The videos have been uploaded on the municipal website.
I thoroughly enjoyed last night's Discussion Session Part 1, specifically when the Environmental Sustainability Board (ESB) made their official statement concerning artificial turf. Since members of the ESB were in the audience, Kelly Fraasch asked if they could hear from the ESB. See 38:57 time stamp. At 39:10, Dave Brumfield declared that they got the ESB's recommendation. At 39:16, you can hear from a member of the ESB say, "No you didn't."
At 40:40, Maria Joseph made an official statement. She started out by saying that the ESB was misrepresented by the Commission liaison. Kristen interrupted Ms. Joseph to say that it wasn't true.
Ms. Joseph included the fact that residents on neighboring streets were never notified of the potential risks. At 46:05, Kristen continued to defend herself.
Dave Franklin stated that the fields will not be irrigated because we don't have enough hot days to warrant irrigation. (Remember how the pool pump went down on 100ยบ days?) He also challenged the ESB saying that they were alerted to this plan. He said that the minutes show that turf has been discussed at the last three or four ESB meetings. Decide for yourself if that is true. ESB minutes
Kelly Fraasch asked why residents in her ward were never notified about turf going on Middle and Wildcat Fields. Dave Brumfield jumped on Kelly saying that they have NEVER notified neighbors about projects. Kelly asked, "What about Brafferton?" Dave said that he only asked them a question. Here is a question for Dave. What about dogs being allowed in Williamsburg? I seem to remember him having a meeting in Williamsburg Park to discuss the subject.
I loved how Kathy Hrabovsky told Dave Brumfield, "Sorry, but you are interrupting." The Daves and Kristen looked REALLY bad. Finally, Kristen said that there were five elected officials here who are responsible for making decisions. Ultimately, it is their decision. It is three Commissioners' decision to turf those fields because they saw no other option. She said that there was simply no place to put grass fields. Uh, what about Robb Hollow? Kelly had plans for TWO FIELDS. What happened to improving Brafferton? Kristen said that they had no choice. She also pointed out that the new commission liaison (Kelly Fraasch) to the ESB happens to be against turf. What is Kristen insinuating?
One other thing that I would like to point out that transpired during the SAB presentation. Dan Deiseroth, municipal engineer from Gateway and also first donor, but now anonymous, had a meeting with the Mt. Lebanon Community Endowment. I couldn't believe it when I heard it. Go to 12:09 of Part 1 of the Discussion Session. That just doesn't feel right to me.
Finally, once again, I want to thank the Mt. Lebanon Environmental Sustainability Board for their official statement.
Update February 15, 2014 11:08 AM Here is the ESB statement that was read at the February 11 Commission discussion meeting.
Update February 15, 2014 11:08 AM Here is the ESB statement that was read at the February 11 Commission discussion meeting.
This is a seriously concerning discussion session on multiple levels -- not just turf -- but definitely related to turf. If you listen or watch the part about the bid process, I think you might recognize that Kelly Fraasch seems to be trying to figure out how she can avoid being "blindsided" and forced into voting to endorse spending on huge sums of money without adequate time to process new information or share it with residents in public. She inquires about whether there's a way to have public emergency meetings when bids come in that are greatly unexpected in price.
ReplyDeleteBut Kristen, Dave & John aren't so keen on slowing things down, nor is Dan Deiseroth, who had to account for why his estimates for projects like the pool, golf course, Robb Hollow, and Brafferton all seem to be way off but quite fine if not perfect for allowing the turf project to go forth.
Brumfield feels that the municipality is under no obligation to alert neighbors about a project.
ReplyDeleteGee, Mr. Brumfield how hard would it be to put the plan in the 'community' magazine a month or two in advance and 'ask' for input?
Thought governmant transparency was the democrats mantra.
I thought Ms. linfante's mother taught her to never lie.
ReplyDeleteShe plainly said there is no place to put grass fields.
Fraasch's plan plainly shows a place to put a grass field. Plus, if there isn't a place Ms. Linfante, please explain why the municipality bought the McNeilly property and why we're still holding onto it?
Residents make note of her comment for future reference when the SAB comes back and wants to do something on McNeilly.
Another interesting discussion suject was the scheduling for the turfing. The SAB is proposing taking Wildcat/Middle out of circulation at the end of July.
Now its OK to cancel games and make accomadations. Somehow they'll make it work.
If they went with Frassch's plan it wouldn't have any impact on game schedules at all until it comes online. Another point in its favor.
If there are going to be discussion sessions commissioners, you really need to think about what is being discussed.
