Tuesday, July 29, 2014

"You can't handle the truth!" UPDATED (Ongoing)

I have started to look at the granddaddy of all RTKs (that's what I am calling it for now.) I am not even one fourth of the way through, and I hear Jack Nicholson saying, "You can't handle the truth!"

The truth is over an email exchange between our Public Information Officer, Susan Morgans and Penn State's Andrew McNitt.

Susan writes, "The purpose of this meeting it [sic] NOT to discuss the potential harmful effects of artificial turf..."

Not to discuss the potential harmful effects of artificial turf? That wouldn't look good, now would it, Susan? Yes, I know that the PIO is paid to write fluff, but to intentionally avoid any discussions of potentially harmful effects is unethical, at least to me. I can't believe that even she would stoop that low.

May I remind Susan that she is being paid to disseminate information to residents of Mt. Lebanon, not to organize a "meeting tightly to control any potential problems."

I was relieved to see a police officer at Mellon that night. I remember how I felt threatened at the not for the general public public meeting on April 24. Little did I realize, he was there because of the "small but vocal minority of people who have come to oppose the project recently, long after it was voted on and plans made to move forward."

Update July 30, 2014 8:37 AM I took a quick glance at the RTK. I will be adding to this list throughout the day, but will not break it down by separate updates.

It turns out that Andrew McNitt has a separate business and billed Dan Deiseroth (Gateway) for $2500. He was not representing himself as an expert from Penn State.

John Bendel had his list of Q & A for the June 12 presentation on June 5. Here it is.

Bendel sure was prepared! He had Dan Deiseroth vetting Andrew McNitt. Obviously, McNitt gave the right answers. Here are his responses. Check out McNitt's answer to Item C.

I just love how Susan Morgans was ready for a scene. "We will have a police officer there, and if there is any disruptive behavior that person will need to leave. We cannot invite guests to speak at a meeting and have them publicly debased or bullied." I have scanned a few emails together since they relate to the June 12 "Field Enhancement" meeting. Read page 3 for Susan's justification for using words such as "field improvements" and "field surface."

"July 26, 2014 at 7:21 PM," I saw your letter with your email address redacted. I never did find a check from Gateway. You are welcome to review the RTK. Email me privately. Let me back up a minute. Part of the RTK was for all correspondence to/from municipal engineer Dan Deiseroth (Gateway Engineers) related to or regarding artificial turf within the dates October 1, 2013 - June 19, 2014. I think email records were sterilized. Not a trace of his check. I did find emails from SAB regarding the donation, but nothing other than that. What I did find concerning fundraising, "7:21 PM," was this. Any time that Deiseroth worked on the fundraising, was on him and would not be billed. What a guy.

Here is the email which states that Gateway had agreed to donate $4000 into the Mt. Lebanon Community Endowment Fund. That is why we never saw Gateway's check in the RTK or in the turf donation checks in a previous post.

Another example of lowballing an estimate: Dan Deiseroth estimates the replacement cost based on 108,000 sq. ft. instead of 110,000 sq. ft.

Turf Project Task Force Presentation downplays the true annual contribution. Read about their spin here.

Dan Deiseroth sent an email to J.T. Sauer saying that nobody from the TPTF wants organic infill, but they need to keep it on the table.

Here is a whopper. I don't know who to believe considering Kristen's tendency to "misrepresent." This email shows that the ESB President asked Kristen to insist on artificial turf.

Municipal Planner Keith McGill reminded a member of the Planning Board that the turf project is an improvement on an existing facility and all discussions for the turf project were in the Comprehensive Plan that was recommended by the Planning Board. There was never a presentation made to the Planning Board about the project. The issue of turf was discussed on numerous occasions during the very public 14 month long Comprehensive Plan update process, long before the decision to turf Middle and Wildcat Fields.

This is what my dining room table looks like at the moment. The box on the right contains all the documents I have scanned so far and uploaded here. The box on the left is filled with background information about the School District, which I have yet to review.
RTK 080214

More evidence of misrepresenting the ESB. This time, over the McNitt meeting.

Unfortunately, the text size is extremely small on this email exchange. It sound like sibling rivalry between Susan Morgans and Keith McGill. Kelly Fraasch is asking for more details about the June 12 McNitt meeting, since the ESB wants to reschedule their meeting which is scheduled for the same time. Kelly emailed Steve Feller and cc'ed Susan Morgans, Keith McGill, David Donnellan, Dan Deiseroth and the commission about how the public was told that Dr. McNitt would only be there if a toxicologist would also be attending. Kelly pointed out that they were not doing what they said.
Morgans responds to Feller and Bendel only: "Not answering. I did not hear the discussion or receive any such instructions."
Keith McGill: "What she said. Is someone from the health department willing to provide a written statement indicating that they have no objections to the project and that this is not a public health issue?"
Morgans: "Can we talk about this on Monday? This was David Donnellans and my assignment. I will be back on Monday or are you in charge now? Whatever, I do not think Health Dept. Is prepared to provide a written statement nor do I think it would be appropriate to ask them to do so, but we do have emails and phone conversations that could be summarized and I do not think the health department would mind. They clearly think this is a ridiculous first world problem. Is it possible that we just say no. Both UPMC and the health department have declined to participate and we can find no one with greater credibility to speak?"
McGill: "Steve Feller asked me to prepare an agenda based on Commissioner Bendel's email, which is what I did. I have more than enough of my own work to do. I would suggest you discuss with Steve on Monday."

