From: John Bendel [mailto:jbendel@mtlebanon.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 2:50 PM
To: Nicholas Meduho Jr
Cc: <sfeller@mtlebanon.org>; Commission
Subject: Re: donations
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 2:50 PM
To: Nicholas Meduho Jr
Cc: <sfeller@mtlebanon.org>; Commission
Subject: Re: donations
The municipality was notified yesterday that the Endowment has an additional $6,195 in funds that have been collected through the Field Improvement Fund since their last contribution. Steve Feller has requested the funds and a check to the municipality should arrive soon.
This will bring the total non-municipal contribution to $263,928.73.
This will bring the total non-municipal contribution to $263,928.73.
Mr. Feller and Commissioners,
On Monday evening during citizen comments I asked the following:“Since July 10th when MLCE submitted a check for $15,267 for turf donations, have there been any additional donations made since that time to the MLCE. If so, in what amounts and have those fund been transferred to the municipality?”Because no one knew the answer to this question, can someone please take the time to find out the answer.I have asked MLCE several times, they are refusing to answer this simple question.Thank you,
Nicholas Meduho
Mt. Lebanon, PA
29 comments:
The MLCE is also soliciting donations from alums in behalf of the school districts $6 million fundraising boondoggle. They won't divulge any info about this either, nor will the district.
This place sucks !
I'm just a casual observer, so please enlighten me. If tax dollars aren't at stake, but donations, why the uproar? Is it just a knee-jerk reaction at this point?
Casual observer.
Yes, tax dollars ARE at stake.
First, ask how much was spent on maintenance annually at WCM for say... the last ten years.
Then ask how much the municipality is spending on the turf installation.
Then ask how much the annual maintenance of the turf will cost.
Then ask how much is the replacement of turf projected to bein 8-10 years.
Consider yourself enlighten,though I'm sure you will chose to ignore all of the above because it is easier to stay clueless.
Also, MLCE is acting as a middleman and shielding the identity of the donors. The public has a right to know who the donors are, particularly corporate ones, to ensure this isn't a quid pro quo.
11:10 AM, don't forget the first change order for $86,694. First change order for turf project done without approval
There will be additional change orders for the turf project.
Elaine
10:16,
If Joe Resident elects to make a personal donation to the turf fund, the school district campaign, the Veteran's Memorial, the Library, or whatever: (a) why do you care, (b) why does it suck, and (c) how is it any of your business?
I'm not 10:16, but I care because Joe Resident might be a salesman for National Widget Co. and I want to be able to scrutinize any current and future contracts that Mt. Lebanon enters into with National Widget Co. I view this as a basic ethical and transparency issue. The same concerns were raised with Mayor Peduto's acceptance of donations for the Undercover Boss show.
11:33
The municipality is mixing private dollars with public dollars. At that point, any notion of privacy is relinquished. It's simple math. Taxpayers deserve to know how much of their confiscated income is going toward boondoggles versus how muchpeople give of their free will.
http://m.grantspace.org/tools/knowledge-base/Funding-Resources/Foundations/private-foundations-vs-public-charities
"Public charities generally derive their funding or support primarily from the general public, receiving grants from individuals, government, and private foundations. Although some public charities engage in grantmaking activities, most conduct direct service or other tax-exempt activities. A private foundation, on the other hand, usually derives its principal fund from a single source, such as an individual, family, or corporation, and more often than not is a grantmaker. A private foundation does not solicit funds from the public."
I'm no expert, but after reading the above and then reading the Forbes article linked below it appears donors giving more than $5,000 to our education and turf "foundations" must be divulged under Federal law.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/deborahljacobs/2012/09/19/how-to-stay-anonymous-when-you-give-to-charity/
So you must ask yourself 11:33, why shouldn't itbe our business.
10:50, the uproar from this post should not be about whether or not tax dollars are at stake or not, the uproar should by why it took 6 months to ask about additional donations and why the MLCE refused to answer a simple question to a taxpayer. Please remember, the MLCE was given the use of a taxpayer owned database of 8,000 email addresses to make a profit in addition to the free use of the LeboAlert system to solicit gift cards. Susan Morgans told me that it was the municipality that helped to establish the MLCE and this is the thanks that we get in return. If the MLCE was run by responsible people, then those additional donations should have been sent to us on a monthly basis, without asking. I expect a lot more from Joseph King (President), Ruby Kang (past President) and Audrey Bode (paid executive director).