First step is to establish if someone is lying or diseminating manure!
I can't believe that she lied again. Lie once, get caught. Lie again, caught again. Anyone have a guess what happens in the future?
ReplyDeleteUh, she continues to be our commission president for another nine months?
ReplyDeleteElaine
Don't forget my pending mother of all RTKs, 1500 emails about artificial turf.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Anyone hear the discussion from Tim White about how the SAB reps speak for the association and have authority without consultation from members.
ReplyDeleteTalk about a power trip!
I am going to protest the next Commissioner meeting outside with a sign:
ReplyDelete"What the SPIN-LIN"?
I want to make sure I am hearing things correctly. Kelly Fraasch the most transparent of the full Commission trying to become more transparent and is told no by the others. Surprised, no!
ReplyDeleteI've seen it mentioned multiple times on here. For someone who works nights and can't get to meetings, is there a place or link to her blog where Kelly's plan is laid out? She's quite thorough and great worker, so I'm intrigued to see what her ideas are.
ReplyDeleteI am not sure where to find the Robb Hollow plan but if you email Kelly Fraasch, I am sure she will provide it to you.
ReplyDeleteOf Robb Hollow, I just read this article about how the muni was breaking the laws on how it was using Robb Hollow and was told by the state to cut it out!
http://triblive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_755551.html#axzz2syWFm4Tv
10:06 PM, I have a link to her proposal here.
ReplyDeleteWhere is the Fraasch proposal?
Kelly's blog is http://www.kellyfraasch.com/blog/
Elaine
You know what this town needs? A second opinion. Why is it we ask only Gateway Engineering what is will cost to draw up plans for a park? It kinda seems to me that they might be unduly influenced by a few key characters in this town.
ReplyDeleteIf people want Robb Hollow, maybe they get the sketches and plan and see what another engineering firm suggests.
Some other muni projects have come in way under what Gateway originally estimated... seems it's not easy to predict prices these days.
10:35 PM, they are still grinding leaves there and the woman quoted in the article, Mrs. D'Angelo, moved away.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Mt Lebanon spends a lot of money maintaining the municipal property that is sprinkled across VA Manor. Since Mr Franklin thinks that turf is such a great idea perhaps we can install it in his neighborhood?
ReplyDelete- The dogs will love it!
- No maintenance will be needed.
- It'll be green year-round.
How much money are the Franklins donating? Or the Bendels? Or the Brumfields? Or Linfante-Knox family?
ReplyDeleteHow about an audit of the old YSA?
Gateway is our municipal engineering firm, 10:44 PM. A former commissioner hired an outside firm and paid for it himself. That came out during the discussion session on Tuesday.
The Trib quoted Kristen in their article. Mt. Lebanon turf task force inches toward goal
"Commission President Kristen Linfante said the decision ultimately rests with commissioners. 'At least three of us voted for it because we saw no other options, nowhere else to put fields.'"
Wasn't it to increase the value of our homes by attracting prospective home buyers who are looking for turfed fields along Cedar Blvd.? No where else to put fields? Weren't there two fields in Kelly's proposal?
Kristen, Kristen, Kristen. That quote is going to haunt you. I would love to hear you double talk your way out of that one. You didn't look too good trying to explain what happened with the ESB.
Elaine
Go to Kelly's blog and go down to search at the end of the page. Type in Robb Hollow & I had 10 blogs come up. She has been talking about this since 2012-unreal.
ReplyDeleteI found this enlightening, because I remember someone blogging about Kelly not wanting a truf field. Read this-
"Phase I of Recreation in Mt Lebanon Proposal: One regulation multi-purpose field at the top of Robb Hollow Park and 1 Jr. practice field near Public Works including entry points and parking areas. A price tag that falls within the same cost of turfing Middle/Wildcat field approximately $1.5m."
What's up with that?
Linfante and her two colleagues couldn't see any other options because they had their eyes closed!
ReplyDeleteHer pal, Brumfield, if you pay close attention to his words said it wasn't their obligation to talk with municipal boards or their constituents.
10:44 PM,
ReplyDeleteIt actually isn't that easy to predict price, but you can do it accurately if you know what you are doing. Designers will usually always design over their budget, but if a estimating firm is involved the price and design will go down. Once the plans come out, I'll be able to get a good ballpark price on the project.
1:15, what's up with that... is that this commission (sans one) will say anything true or not to advance their favored projects.
ReplyDeleteThey'll inform IF they feel a need to and if they don't-- tough sh*t-- they have three votes and that's all they need.