It was Dan Desieroth's suggestion to bring in Andrew McNitt. Dan said that McNitt is a neutral third party from Penn State.

Update August 6, 2014 8:49 AM As promised in my "Cedar Blvd. Closed Due To Flooding" comment, here is the email which Dave Franklin sent to four of the five commissioners, with the subject heading Turf & Environmental Issues. Sorry, Kelly, you don't count. In addition, Franklin takes a couple jabs at the ESB. I did not scan the 36 page report because the print is too small. Here is a link to the report, from the Field Turf website. Is it possible that this report is what Kristen Linfante alluded to when she said that they based their decision on information that we don't have?

ESB member Pam Scott asked David Donnellan to provide some facts for J.T.Sauer's "extrapolation" that we don't need to worry about health effects from recycled tires. David forward her email to Dan Deiseroth and asked him to prepare a response to Pam's inquiry. Here is the email exchange.  The lead was found in and around fields in NJ which was a chemical plant and not from the turf.

But in June 2014, Deiseroth warns people not to say that anything is lead free. Andy McNitt weighs in on US Standards for lead levels.

I am not a fan of Dave Franklin, but he said something in the RTK that made me laugh. It was about the plaza and the donor sign that Dan Deiseroth designed for Middle and Wildcat Fields. He wanted to know whose idea was the plaza and donor wall. It was never discussed at a SAB meeting or a Turf Task Force meeting or a commission meeting. Here is the quote that is classic. "We're changing out grass for turf, not constructing a stadium."

Remember the not for the general public public meeting on April 24, 2014? Here is the map showing which properties were invited to the meeting on Vee Lynn and Cedar Blvd.

Kelly Fraasch continued to forward studies on the hazards of tire crumb infill to fellow commissioners, Steve Feller, Phil Weis, and Dan Deiseroth. Thank you Kelly, for standing up for us. Here is the link to Kelly's email of studies on the dangers of recycled tire crumb rubber.

I will be cross posting this next one under Cedar Blvd. Closed Due to Flooding. Read what Tim White says about addressing water run  off - "Something to appease the ESB people and diffuse Kelly F." White is going after the ESB again.

This may be the reason why Dave Franklin was pushing Fieldturf so much. Fieldturf offers a $50K grant. The NFL offers grants, but we will never know who donated, will we?

92 comments:

Anonymous said...

What was Susan thinking??? A multimillion turf project that should have gone to a referendum for the taxpayers and violated PA state law!!! Who is she in collusion with to discriminate against the Mt. Lebanon taxpayers!!! She has to go! No question about it!

Anonymous said...

What stuck out to me the most was the sentence:

“I don’t really expect a large crowd, as we have not had a lot of time to publicize it.”

The email to McNitt was sent on May 23rd and the meeting was held on June 12th, that’s 20 days.
The meeting was planned prior to May 23rd and Susan states on May 23rd that they did not have a lot of time to publicize it which tells me that the decision was made prior to May 23rd to purposely NOT to publicize the meeting the way it could have been which is probably why they didn’t expect a large crowd in the first place. In actuality, there was more than enough time to do more to publicize the meeting, if they wanted to.

Nick M.

Anonymous said...

Susan writes, "The purpose of this meeting it [sic] NOT to discuss the potential harmful effects of artificial turf..."

Obviously, then the purpose of the meeting is to discuss the positive benefits and effects of turf!

That a Penn State research professor would take part in such a scam over the public is pathetic.

Anonymous said...

I certainly hope the TV news turf investigation includes a look at McNitt's papers on the heat effects of turf on player injuries pre and post Field Turf funding.

Anonymous said...

Isn't it interesting and very telling about the moral and ethical decline in Mt. Lebanon that two eminently qualified experts, Dr. Phil and Dr. Tracy, who testified exposing the health risks associated with artificial turf did so out of professional and personal concerns about children and public, and did so pro bono. The Gang of Four commissioners paid no heed to their warnings and sided with a paid pro-turf "soils" consultant (fact not divulged until now) instructed by our PIO not to discuss health risks associated with artificial turf.

Mt. Lebanon needs a serious house cleaning of both elected and appointed public officials!

Anonymous said...

Dear Fake-Dr McNitt,

You give Penn State, and by default, the state of Pennsylvania, a bad name.

I hope all of the readers hear help protect the unsuspected public from your deceptive, unethical behavior we now have documented and on video by submitting a ethics complaint.

http://www.la.psu.edu/faculty-staff/faculty-staff/resources-for-reporting-wrongdoing

o



Lebo Citizens said...

Anonymous comment submitted at 9:48,
Please resubmit your comment leaving out the Giant Eagle portion. I don't want to be sued. Thanks.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Whether McNitt was representing himself or not, the commission and Gateway did nothing to separate his Penn State position from his his private business.

Lebo Citizens said...

Nor did they separate him from his partnership with FieldTurf.
More on FieldTurf to follow.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Remember this email Elaine?

"From: John Bendel
To: egillen476
Cc: commission
Sent: Wed, Jun 11, 2014 10:48 pm
Subject: Re: Thursday's panel

Elaine,

The panel
I will moderate the panel and provide background on the project
Others on the panel:
David Donnellan - field use, Work of turf task force, SAB
Dan Deiseroth, Jim Sauer - project design, storm water, bid specifications, timeline
Andrew McNitt, PSU
The presentations will be followed by question and answer period."
Bendel didn't say Andrew McNitt from A. McNitt & Seren Soil Testing, he specifically shows him as being a PSU expert.

