Appeasing a select few?

I wanted to take a break for a couple of days, but I want use of my dining room table again. So here is another chapter from my mother of all RTKs.
Elaine

On  November 6, 2013, Dave Franklin writes:
"My primary concern was that the proposal seemed to place a particular emphasis on the organic product. I didn't want to let that horse too far out of the barn, and then have a difficult time pulling him back in."

In his email, Dave knocks GeoTurf's endorsement by the Green Energy Council. Dave continues with the cost of GeoTurf being significantly higher than traditional synthetic surfaces. He feels that Mt. Lebanon can't afford a more luxurious surface. Dave "doesn't want to rain on the organic parade, but I am [he is]  troubled about driving the cost up even further just to appease a select few in our community, especially when nearly every other community, School District, University and other turf customer is content  to use the traditional surface. In our efforts to satisfy this vocal minority, we may really just be buying a pig in a poke." He quotes an article written about renovating a football field in Dobbs Ferry, NY. Lebo's space would be much larger.

The Geo-turf field is expected to cost $1,721,969, about $310,000 more than the cost of a synthetic field with recycled tire infill and about $1.2 million dollars more than a new grass field.

John Bendel answered Mr. Franklin.with:

I get the rationale if the cost is significantly higher for organic fill, but don't know why the endorsements are in question. The product is used in other countries and I spoke with the public works director in San Carlos,CA. I called him because their project was almost identical to ours. The PW Director endorsed the product and told me they may use it on another field. Last year, the Geoturf vendor quoted a price that was in line with the YSA proposals. Dan Deiseroth's opinion of cost assumed organic fill.

If it costs about the same, and performs well, why not use it? If the price is significantly higher than other options then that's a different story. l'd like to wait until the bids come in to decide.

Good question, John. But then Kelly Fraasch's November blog post hit on November 13, 2013.

The icing on the cake is right here. SAB chair and Turf Project Task Force member Tim White wrote this to Kristen Linfante on November 19, 2013:

As is always the case, K Fraasch has us concerned - she is on record with some folks that she wants more information, wants to make sure the turf is the organic product (not the rubber product) and that she is proposing to use the Brafferton money (only).........usual BS

Obviously, Tim didn't read Kelly's November 13 blog post very carefully. She was pretty transparent on her position. Why shouldn't she want more information? This is a major project. She is concerned about the environmental and health issues related to artificial turf. That is BS? I wish we had four more commissioners concerned about the environment and the health and safety of our young athletes.

But Kristen summed it up with "No worries! We only need 3 votes, and we have them! It's a go for sure! Thanks for all your work on this!" Wasn't the vote on November 25, 2013? You know, the night that Kristen lied about the ESB's position on artificial turf?

Poor Dave Franklin. My blog post, "Whoa," says the EPA. came out on January 13, 2014. David P. Franklin, Esq., Eckert Seamans fired off an epistle to the commissioners on January 14, 2014. He encouraged the commissioners to review the actual 2013 EPA report (attached) rather than relying upon "position pieces written by those on either side of the debate." I wonder why the formality.

David Donnellan got in the act. He sent a 2010 turf report provided by J. T. Sauer and Associates on January 15, 2014 to members of the Turf Project Task Force. Sauer is the landscape architect involved with the turfing project.

So Parents, that is a little more background on the organic vs. synthetic turf debate. Are you part of the select few who demand a safe playing environment for your children? ESB and residents on Cedar Blvd., do your concerns for the environment make you the vocal minority? Have you reached that breaking point yet?