12:54 AM...Elaine, an audit on Franklin's Youth Sports Alliance (YSA), the deadbeat field sports association of athletic supporters who stiffed the school district on nonpayment of some $88,000 in annual field maintenance fees over several years ?
ReplyDeleteA whole series of past comments on your blog documented that failure in detail, year by year. Insult to injury was that the district never forced the YSA to pay up, so we taxpayers footed the shortfall.
And the stupid three members of the pro-turf Commission now really believe that Franklin & Co. will honor the $250,000 requirement with cash in advance ? Of course they're in total cahoots with the turf schemers, joined at their hips, and will remove that requirement when the bids are in and contracts are ready to award.
We are now witnessing first hand the true underbelly of politics when Democrats are in total control !
ReplyDelete9:45 AM, remember the 2012 YSA proposal? They wanted to finance their contribution over ten years. I am sure that Dave, John, and Kristen wll agree to those terms again. And you know what? Franklin and Company will get away with it. We have three commissioners ruling the new Democratic Republic of Mt. Lebanon.
ReplyDeleteElaine
9:50 AM, sorry to disagree, but I think we have three rogue Democrats not representing their party.
ReplyDeleteElaine
9:45 once turfing starts or in place, what will the ramifications be if the sports groups don't hold up their end of the bargain?
ReplyDeleteI suspect, the municipality-- therefore the taxpayers will foot the bill.
With a dwindling K-12 population here, it will be harder and harder to sustain youth group obligations to pay for maintenance and replacement turf through fees.
At some point young parents will cut back on their kids participation because it'll become prohibitively expensive.
The ideals and principals of both parties, republican or democrat look good on paper!
ReplyDeleteToo bad they're not worth the paper they are written on.
Remember, the Soccer Association has $180,000.00+ in CASH. There is plenty of money for ecofriendly turf. Its simply a matter of David Donnellan executing on the Commission's directive that calls for it rather than the old fashioned stuff. Ecofriendly turf would resolve this conflict. Its that simple.
ReplyDeleteWhy do we waste time AND MONEY here in the bubble on Boards?
ReplyDeleteThe Zoning Board rejected the high schools plan because it didn't conform to code. Eventually they were ignored!
The Planning Board advised against allowing field signs. They were ignored!
Now the Environmental Sustainability Board advises- back up with significant research- not to install artificial turf.
Linfante lies about the board's position and Brumfield declares: "findings, I don't need no stinking ESB findings!"
Lets get rid of all the boards, save one... the Sports Advisory Board and they can buy their own appriciation dinners.
www.synturf.org
ReplyDelete[No. 33] Montreal, Canada: Turf-workers wearing gas masks during installation of artificial turf field. The Montreat Impact soccer club inaugurated its new synthetic training field next to Stade Saputo on Tuesday, 1 October 2013. The Press release on the team’s website has an imbedded video presentation of the filed coming together. At various stages of the installation workers are shown wearing gas masks. See “Impact inaugurates new synthetic training field next to Stade Saputo,” on Montreal Impact website at http://www.impactmontreal.com/en/news/2013/10/impact-inaugurates-new-synthetic-training-field-next-stade-saputo . SynTurf Note: Should athletes using artificial turf fields be also protected by gas masks? Would not what these workers set down – such as silica or highly toxic adhesives – dust up and be inhaled by the athletes.
You know Elaine could be onto something with her Marlboro post.
ReplyDeleteJust so those potential homebuyers being driven along Cedar Blvd. don't miss it we should put up a sign.
THIS FIELD IS MT. LEBANON'S "CROWN JEWEL"!
and in small type below
WARNING: Playing on it could be hazardous to your child's health and to the environment. Have a nixe day.
Correct Camels not Marlboro
ReplyDeleteNo athlete in their right mind wants to play on new synthetic turf in Mt Lebanon. Have you heard of Athletes United for Air? These are *real* athletes who are aware of the dangers of the air quality problem we have in this region. They are working diligently to reduce the toxins that continue to lead to such high levels of pollution that the EPA has to give us air quality warnings in the middle of winter (like um, yesterday?).
ReplyDeleteReal supporters of athletes in Mt Lebanon will tell their field sport reps not to support the synthetic turf, and also speak up for the health of our youngest athletes, not only for the air, but also for the variety of other reasons why these synthetic turf fields are built on lies that serve only to undermine our trust in youth sports and municipal government.
My children will never play on this Field of Lies.
11:43 the Sports Task Force evaded Kelly's question on whether the various sports groups had discussed or polled parents about the artificial turfing of Wildcat/Middle.