Anonymous said...

Obviously, McNitt's conspiracy to deceive the public was wrong but so is Mt Lebanon's desire to state they are offering a "public forum" that is intentionally crafted to avoid discussing HEALTH RISKS FOR CHILDREN.

Whether or not there is scientific consensus on the health risks to children from playing on crumb rubber, CONSPIRING to prevent a discussion of these concerns in a forum that was designed to address such matters and publicized in local newspapers in a such a matter is blatantly UNETHICAL, manipulative, and pathetic.

Whether or not Wildcat remains Wildcat, Mt Lebanon's efforts to deceive the public, which has been predominantly represented by thoughtful and caring members of the community, will be documented for the historians of Western Pennsylvania, as well as prospective residents and parents who will quickly move on to better places to raise a family.

Anonymous said...

The Morgan, Bendel, Dieseroth, McNitt exchanges in the update this afternoon will also become valuable evidence when health & injury incidents materialize and people sue our morally bankrupt government and irresponsible public officials.

Anonymous said...

Also interesting that McNitt correspondence prior to his appearance was all on and based upon his Penn State connection, but when it came time to bill for services rendered, it was all on his personal consulting business.

Were we misled in believing that he was representing and Penn State was endorsing his opinions and statements ?

Anonymous said...

Brings up a bigger issue. Does Penn State allow its professors to profit privately from their research and association with the university?

Anonymous said...

Gateway/Deiseroth/Donnellan working on, promoting, designing, cost estimating the Wildcat artificial turf project for over four years, PIO Morgans preparing propaganda material, arranging Mellon auditorium meeting (plus rental fee) plus an off duty police officer (fee at $400/hr.)to remove taxpayers who disagree or object -- I'll bet my pension that little if any of this has been or will be included in the actual project cost of the turf project.

Another example of the trickery, chicanery and deceit of the public officials. WAKE UP MT. LEBANON !

Anonymous said...

The Deiseroth comment about his fundraising time further confirms his bias and conflict of interest ! The Gateway $5,000 donation was obviously included in the Endowment payovers. Earlier RTK results confirm Deiseroth meeting with Endowment.

Anonymous said...

Two items that taypayers should consider immediately.
#1. do not look at Morgans as our Public Information Officer, but rather consider her position as Information Strategy Officer.
#2. when you hear or read anything from an elected official or municipal employee whose livelihood depends on taking your money... fact-check the info they are feeding you to make their case.

Anonymous said...

There are a number of contrast that come to light thankfully due to the hardwork of Elaine Gillen and her generousity of her anonymous supporter.

A big one to think about is the public response to two "public forums" held in the community over the past few years.

The first one was receive with a street protest and children displaying "What the Kluck" signs. There was anger in their voices that pro-HS renovation spenders were denied participation in the town hall despite the fact they were invited to participate and one of their own was first to ask a question from the audience.

Now compare that with the recent public forum. It is set up not as a true open meeting to truly inform the community on turf issues, but as a sales job. On top of that, the public employees prepped to oust any dissenting voices should they be raised.

But they weren't. The opponents to turf that bother to attend the "monkey forum" didn't picket, didn't use children to hold "What the F*ck" signs. They let the show go on without protest.

Now then, I can't say for sure this is a republican vs. democrats contrast as people like Larry Evans would paint it. Remember his comment in his letter to the editor of 'The Almanac': " A nest of begrudging Republicans led the charge protesting the turfing as too expensive and get this - not green enough for their sensibilities." It does shine a light on two contrasting segments in our community.

Personally, I like the one that does their research, respectfully makes their case to our elected officials and isn't afraid of opposing opinions. The one that steals lawn signs, uses children, makes anonymous phone calls, calls police and schemes to suppress facts scares the hell out of me.

Anonymous said...

Mt. Lebanon magazine writes about its readers: "Mt. Lebanon residents are among the most affluent, best-educated residents of the Pittsburgh region. They shop for fun and good value; they love to dine out; they travel; they enjoy cultural, educational and sports events; they’re concerned about health and fitness, and they plan for the future."

So if they believe their readers are concerned about health and future planning why would the PIO advise a guest speaker that the turf information forum — "The purpose of this meeting it [sic] NOT to discuss the potential harmful effects of artificial turf..."

Her readership by her own admission worries about health, fitness and the future (especially for their kids) and she doesn't want those things discussed.
Why not, Ms. Morgans?

Anonymous said...

The highly compensated "objective" expert was instructed not to be objective. So, the thousands of dollars that was spent for his insight was wasted. Citizens may have been misled. Morgans must be disciplined and the money returned. What's up with the redacts?

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know what Gateway stands to make on the turf project?
Surely, they didn't do the engineering studies and plans pro bono.

Lebo Citizens said...

Thanks, 1:58 PM. Your link didn't come through correctly. Here is the hyperlink for your comment.
Thanks for submitting!
The Solicitation of Funds for Charitable Purposes Act
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Elaine.

IRS reg's specify that a charitable purpose is a public purpose in which a governmental action (e.g. turf project) purports to benefit the populace as a whole, and that the activity does not have as its primary objective the benefit of a private interest (e.g. field sports groups).

