The following letter is from Lebo Citizens reader, John David Kendrick.
DEAR NEWCOMERS,…
Earlier today I watched the April 8, 2014 meeting of the Mt. Lebanon Commission and I have several observations that I want to share with you:
1. Contrary to Dave Brumfield’s comments around the 48 minute mark, Nancy Carroll will not have any discussion with you concerning an informal resolution of the appeal. In fact, the only response that you will get from her is, “I’ll see you at the hearing.”
2. The four Commissioners present at the meeting couldn't care less about your problems:
a. They have no reason to care (they are not your stakeholders);
b. They have no interest in the welfare of you or your family; and
c. In all likelihood they don’t understand the impact that they have had on your property values.
3. All of you should be proud of how you presented yourselves at the meeting.
a. You all were well prepared with your comments.
b. Your comments were well researched.
c. You showed respect for the institution and the office – which is the polar opposite of what these four FARTS have shown your families!
The question is how you can deal with the problem at hand…
The biggest problem that all of you have is that you don’t have any leverage over the Commissioners. Your presentations made an appeal to their sympathy or the logic of their decision, but you need to find something that will capture their attention and make them more sensitive and responsive to your problems. Leverage can come in many ways and political leverage appears to be the most effective solution for this problem. You need to find something, like the potential death of the turf project, that you can control. For instance, after I heard that Dick’s was contributing $5,000 I decided that I’ll never go shopping in a Dick’s store again! Maybe all of you can think of similar collective economic leverage that you can assert?
I can’t stress enough that the Commission's behavior is a call to action. There is a burning platform before every Mt. Lebanon resident – and it’s the equity, your hard-earned and invested money in your home that is going up in flames before your eyes! All of you absolutely must get involved, get organized, select your candidates and VOTE, VOTE, VOTE!
Don’t delay – the Community is about to turn into ashes before your eyes!
Sincerely,
John David Kendrick
People need to know what's going on. Contrary to Brumfields nonsensical assertions that most people in Lebo are aware, most are not. I would encourage readers to talk to their neighbors. Let everyone know what a disgusting environment exists just beneath the surface in this community. Look at it this way--if four commissioners are so quick to be shady and unethical about something as pointless as turf, what the hell else arent they sharing??
ReplyDeleteTwo things you can do:
ReplyDeleteThe commission president threatened to shut down a meeting. Residents have every right to take action against such a threat by a public official and sitting commission president. This is FAR out of bounds and contradicts the basic tenets of good governance. It is likely a very actionable event.
At the risk of exposing myself to the ever-eager lawsuit mongers in Mt. Lebanon, I need to say this carefully: It is my understanding that fines for Sunshine violations are quite significant. First violations are often $100 but each subsequent violation can range from $500 to $2000. And, these fines are NOT reimbursable to the violator.
See: http://www.mbm-law.net/articles/increased-penalties-for-sunshine-act-violations/1941/
(Also, these guys are the ones that represented MTLSD in the last contract negotiations for whatever that's worth)
To point number two, there may or not be a sitting commissioner that enjoys sending emails about various topics using the "reply all" button. Certainly you can find evidence of this in some of Elaine's right to know materials. If you think these are the only times that a sitting commissioner has violated Sunshine (in the very limited sample of Elaine's RTK requests), you are probably wrong.
Simply the consolidation of these violations (perhaps after a right to know for more that commissioners emails) into a report of some sort and the threat of exposing the violator(s) to significant fines via the Office of Open Records may be enough to get one to resign from office.
The Newcomer's would certainly throw a monkey wrench into the plans of the commission should they follow the above two paths.
You're welcome.
Title 53 Chapter 88 § 8855. Appeals by taxing districts.
ReplyDeleteA taxing district shall have the right to appeal any assessment within its jurisdiction in the same manner, subject to the same procedure and with like effect as if the appeal were taken by a taxable person with respect to the assessment, and, in addition, may take an appeal from any decision of the board or court of common pleas as though it had been a party to the proceedings before the board or court even though it was not a party in fact. A taxing district authority may intervene in any appeal by a taxable person under section 8854 (relating to appeals to court) as a matter of right.
Nobody is disputing the right of the municipality to file an appeal. The municipality has that right, but it is their choice to exercise that right. The manner is which they target homeowners is within their power.
ReplyDeleteIn this instance, the municipality decided to selectively target approximately 150 out of 500 homes that changed ownership in 2011 and 2012. Similarly, the municipality has a rationale why they want to target a small group of homeowners in 2013, 2006-2010. Eventually, they will have a plan to pursue the pre-2006 home sales unless they think that there was too much stink raised over the homes that were appealed and then come to the conclusion that pre-2006 home sales should be left alone.
Perhaps it will just be a coincidence that this targeted approach and the justification just happens to by-pass high profile municipal employees, elected officials, friends of officials, etc. - and what Mt Lebanon is doing may be legal. Who knows? The determination of legality is determined by a Judge, and I am not even an attorney. Hell, I didn't even take the LSAT! ;)
But that doesn't mean that the public has to take it. If you don't like the way that you were treated then maybe you should think about whether or not you want your hard earned tax dollars financing some millionaires little hobby at your expense? Do you really want to see the resources of the entire community directed for the sole benefit of a small fraction of the population? Do you want your tax increase to finance someone millionaires recreation?
Is turf toxic? Will it lead to health problems? Will there be adverse environmental impacts?
Clearly, there is an on-going debate about this issues. Everyone should read the arguments, view the facts and make a decision.
Now, if you happen to feel that the children will suffer adverse health effects from the employment of turf then you should make others aware of your opinion. If a business wants to support the purchase of turf then you may want to decide whether or not you want to shop there... or for that matter, you may want to tell your friends and neighbors about your concerns so that they can decide whether or not to shop there.
I wonder how the merchants might react to supporting controversial projects? Do you think that they want their business reputation to become associated with something that may lead to long term health effects of your kids? It's hard to say - they may still contribute, or they may what to wait and see with their contribution.
You have a right to express your opinion, and you have a right to shop any place that you want. If you don't like a merchants support for a project, don't shop there. In fact, you way want to even opine on YELP! about their support of controversial projects that may lead to adverse effects on children.
As far as I am concerned, the people who want this turf are loaded! If they really want the turf, let them pull out their checkbooks and write a check for the 25%!
NO JUSTICE NO PEACE!
ReplyDeletePA Rules of Professional Conduct
ReplyDeletehttp://www.padisciplinaryboard.org/documents/RulesOfProfessionalConduct.pdf
trust your senses: it it walk like a duck and quacks like a duck, it just may be a duck, even if someone tries to tell you it is a goldfish....(hmmm, maybe it is something more like a "gold digger")
ReplyDelete4/11 at 4?15: governmental jurisdictions have powers, not "rights" (only legal persons can have "rights" under the Constitution)...but, either way, a right or a power does not have to be exercised, by which I mean that it is clearly a policy choice for the commission to interfere in the assessment process...so, just because we want to say they can is not to say they should--is anyone listening?
ReplyDelete"The power to tax is the power to destroy"
ReplyDeleteU.S. Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
"Life is not fair" --- James Earl Carter (Democrat), 39th President of the United States
ReplyDeleteHe who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it. - Martin Luther King
ReplyDelete