ReplyDeleteI'm fairly certain one of the task force eventually replied that sports group officers didn't need to consult the parents.
Tim White - Lacrosse
ReplyDeleteAs I had said during Citizens Comments the other night, I spoke with parents from lacrosse, football, baseball and soccer. None of them had known about the EPA warnings and none of them had any idea about artificial turf going in. They are now Lebo Citizens readers. :) How else would they have known about it? Not from the sports groups!
ReplyDeleteElaine
These uninformed parents are clueless as well as to how much this artificial turf will cost them in participation fees and eventually taxes.
ReplyDeleteEven the money from corporate sponsors eventually comes out of their pockets. Corporations source of money to hand out are from their customers.
I'm left to wonder if any of the heavy, progressive thinkers on the commission or the forward thinking municipal manager have considered the impact this unusually harsh wiinter will have on our roads.
ReplyDeleteThe freeze-thaws, the heavy saltings are bound to increase potholes and affect equipment.
Those undesignated funds they're going to steal away for turf would go a long way to undoing the winter damage.
Hey, "what-me-worry" Mr. Feller, taxes can always be raised.
Realtors can always tell those prospective home buyers as they bounce from pothole to pothole on our municipal streets that we're all big fans of the Baja 1000 road race.
Thats why the moms love their big SUVs.
I have 3 sons who play all the youth sports LAX, football, baseball, soccer. Having been to 2 meetings for football and 3 for baseball I can tell you that they did discuss the turf project. the were no objections at any of these meetings. I was there when they voted to contribute funds all were in favor NO ONE objected. There were approxiamtly 100 people at these meetings so I know more than I heard the plan. I haven't heard if soccer or LAX had any meetings but I know from speaking to other parents that those organizations had been in discussion regarding the project.
ReplyDeleteSigned,
ReplyDeleteKristin Linfante
Kristin, were those meeting held before or after the release of the EPA information on the potential hazards or environmental impact?
ReplyDeletePlus, how was the turf infomation presented. Did you stand up and tell everyone present there were or are no other options?
Did anyone lay out the details and ask if anyone had objections?
There's a substantial difference if it was casually mentioned---- "hey we're getting turf!" or "the munipality is getting turf and here are the options, the potentional plus/minus and how much its going to cost you. We'd like your input!"
Obviously 3:57 PM was not Kristen. She spells her name with an e, but I get the point 3:57 is making. Perhaps some of the hundred parents will come forward and identify themselves. I am not too trusting of the proturf people, since some have lied to my face.
ReplyDelete4:19 PM, I, too, was wondering if the EPA warnings were mentioned.
Elaine
What happens when other communities refuse to allow their kids to play on this turf? They just love finding an excuse to knock Mt Lebanon down a peg. Will it be KDKA or WTAE?
ReplyDelete100 people 3:34 ? Afraid to put your name to it ? I don't care if you are Kristen or Kristin. I don't believe it. Convince me.
ReplyDelete11:37 here again. Your first football meeting is Feb 23. http://mtlebanonfootball.com/ was the 2 meetings in your crystal ball Kristin ?
ReplyDeletePlease tell me where/when the competing plans for addressing field shortages were addressed within this community. As a parent of athletes, I never once heard of the Robb Hollow plan that would have added 2 fields, addressed the concerns of neighbors and state officials about the misuse of that space,and rehabilitated a neglected park in our community. Over the course of four years, I had 2 emails about McNeilly, and 3 emails stating there was a petition for turf. I heard rumors of back and forth about where to put the turf and of commissioners who were for/against.
ReplyDeleteThere was never any mention of details--where would the money come from, how it would be raised, the impact on families/athletes -- nor was a process for how neighbors would be notified of the project and it's impact on their property, or information regarding environmental and health concerns.
Here is an example:
You may know that the Mt Lebanon commissioners are considering a proposal by the Youth Sports Alliance (YSA) to place artificial turf and lights on Dixon and Wildcat fields. This would be a multi-purpose field that could still be used by baseball and softball but also the other field based sports as well. Dave Franklin has been circulating a petition supporting this action. Please consider signing (SEE LINK BELOW). It would go along way toward alleviating the field shortage.
Thank you
....
We need to continue to let the Commissioners know that the community wants to see a turf package included in any comprehensive Rec bond proposal.
1:00 AM, do you still have those emails? Were the email addresses cc'ed or bcc'ed? If you have the email addresses, you might want to contact them and inform them about the missing details.
ReplyDeleteWere you aware that the petition signatures will be used to solicit donations? They left that part out too.