Tell me how the turf project, designed and intended for less than 10 of Lebo population and the advertised, purported 60% increase in playing time will be assigned almost exclusively to lacrosse qualifies as a charitable, public purpose qualifying for federal tax deductibility for donors ?

Any tax attorney's out there opposed to the turf project could have a "field day" with this in a challenge filing with the IRS.

Lebo Citizens said...

10:55 AM, redacting personal email addresses is part of the RTK law.
"All agency records are subject to the Right-to-Know Law, however not all records are public records. The law contains 30 exceptions, cited in Section 708, that permit an Agency to withhold records. An Agency may deny release of a record if it falls within one of the 30 exceptions designed to protect information that is confidential or may jeopardize safety or investigations. Types of records that can be withheld include records related to personal or public security, DNA/RNA records, autopsy records, social security numbers, personal financial information, personal email addresses, marital status, identity of a covert law enforcement officer, home address of judges or law enforcement, confidential source records, victim information."
Elaine

Lebo Citizens said...

10:44 AM, in every direction, you will find corruption. Shut up and pay your taxes. That is the message I get.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Yep!
Linfante said they had the three votes necessary to ignore everyone and do what they want.
They can - so they will.
You can be sure a gender neutral Home Rule Charter won't change the status quo.

Anonymous said...

Today's 317 pt. drop in the Dow Jones (erasing 2014's gains to date) doesn't bode well for future chariitable giving for future turf replacement or the school district's capital campaign, doesit?

Anonymous said...

This speech sounds like the Commission and Schoo Board.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfRtbIQ1kTw&feature=youtu.be

Anonymous said...

Our water supply!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
Mt Lebanon <=> The Love Canal !

Anonymous said...

The meeting should have been called, SnowJobmageddon

Anonymous said...

Hey 6:38/42. My family walked around mt Lebo for a few month measuring air quality with a cmu device called the speck. You can borrow them for free from gasp (group against smog and pollution) downtown. I suggest a pre-turf, installation-turf and post-turf study of the air quality.
Check it out. It's a cool personal device that is under consideration for further development by the EPA.

Anonymous said...

The Planning Board formal review and recommendation for the entire 100 page or so Comprehensive Plan lasted a scant 5 minutes. There was no presentation or discussion of the turf project; and, the Plan statement is actually for artificial turf or additional fields.

The public fails to realize that the Comprehensive Plan is nothing more than a gigantic staff and commission 10 year wish list of capital projects, and that the perpetrators "justify" all subsequent capital project proposals by stating such projects are recommended in and therefore are in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, therefore the project must go forward. It's all a colossal government con job, and we sit by and let it all happen.

Lebo Citizens said...

I guess Commissioner Linfante strikes again. I just received this email from Commissioner Fraasch.


Hi Elaine:

I received an email from Kathy, ESB Chair about an email you forwarded that was a part of a RTK.

I understand that the email may sound suspect, but it appears that Kristen's email was inaccurate and misstated Kathy's advocacy for insisting on organic only. Kristen's statement may have been mis-typed but the statement 'insist on artificial turf' is incorrect. Again it appears that Kristen misspoke or mis-typed.

I hope this helps clarify any concern.

--
KELLY FRAASCH
Ward 5 Commissioner, Mt Lebanon

Anonymous said...

So Kristen supports organic infill turf until she doesn't. She believes the input of the ESB is important until it isn't.

She calls Kelly out for mis-representing her own statements but then meets with John who then asks her to clarify the same thing! I don't see her calling John out and "cautioning" him on anything.

Anonymous said...

5:05 PM, the underlying and secret motive behind the massive "con job" is job security for municipal staff, appointed officials and consultants.

If there were not huge laundry lists of alleged "needed" capital projects to undertake, we wouldn't need all those feeding at the public troughs.

The con job is sold to us on the premise that such planning is necessary by the same public employees, elected officials and vendors/contractors/consultants who stand to benefit from the con.

Anonymous said...

Regarding those contributions that will result in reduced users fees. From the IRS—
http://www.irs.gov/uac/Eight-Tips-for-Deducting-Charitable-Contributions

"7. To claim a deduction for contributions of cash or property equaling $250 or more you must have a bank record, payroll deduction records or a written acknowledgment from the qualified organization showing the amount of the cash and a description of any property contributed, and whether the organization provided any goods or services in exchange for the gift. One document may satisfy both the written communication requirement for monetary gifts and the written acknowledgement requirement for all contributions of $250 or more. If your total deduction for all noncash contributions for the year is over $500, you must complete and attach IRS Form 8283, Noncash Charitable Contributions, to your return."

Now why would the IRS specifically ask for infomation on whether there was an exchange of gifts or services?

Did the commissioners deliberately skirt rules regarding donations by running it through the community endowment to hide the quid pro quo of reductions in user fees? Opinions... lawyers, accountants and judges out there, please?

Plus, if sports groups get lower or preferential field usage fees because they donated some amount of money to turf, then some part of their donation isn't really a donation. It is a prepayment and shouldn't count towards the $250,000 private money!

Example:
Let's look at Youth Football's donation of $6,666.66. (an odd amount by the way! Is this what they pay in field user fees regularly?)

According to Elaine's RTK search - donating groups are to receive reductions in their users fees. (Universally applied to all MTL fields or just WC/M????)