Nick M.
11:33, we know from the Lebo website that $262,000 has been contributed to the turf project thru the sports groups and private donations. Using your simple math, the rest comes from tax dollars. No donor names are required to answer your question. It's all on the website.
12:50, if the MLCE must identify donors who gave $5,000 or more then I'm sure they will do that in the proper filing with the IRS. I don't think the MLCE should be harassed with outside requests for this info.
I'm still wondering why anyone thinks that private donations suck? Would you rather it all come from tax dollars? Or does it suck because you don't support the field project?
The idea behind the eventual creation of the MLCE was concocted back in the days of Commissioner Dale Colby a/k/a Mr. Youth Sports. His Soccer Foundation had given up on the soccer field at Terrace/Conner because the promised and alleged "private" funding (read that actually a state grant of $800,000) was not approved by the governor. They were given the land by a frustrated local aged developer, but could not, did not raise local private funding from the athletic supporters. There was also neighborhood opposition.
Dale then came up with the private community foundation 501(c)(3)idea, the Muni financed a west coast "expert" to recommend a basis, structure and plan that cost thousands of our tax dollars which was subsequently trashed. This is what our esteemed PIO is referring to. This scheme was really to raise money for community (read that the emphasis was on athletic facility) capital improvements.
What eventually emerged sometime after Dale's passing was the MLCE, the board of which is not entirely dominated by youth sports nuts. Believe the first MLCE grant was $1,000 to the library.
i know this comment is really way out in left field.. but Lebo has had an indoor iceskating rink since 1977.. and the HS has only won the state championships twice 1976 and some time in the early 2000's.. so do you think a new paved playing field is going to make better soccer or lacrosse players..???
1:16, one thing wrong with your comment. You ask "would you rather it all come from tax dollar? Or does it suck because you don't support the field project?"
The answer to both questions at least for this taxpayer is yes!
I wholeheartedly support community investment in recreation. I support good, well-kept and managed sports facilities. If we indeed want for example artificially turfed fields, by all means lets build them if that is the majority consensus. Put it to a referendum.
Forget the special interest and special agendas.
Now if your "private" interest want for an example again... artificial turf, tell them to go build it.
There is a perfect example of such a project going on about a mile away on Hamilton Road.
You see your private people want to put up a piddling amount and are demanding the taxpayers pony up the rest.
And then get damn indignant when ask who's pushing for the public investment in their project.
If the taxpayers are footing the biggest portion of the money for turf, they have a right to know who's involved.
" . . . those additional donations should have been sent to us on a monthly basis."
Who is "us"? The funds in the MLCE Field Fund do not belong to the Municipality, let alone you or any other taxpayer. They belong to the party that entered into the project account agreement with the MLCE. Only that party can direct where the funds go and when, not the Muni and not the MLCE.
Plus, the non-municipal share (according to the resolution approving the project) was to be$250,000. This amount was fully contributed months ago. There is no obligation to turn over more than that, but they did. About $12,000 extra.
We also know from prior meetings that a $5000 donation was coming from the Pirates at the END of 2014. If that donation was made to the MLCE in December, it would seem that the majority of this extra money was turned over to the Municipality almost immediately, contrary to your assertion.
2:01 pm Have you noticed, though, that the MCLE services are not recommended or offered to all resident undertakings that require fundraising? In fact, the MCLE may remain unknown to some residents if they do not read or know about this blog or their commissioner refuses to provide support. While everyone that reads this blog is pretty "clued-in", average residents do not recognize the need to stay abreast of these matters because they trust that the government provides equal opportunities.
2:51 you're right. The MLCE is under no obligation to answer to the residents of Mt. Lebanon therefore therecreation dept. shouldn't be providing email list and the taxpayer owned MTL magazine shouldn't be running ads siciting for money for the MLCE.
They wan to advertise fordonations buy an ad!
You want separation, then separate.
I don’t understand the whole idea behind the MLCE and its purpose, I do question how much of their contributions are going to the good of Mt. Lebanon versus a salary and questionable expenses.