The Municipality has until February 28 to respond to my RTK request. See A new twist in transparency here in the bubble. If the Municipality does release those 1500 emails, I will be needing a Review Team. I have a few people in mind, but am always looking for volunteers. Thanks.
Elaine
Perhaps the best post from Kelly on this was her compromise to allow eco-friendly turf at Robb Hollow:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.kellyfraasch.com/2012/10/19/a-compromise/
Thanks, 9:06 AM. That post was from October 19, 2012! Was Kristen a liaison to the ESB at that time? Looks like it would have been a relevant topic for the ESB agenda.
ReplyDeleteElaine
How is the turf task force different from the SAB? Where are the at large members on the turf task force that represent non-sports folks as dictated by the original ordinance re the development of the SAB?
ReplyDeleteThe turf discussion was must see TV. If you have not seen it, I highly recommend that if you can watch only one muni meeting, this is the one to see.
Another question: indoor tennis wanted sidewalk expansion and offered $20k for the project. It looks like the bid was $46k. Did the sidewalks go in yet? Did indoor tennis essentially pay 50% for sidewalks around the tennis bubbles?
ReplyDeleteThe seven member turf task force, which includes a school rep, must provide equal representation of women and girls as dictated by title 9. Where is the equal representation? The Board of Ed also mandates equal publicity to prevent sex discrimination. So how is it that the female commissioner's field plan was never distributed in this community via petition, emails, or posted on mtlebanon.org?
ReplyDeleteSex discrimination.
I updated this post to include the official statement read by the Environmental Sustainability Board during the Turf Task Force presentation.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Paraphrasing the commissioners, a board that tells us what we told them to tell us is all the board advice we want. Others need not apply. We are in charge. We make the decisions. We know what the township wants. We know best. When we are done you will thank us.
ReplyDeleteElaine We are new to this area and find the pushing of "turf" to be quite funny. When I worked for Microsoft in Redmond WA the various communities that surrounded that area "turfed" the majority of natural grass fields. The politicians and coaches blamed the rain. When we were packing up to move here those "turfed" fields were NOT being used. They sat unused because of the dangers ie injuries and toxic chemicals. My Mom always said the East Coast was years behind and guess this proves her point. In a couple of years a bond for 3-4 million will be needed to clean this mess up.
ReplyDeleteThe future not corrected for inflation and with commissioners:
ReplyDeletehttp://triblive.com/neighborhoods/yoursewickley/yoursewickleymore/5506919-74/field-turf-board#axzz2u0tL05De
The field's current surface was installed in 2004, district leaders said.
ReplyDeleteThat turf article is very interesting, 9:21.
"Several Quaker Valley High School sports teams use the field, including girls soccer, boys soccer, football, girls lacrosse and boys lacrosse. In addition, the marching band, cheerleaders and middle school sports use the field.
Outside of Quaker Valley-sanctioned events, community groups and sports teams use the surface.
Boys soccer Coach Gene Klein told board members last month the existing turf is unsafe.
“It's horrendous,” he said.
Klein said Chuck Knox Stadium turf was once “one of the top ones around. Now it's really struggling.”
He said coaches and WPIAL officials at times have questioned the safety of the surface, and said piles of green fibers are left following rain storms."
Ten years, that's all the longer their tuff lasted and apparently it should have been replaced sooner. Wonder how much was spent on the initial turf installation!
THIS IS AN ESPECIALLY INTERESTING COMMENT. THEIR SUPER MUST BE USING THAT NEW TERC MATH!
"Superintendent Joseph Clapper said had board members considered a natural surface, maintenance costs could have been high.
“It costs money to put in a new turf field, but it costs money to maintain a (grass) field,” he said. A decade ago, when school leaders considered replacing a then-grass surface, Clapper said maintenance costs were estimated to be about $30,000 per year, which included labor costs, fertilizer, seeding and preparing the field for winter."
Ten years ago had they put in natural grass maintenance would have cost them $30,000/year.
10 years x $30,000 = $300,000.
They would have been ahead of the game by probably more than $100,000, maybe even more. Once again they don't say what the initial installation cost.
So its real simple. An installation probably cost around $400,000 or more in 2004. Replacement is at $436,000 for hopefully another 10 years. Their total out-of-pocket... is at least.. at least $836,000 up to 2024.
Compared to natural grass maintenance @ $30,000/year for a total of $600,000 over twenty years.
Yeah sure, artificial turf is the bargain of the century!!!!!!
Nice math Superintendent Clapper!