So let's say football without a donation would be billed $4,000 to use the field. (I don't know what their usage fees are)

But, because they did donate, they get a reduced rate of $2,000.

Then football in reality only donated $4,666.66 towards turf. Two thousand dollars was in reality an advance on future user fees!

Anonymous said...

If the statement was "mistyped" how about telling us all what it should have said?

Anonymous said...

And I believe that Kathy, believing the turf project per-se was already a "done deal", was only trying to encourage a decision to specify organic filler rather than toxic crumb rubber.

Lebo Citizens said...

If you read the Kristen email exchange, I find it fascinating that the original email where Kristen is attacking Kelly in January showed up in my mother of RTKS. Almost a month later, Kristen is still talking about that email and shows up in another resident's RTK. Did you catch how Kristen said that the ESB has admitted in an email that there is no scientific proof that shows that rubber turf causes health issues. Where is that email, Kristen? Of course, we will never know because she doesn't read this blog, at least that is what she likes to tell everyone. Kristen is like the Eveready Bunny. She keeps on misrepresenting and misrepresenting.
It is unfortunate that the Home Rule Charter Committee never considered a recall procedure for commissioners.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Every time a Lebo Citizens poster has a good point about the failings of the commission or school board, and then makes some dumb comment about democrats, they lose their mojo tenfold.

When this movement becomes post-partisan, it will have a chance. Until then, you reap what you sow.

Jason

Lebo Citizens said...

Jason, to be fair, we had Larry Evans trash talking the Republicans. I am disappointed with Republicans too.
I have said over and over, it isn't about Rs or Ds. It is about elected officials ignoring their constituents and pushing their personal agendas.
Elaine

Lebo Citizens said...

We mustn't forget Dave Brumfield's and Mary Birks' views on our Republican Governor.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Jason - Yeah its fine to smacktalk our governor.

Anonymous said...

The commissioners failings, including Brumfield's inappropriate comment about the Governor, come not because they are not conservative enough - but because they are not responsible enough - to lead.

- Jason

Anonymous said...

When the FIVE DEMOCRAT commissioners decide to lead by example and stop the partisan tone, Jason, then we can all get our "mojo" back. Until then, you're damn right it's a R and D issue. Grow up.

Anonymous said...

There's nothing partisan about toxic turf, and taxing out the middle and lower-middle class... take your blinders off.

- Jason

Lebo Citizens said...

Thank you, Jason!
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Jason, the republicans have Kubit - the guy that told us he had 4,000 and 1 pro-high school contacts and Remely - who told us he'd keep the renovation under $80 million.

As Elaine writes, this isn't about Rs and Ds, but it does help to highlight where a persons agendas lie.

But Jason, you seem to be of the opinion that 12:49 makes a good about our elected officials. If you read the principals of both our R and D committees they're not all that different. So how do we keep ending with up with basically the same local officials?
Then how is it that these committees go mute when their endorsed elected officials go off track?

Brumfield made a wisecrack about the Republican governor and how he cut education funding. Birks (an R but now a D) makes the sameinaccurate declarations that the Gov. has cut education budgets.

Do you following along? Do you fact check? Do you ever say-- these people got it wrong, I've got to question them from here on out?

Linfante got a lot of things wrong... yes? So Jason, do we sit idle an let her make more mistakes?

Plus, how come you didn't show up to comment on Larry Evans Republican comments ?

Anonymous said...

You see Jason, you need to look at the big picture.
The "mamaforobama" didn't get involved in the environmental aspect of the turf battle even though she is involved with PennFuture.
PennFuture is though all for put coal miners out of work because we must save the environment.
Crumb rubber, carbon black, plastic - apparently OK.
Cheap American energy resource - tough noogies, put Americans out of work and run up the electric bills.

Anonymous said...

Jason you say: "you reap what you sow."

How did we reap expensive, environmentally unsound turf?

If you remember, Elaine ran against Linfante and lost. Had she won, it might be a good bet we wouldn't be having half the discussion topics here we do now.
Elaine listens to all sides, presents both side and obviously doesn't hide what she is doing.
Too bad the voters made the wrong choice.

Anonymous said...

If u contact an attorney from PennFuture, s/he will not share your info with anyone else. It will be protected. EB does not have access to communications from residents to attorneys. Their email addresses are online.

Lebo Citizens said...

4:20 PM, I never ran against Linfante. I ran against Joe DeIullis and lost.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Yes, that is true. You never got the chance to go head-to-head at the polls with Linfante and that is the community's loss.

Anonymous said...

Why would one have to contact a PennFuture attorney?
PennFuture and its associates are free to side on topics of their choice.
It is just nice to pay attention when they do and do not.

Anonymous said...

If Susan Morgans did not want anyone to discuss the potential harmful effects of artificial turf at the June 12th meeting at Mellon, I wonder how much effort really went into trying to locate a toxicologist?

Nick M.

Anonymous said...

Shouldn't the Public Information Officer's roll be to ensure all pertinent information gets out to the public rather than assuring information doesn't get discussed?
Wouldn't they be the 'check and balance' to a biased commission.

Anonymous said...

While the email suggests Dan Deiseroth first pushed for McNitt, I believe that Franklin mentioned McNItt at a SAB meeting around the same time, or prior to this email. Before they started calling him "McNitt", they referred to him as "that guy from Penn State".

Anonymous said...

According to Susan Morgans, concerns that a toxicologist could address are categorically "ridiculous first world problems" per the Allegheny County Health Department.

