highschool-prep-rally/won-t-believe-one-hour-rain-did-pittsburgh-121148615.html
12:31 PM, I agree. I remember saying that the school board members could learn a lesson by watching the commissioners. Boy, those days are over!
There was a time when I enjoyed going to commission meetings. The commissioners listened to their constituents. Now we have back room deals - you support my project and I will support yours.
Seems to be the commission's preferred modus operandi.
There better be an internal investigation. The staff seems to be calling the shots. Why do we even have a manager? Why isn't he managing? Commissioners, why aren't you managing the manager?
Feller, Donnellan, and the architect really screwed up.
Good for Anna Pappas! It is time to clean house.
Elaine
Elaine,
Correct you are? The architect needed to put the specifications and interpret those recommendations by the engineer precisely in the RFP recommended . Apparently this did not happen. We are super screwed.
Connie.
Connie.
We are only super screwed if the commission doesn't do what is right by calling off the pool entirely.
What is so maddening, for me anyway, is this "all or nothing" approach to the maintenance of so-called "public facilities" (I'll skip the sermon about privatizing some of our recreation facilities). Who amongst us, not having the funds to completely renovate our homes, would not do what repairs we can with what funds we have? In the same light, if one of the major gripes about the pool is its changing rooms, why not renovate the changing rooms. Some might say, "the cost of money is low now, and if we renovate the pool in stages we may have to pay more." That argument is logically consistent only if there is enough money available to fix the essential items of infrastructure first, and the total cost of everything - essential and nonessential - does not overburden the taxpayers. Our officials have all but conceded that there isn't enough money to do everything they would like to do, and have therefore decided that the pool gets first dibs. Even so, they seem to have run afoul of the law in order to get the job moving.
If our officials shortchange those things that are the primary responsibilities of local government - police and fire protection, and infrastructure - in favor of entertainment facilities then the only result is the immediate approbation of certain recreation interests, and the longer term opprobrium of the community at large. Just ask the people whose homes are flooded at every major downpour.
RG, here is what is going to go down. The commissioners will issue another rec bond to cover all things that were planned for the first rec bond. I am sure they will want to include upgrades to more fields while they are at it.
Connie, you are absolutely right.
Elaine
Elaine, suspect you are right on target with you're prediction that we will see another bond larger or supplimental bond float so that we'll get turf.
There are suspicions that is the rational behind the bid lawsuit to delay pool improvements until they can piggyback turf into the new funds.
One would think with all the lawyers in this community acting as advisors, we wouldn't be involved in all these imbroglios on a regular basis.
The money wasted, fighting over four parking spaces, defending bid processes, surveys, natatorium projects that fail, teacher grievances, soil surveys, change orders, leaky municipal buildings and on and on. Somebody's not doing a very good job.
But when you, anonymous contributors or named 'wingnuts' ask questions or suggest alternatives, the immediate reaction is... how dare you question us!
You hate kids, you hate sports, you hate dogs, 'what the kluck' you didn't invite 'ME' to your town hall.
You and your friends, Elaine, are laballed uncompromising haters. Yet at every turn it turns out we're right to questiin.
McNeilly was a dumb purchase! The high school was never going to be done for under $100 million! They were warned the school budget would be overwhelmed by all the spending. It is overwhelmed and that can't be denied! Otherwise explain to me why we now have a hired panhandler making more than a teacher with 10 years experience.
Thank God Elaine, for your blog that offers are meeting place for rational and unfortunately some irrarional discussion.
1:54 PM, let me clear that I do not support your statement about the pool lawsuit is a delay to allow for turf improvements. There is a lawsuit because there were laws broken about the bids being awarded improperly. What the manager, architect, and rec manager did was illegal. As Kristen likes to say, Period.
Elaine
Elaine, i did not make a statement that the pool lawsuit is a delay to allow for turf improvements. I said there are SUSPICIONS out there it may be a factor.
No accusation. As I said, if was true an email, a document or some other hard evidence should be presented to back the claim.
I do agree with the suit what little I know of it, it does seem improper to me to modify bids after all the bids are in.
Anybody have the entire project or even just the detailed construction cost estimates for the pool project - base costs and each of the 14 add-alternates - just before it went out for bid ? And who was it who decided to go multiple prime rather than single prime ? And who was supposed to be the owners representative to oversee and manage the 5 multiple primes, unnamed and whose costs were not included in the project costing ? If the Muni tells you it would be the architect or Rec Director that would only further demonstrate their incompetence and ignorance.
Probably all available in a RTK.
Do residents have a say in whether we hire a new municipal manager? If so, how? I doubt the commission will fire him.
I don't think we have a say. Our commission is consumed with dogs, turf, and hosta. They don't have time to concentrate on flooding, lawsuits, or managers.
Elaine
1:54 the "somebody" that is not doing a very good job is those who do not vote. It does not take a Mt. Lebanon lawyer to figure what the problem and solution really is. The community is becoming a joke. Period.
5:39 AM, not sure I am following what you are saying. The manager, architect, and director of recreation screwed up. Are you saying it is because people don't vote? You can't vote for those people. I believe Feller returned to Mt. Lebanon as manager in 2001. How many commissioners have come and gone in that time? Plus, you can only vote for one commissioner in your ward.
From what I understand, the commissioners were not present at the bid opening. Let's not blame the nonvoters this time.
Elaine
8:28 the community as a whole must vote in their respective wards for the best candidates willing to offer their time for community service. That elected group collectively must work together to lead in selecting employees who will serve the community with distinction on a day-to-day basis. Standards must be set for performance measures and adhered to. This will take more than one or two elections to accomplish. It may never happen! Without a choice at the polls, it most likely won't improve. The "somebody" is everybody.
That is all well and good, but what about the lawsuit and the pool bids?
I would rather save the "Let's go out and vote" speech for another time.
Elaine
Post a Comment