The organization’s mission is: “To enhance the quality of life for all citizens of Mt. Lebanon by identifying and addressing community needs and opportunities with funds provided by donors”
For fiscal year ending June 2013, total contributions were $183,279 of which only a miniscule $4325 was paid out for grants and a whopping $43,898 was paid out for expenses. Part of the expenses that were paid out was for insurance for $3026, $900 for telephone and accounting that totaled $6750...hmmm!! The total amount the MLCE had in the bank at the end of June 2013 was $375,511. Why are they holding all that money and why are they spending so much on expenses?
As far as who can apply and receive grants?
"The Community Endowment supports the community by making grants to programs, organizations and individuals in need,"
however…
"Grants from Mt. Lebanon Community Endowment are awarded in a competitive process to tax exempt organizations classified as 501(c)(3) organizations as defined by the Internal Revenue Service and to government agencies."
So unless you are a non-profit organization classified as a 501(c)(3), sorry, no grant for you.
Nick M.
2:51, one correction. When a donor makes a contribution to the MLCE, those monies become the property of the MLCE and can be used any way the MLCE directs, provided the money is used for charitable purposes. The donor gives up all control of any monies donated.
Nick M.
2:51, talk to us when you come up with some real money for your pet project.
http://triblive.com/mobile/msports/mhighschool/1156309-81/field-baseball-turf-athletic-brien-chapel-fox-foxes-ground-season
"The projects are being funded by an anonymous, $800,000 donation from a local philanthropist, as well asg some $35,000 raised by the athletic department. The latter amount also included private funding."
Maybe that was 4k from Gateway for 2014 -- the maximum allowable amount companies in PA give to avoid a conflict of interest investigation according to the FBI.
Gateway also started donating to the Nature Conservancy this year. How generous! The most recent Nature Conservancy newsletter describes the horrific state of invasive species in our limited green spaces. But the priority within the community is to tear up green fields, make them crumb rubber, and neglect the conservancy. I see how it is, Gateway. If you could pave the three rivers, I know you would!
2:51 PM, you may know about the Pirates, but we didn't. You won't tell us where the donations are coming from. Also, that must have been discussed at one of your super secret turf project task force meetings since that was never mentioned in a public meeting.
Are you saying, 2:51 PM, that the municipality is stealing from you and that the $12,000 belonged to you and that they had no right to take it? Does this throw a monkey wrench into your plan to turf more fields? We, not you, were told that your contribution was somewhere between $250,000 and 25% of the cost of the project. I could never pin down John Bendel on that one. He said that had not been determined. We do know that the acceptance of the contract with Vasco was subject to receipt of your $250,000 and the receipt of the NPDES permit.
You boys are really cranky because I had an unusually high amount of blog traffic yesterday.
Elaine
I'm still trying to figure out why the Pirates would donate $5,000 toward a lacrosse field. Was that earmarked for another project? Is that why you guys are so cranky? I won't tell the Pirates that they were misled.
Elaine
Since there is a Sports Advisory Board meeting tonight at 8, perhaps 2:51 PM will address my concerns at the meeting.
Elaine
12:05 PM. As of today, the most recent Sports Advisory Board (SAB) meeting minutes posted are for their June 14, 2014 meeting !
This is typical of postings for most Boards & Authorities. Is no one responsible or held accountable in this community of characters ?
4:56 PM, I forwarded your comment to the commissioners. If or when I hear something, I will post here.
Elaine
4:56 PM, I heard back from John Bendel.
"Meeting minutes are posted after they are approved. Therefore, the postings have at least a one month delay. In the case of the SAB, they met on June 14, November 6 and January 15. The November 6 minutes were approved a few days ago at the January 15 meeting. They should be posted shortly. "
Elaine
Maybe the question to Mr. Bendel should be: why does the board with the largest budget ever recorded in Mt Lebanon history have gaps of over 5 months between meetings? If the board's needs are so essential, why the long vacation?
10:15 PM. Bendel and his 3 stooges & staff gave them everything they ever dreamed of, and they've taken an extended celebratory vacation, scheming for the turfing of the Rock Pile field and McNeilly out of sight behind the curtain.
Post a Comment