See what is FIRST on the list of responsibilities assigned to adults by the WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION:

"Adults must ensure that children are protected from:
•exposures to toxic chemicals, physical injury and infections;
•poverty and malnutrition; and
•child labour".

Is not just adults in Mt Lebanon that concern themselves with preventing pediatric exposures to toxic chemicals. I guess the health department is stuck in what, 1950?

Lebo Citizens said...

10:23 PM, here's something to think about. The RTK should have included those Health Dept. and UPMC emails that Susan mentioned. Either they don't exist because they were deleted or they never happened. The third possibility is that Feller did not produce all the emails that were requested.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Susan Morgans acts like the public are in Kindergarden, who can't think for themselves. Who is she trying to fool? They say that people who go around trying to fool others or themselves over time, end up not even fooling themselves. The end result is they end up being the complete fools all by themselves!!!

Anonymous said...

Qualified pediatric health reps within the health department should have referred Susan Morgans to a Pediatric Environmental Health Speciality Unit within the Mid Atlantic for free consultation/speaker to address citizen concerns. Many other communities throughout the US have held public forums related to artificial turf and tapped into these resources for qualified unbiased speakers.

http://aoec.org/pehsu/faq.html

Information is not a gift, it belongs to the people. Feller never responded to the residents who inquired about the forum.

When municipal staff begin emails, with "I am not answering", you don't have to wonder what's going on.

Lebo Citizens said...

Yes, McNitt discussed shoes. His presentation is still on the Municipal website.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Jason, regarding your comment at 3:04, my seat-of-the-pants, gut-feeling is that you are correct and lower to middle income families are indeed being forced out of Mt. Lebanon.

But, the following evidence seems to contradict that view.

"From a PARealtors study of Mt. Lebanon's population shift.

It states:
"Since 2000, we have seen a significant shift in the profile of consumers. The multicultural consumer has grown both in population size and in buying power. The findings of this study paint a complex, yet insightful picture of the Multicultural community. Given the rapid growth rate of Hispanic, Asian, and African-American population, the Gonzales Group examines Mount Lebanon, utilizing data compiled by the U.S. Census to identify the overall market potential within the multicultural segments. 

Overall, the total population of Mount Lebanon is expected to decline by 4.46% between 2010-2015. The Hispanic population will experience the largest growth, growing by 98.00%. 

From 2000 to 2010 Mount Lebanon saw the Hispanic and Asian population increase by 39.16% and 15.19%, respectively, while the African-American population increased by .96%. The traditional White non-Hispanic population decreased by 10.04%. 

Population Growth by Ethnicity
Over a 15 year period between 2000-2015, the population shifts in Mount Lebanon are projected to be profound with the overall population decreasing by 13.04% and the Hispanic and Asian population increasing by 52.09% and 19.95% respectively while the White non-Hispanic population is expected to decrease by 14.51% and African-American population is expected to increase by 4.46%.

Median Household Incomes
While the population growth in Mount Lebanon shows significant shifts in demographic profile, household median income does not necessarily track with population trends. Median incomes are the following:
White $73480
Black $79,348
Asian $53,598
Hispanic $46,250"
So, what we're seeing is that the tradition White population with a median income of $73,480 declining by 14.51%, while the Asian and Hispanic segment with median incomes of $53,598 and $46,250 growing by 52.09% and 19.95%"

Forget race and concentrate on median income. Low to middle income families seem to be growing while the families in the upper middle class are shrinking by 14.51%.

Is the PARealtors study flawed or are our perceptions???
Is it the $73,480 median group, while maybe not being forced out, getting wise and looking for better, less expensive pastures?
An interesting discussion, eh!

Anonymous said...

There have lots of numbers thrown around on this blog that are misleading.

According to the 2010 census; the population of Mt. Lebanon is 33,137. Of those 33K, 25% are under 19 and 15% are over 70.
Also, there are 14,196 households. 4,238 of those (30%) have children under 18. Common sense will tell you that the HH income number (and Pop #'s) are skewed because a large percentage of HH's are retired seniors living on a fixed income.
And slowly those HH are being replaced with young couples/families. How many 65+ individuals are looking to buy in Mt. Lebanon? Not many.
If you don't believe me or the census numbers, pay attention to the houses in your neighborhood. Who's moving out and who's moving in....

And the Hispanic Population in Lebo. 1.8%. (580)
Thay may represent a large % increase from 2000, but it's still 580.

Anonymous said...

Yes interesting numbers to be sure 1:49, but why cherry pick.

Out of 13,610 households--
31.3% had children under 18
57.3% were married couples
7.2%  female household (no husband)
33.7% were non-familes
30.6% were single person households
13.5% were individuals 65 or older

24.8% <18 years of age
4% 18 to 24
26.9% 25 to 44
25.4% 45 to 64
18.8% 65 and up

In the go-go days of MTL ice rink and tennis court construction MTL population was--
1960 - 35,361
1970 - 39,157
1980 - 34,414
More recently-
1990 - 33,362
2000 - 33,017
2010 - 33,137
2012 - 33,102 est.

So with over 70% of the population 24 or older and probably unlikely to engage in sports like lacrosse and soccer why are we focused so intently on rec facilities for 25% of the populace? Why not trails and rec improvements that serve all age groups?

Remember 33.7% of households have no kids and the municipality is bent on spending millions developing apts and condos at the T station that most likely won't attract young families with children.

So which is it? Are we after families or young professionals? $800,000 in undesignated taxes will only go so far, 1:49!

Anonymous said...

We also took Twin Hills and McNeilly off the table for new housing and the associated increased tax revenue.

We keep hearing how MTL is a built out community. That's for sure when the municipality buys up the vacant land in the name of sports for kids.

Anonymous said...

5:25 glad you found the numbers interesting. That wasn't my intent. I merely wanted to share actual numbers. And thank you for the comprehensive overview going all the way back to the go-go days when the Mt. Lebanon population was a whopping 35,000. I bet that was a swell Enchantment Under the Sea dance back in '60.

And since 70% of our population is over 24, and very few will 'engage' in lacrosse and soccer, maybe we should look at 'rec improvements and trails.' While we're at it, let's have bingo night every Friday at the High School and add some new shuffle board courts. Perhaps we can get that number of HH w/out kids up to 50%.

Can we agree that people MOVING IN to Mt. Lebanon are likely doing so because they have kids or plan to have kids. To answer your question, we are after families AND young professionals. Guess what? Young professionals often start families.

If you happened to stop by the ULTRA party Friday, you would have seen lots of both.

Have to go - Jack Benny is on TV.



Lebo Citizens said...

9:33 PM, I was thinking about all the assisted living and senior care facilities in Mt. Lebanon. We have Asbury Heights, Baptist Home, Concordia, Devonshire, The Pines, Golden Living Center, as well as apartments on Washington Road, Woodridge, Bower Hill, and Mainline. I am probably forgetting a few places, but I see senior citizens moving in to Mt. Lebanon to downsize, retire, or receive care who would enjoy those bingo games, shuffle board, and Jack Benny.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Really sarcasm is the answer 9:33.
How about dealing in facts.
For starters, MTL's population was a high of 39,000.
You say people are "MOVING IN" Because they have kids or planning too. That's great to say, but enrollment numbers don't seem to bear that out. At least numbers from the PA Dept. If Education don't. Furthermore I believe the school district enrollment is projected to drop below 5,000 in a few years.
Are all the young familes sending their kids to private schools, charters or home schooling?
Show me the numbers that support your suppositions!
Where are all these professionals. Population 39,000 in 1970. Population in 2010 - 33,137.
People moving in... hmmmm, must be that TERC math.


Anonymous said...

9:33, if residents desire bingo nights, shuffle board courts or like Bethel - Pickleball Courts, hey why not if we can afford it.
Too bad we can't because we spent over $2,000,000 on Twin Hills and McNeilly properties in the name of lacrosse and soccer. We're about to add another $1,000,000 to turf a field for them.
What's a bingo night cost? How about a shuffle board court? $10,000, $20,000?

Anonymous said...

9:33, are you trying to tell us young professionals don't jog, bike or power walk?

Lebo Citizens said...

OK, I am looking through hundreds of sheets of paper involving artificial turf. Let's get back on topic. We're an older community spending over $800,000 on fields located on Cedar Blvd. in an area that is closed off several times a year due to flooding. We're going to be seeing toxic crumb rubber infill get washed down Cedar Blvd. and into our creeks and streams. Our commissioners are making decisions without input from boards, ignoring residents' concerns, and allowing staff to do as they please. Yes, this is an older community. Yes, the videos are from the flooding on Cedar yesterday. Yes, student population is decreasing. Please limit your comments to the RTK. Thanks.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Older community - check!
$800,000 taxpayer money going for Cedar field turf - check!
Regular flooding of roadway and basements - check!
Toxic crumb rubber - check!
Subtrefuge and hidden agendas - check!
Ethics and code violations - check!
Declining K-12 population - check!
Wasteful spending on property in the name of sports - check!
Shrinking population - check!
Undeveloped private property - check!
Manipulated public information sessions - check!
Stormwater Maintenance Fees - check!

Much of the above brought out in the sunshine through your diligence and relentless pursuit of RTKs.
What we need to focus on is why and where do we go from here, in my opinion. Call me crazy, I guess.

Lebo Citizens said...

4:37 AM, the why's and the where do we go from here is up to the residents of Mt. Lebanon.

Add: Double agents on Boards - check!

I hope what has been brought out in the sunshine through my "diligence and relentless pursuit of RTKs" does not go wasted.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

I am confused about the comment from August 4, at 5:25 PM which states "Remember 33.7% of households have no kids..." I thought it was the other way around and it is 70% of households that have no kids. Which is correct?

Anonymous said...

11:20 AM - Percentages change almost daily when it comes to Mt. Lebanon demographic stats, but looking at averages over the past 5 years or so it's very safe to say that 67% of private residential addresses (which includes apartments) do not have children under 18. There is a gray area for demos between 18 and 22; many residents in that bracket are not here for most of the year because they're away at school someplace. Another important point to consider is that the total number of kids (meaning under 18) enrolled in various youth sports in Lebo include kids who were counted multiple times. Little Johnny, who is enrolled in baseball and soccer, counts for two kids. You get the idea.

Anonymous said...

The "33.7% have no kids" is an assumption on 5:29's part which may not be accurate and I apologize for the misinterpretation.

The US Census defines a "family household" for statistical purposes as "a householder and one or more other people related to the householder by birth, marriage or adoption."

So their numbers show 33.7% are non-families.

So 5:29 erroneously assumed that meant no kids in the household.

You may indeed be correct that 70% of the households have no kids, 11:20. My source didn't break that percentage out.

Anonymous said...

If you want to know your past, look into your present conditions. If you want to know your future, look into your present actions. — Buddhist saying

Anonymous said...

Anonymous.

http://www.spcregion.org/pdf/Census%202010/Allegheny%20County/ALLE_MountLebanonTwp.pdf

Anonymous said...

So our sixth, un-elected commissioner, makes some pretty accusatory statements, using his employer's email system.

The mail does say:

"This e-maii message and any files transmitted with it are subject to attorney-client privilege and contain confidential information intended for the person to whom this email message is addressed. If you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or e-mail and destroy the original message without making a copy, Thank you."

Does this mean it shouldn't have been included in the RTK??? Are we viewing attorney-client privilege protected documents? Is this evidence that he is working on behalf of his employer? Or, is he just working in his role as sixth, un-elected commissioner? If this is the case, can the township give him an email address or maybe our sixth, un-elected commissioner needs to review steps on how to make a gmail account --> http://support.google.com/mail/answer/56256?hl=en?

I'd like a clear answer on this.

--Confused but intrigued

Anonymous said...

10:40, screw the un-elected sixth commissioner. Where were the four elected recipients of his email?

Especially the commission president that campaigned on a pledge to listen, collaborate and communicate. She apparently didn't stand up for or do any one of them, did she?

Anonymous said...

Andrew McNitt has been worshipped in Mt. Lebanon for many years. No surprise that they brought him in.

Anonymous said...

I think Franklin's comment hits at the heart of this whole 'fields' issue. He wrote: "We're changing out grass for turf, not constructing a stadium." He's exactly right but fails to include one pertinent point.

We're swapping grass for turf and it's going to cost around $1.5 to $2 million dollars when all is said and done. What will we have achieved nothing more than grass for turf.

On the other hand had they followed Kelly's plan, we could one or two new grass fields with other recreational amenities and beautified a negelected entry point to the community. Kelly's plan could have been instituted over a number of years using undesignated tax revenue as it became available.

It's a shame we didn't work on her plan!

Just think, in 8 to 10 years, Mr. Franklin will be able to say: 'hey we're only changing out turf for turf. Probably spending close to another million dollars to do it.

Anonymous said...

If the genius manager of this town had thought to consider adding staff to actually care for the "grounds" a few years ago and address flooding issues responsibly, none of this would have ever happened. Now Mt Lebanon is a "Community without Character".

Anonymous said...

Interesting isn't it, that in private emails between comissioners and municipal officials Mr. Franklin tells everyone that we're just trading grass for turf.

But in the public meeting our Parks/Turf Advisor sits quiet when people declare turf will be Mt. Lebanon's "Crown Jewel."

What does that say about Mt. Lebanon's Parks and Recreation? About Mt. Lebanon in general that a simple swap of turf for grass is our "Crown Jewel."

Damn, what a great place this has become.

Anonymous said...

http://triblive.com/mobile/6530922-96/acl-knee-athletes

"Fu said studies noted the increase in ACL injuries among young athletes has risen proportionally with adolescents' participation in sports and one-sport specialization.

“We are starting to see kids do one sport all throughout the calendar year, which was not common in the past,” he said."

Maybe extending lacrosse and soccer seasons into February isn't such a great idea after all!

Not like Fu doesn't know what he's talking about.

Anonymous said...

Purdon's Statutes. 53 PS. £1002. City Property Not To Be Used For Private Gain, etc.... Anonymous.


https://govt.westlaw.com/pac/Document/N915C10B0343211DA8A989F4EECDB8638?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)

Anonymous said...

Elaine, I believe that PA Act 53 (PA Municipal's Planning Code) indicates that all Capitol Improvement Projects that apply to land use, including municipal parks, are to be maintained by the municipality only. I would think that any contract with the school district for turf maintenance would violate the Code, meaning that it is illegal.

Anonymous said...

PA Official Guide for Municipal and Employee Ethics Act. Anonymous.

https://www.optumrx.com/vgnlive/HCP/Assets/PDF/Guide%20Public%20Official%20And%20Employee%20Ethics%20Act1.pdf

Anonymous said...

ML Comprehensive Financial Report 2013. Didn't see the turf project under Capitol Improvements. Anonymous.


http://mtlebanon.org/DocumentCenter/View/10286

Anonymous said...

4:29 in the document you linked, it says this:


In 2013, the budget was amended once. The amendment allocated $797,080 in unassigned General Fund fund balance to the following projects:
 Sidewalk installations – $100,000
 Washington Road crosswalk installation – $63,000
 Property acquisition along Cedar Boulevard – $112,000
 Installation of a turf playing field at wildcat/middle fields – $637,400
 Removing the assignment from the Brafferton fields project – ($137,400)
 Other capital items – $22,080

But the question is, why was the budget amended to reflect this capital improvement if this plan for turf was always in the comprehensive plan? for the plan to be of value, it shouldn't require an amendment, right?

Anonymous said...

8:06 from 4:29: Thank you, I missed that! You make an interesting point! You're right. Why WAS there an amendment? Or was it not an amendment, but just an amended budget! What happened at some point that the Capitol Improvement did NOT include the turf project? What was going on behind the scenes? I'm thinking that to have an amendment, would it be covered by a municipal ordinance?